07/2023 - Response to Information Request [As Published] · 132007.2023

Page 2

*

 

 

 

 

 

yf

ACID SULFATE SOIL INVESTIGATION & MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOR A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AT
59 Wyuna Court, Noosa Heads

Version 1.1

Prepared For
Middap Ditchfield Pty Ltd
By
Bio-Track Pty Ltd
23 October, 2007

 

781 Mount Glorious Road, Highvate, Brisbane, Australia 4520

Bio- Track Pty Ltd Phone 617 32897179 Fax 61 7 3289 7155

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Page 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 2.00.0... eee eee teens 1
SUMMARY OF CONTROL MEASURES ........ 0.000.000 ee eee eee eee 1
DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA ........0...0. 000000002 eee eee 2
a. Acid Sulfate Soil Properties ..........0... 0000.00.00... eee 2
b. Surface Drainage ..... 0. eee ee 2
Cc. Sub-Surface Drainage ....... 2... eee 2
d. Groundwater .. 2.0.20. eee 2
PROPOSED MANAGEMENT ......... 0.00000 c eee eee 2
a. Lime Treatment Strategy... 0.0.0... 00.0... ee 3
b. Lime Application .......0.. 0.0002. .2 ce eee 3
c. Lime Storage .. 6... ee ee 3
d. Placement of Excavated Soil ... 2.6.0.0... eee 3
e. Bunding of Excavated Soil .. 0.2... ee eee 4
f. Treatment Pad Design ............. 0.0. cee eee 5
g. Exposed Cut Surfaces «6.0.0.0... eee 5

i. Vegetated Cover... eee 5

ii. Non-Vegetated Cover... 0... cece eee 5
h. Runoff Control... ee ee 5
i. Ponded Water ..... 2.0... eee 5
j. Groundwater . 2... ee eee ee 6
k. Unexpected Groundwater ..... 0... 0.0.2 ee eee 6
VALIDATION 2.0.2 eee tenes 6
a. Validation Sampling 2.2.0... 0... eee 6
b. Scheduling of Validation Sampling ............. 0.00... 0 0020000004 7
RECORD KEEPING 2... 0... eects 8
APPENDIX 1 SUPPORTING INFORMATION ............-2.... 9
a. SOIL CHEMICAL ANALYSIS . 20... eee 10

b. SITE & ENGINEERING DRAWINGS

Page 4

et

ue

 

 

This report has been prepared by Peter Edmiston B-App.Sc.(Hons), M.Phil. for and on behalf
of
Bio-Track Pty Ltd (ABN 91 056 237 275).

Peter Edmiston
Director Bio-Track

Technical Assistance
The evaluation of technical reports is sometimes difficult. Bio-Track remains available to
answer questions regarding this report. Users of this report are encouraged to contact Peter
Edmiston on (07) 3289 7179 or fax queries to (07) 3289 7155 to resolve technical issues
raised within this report that require clarification.

 

 

Page 5

o

ACID SULFATE MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOR A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AT

59 Wyuna Court, Noosa Heads

1. INTRODUCTION

Bio-Track Pty Ltd has been commissioned by Middap Ditchfield Pty Ltd to prepare an
acid sulfate soit management plan (ASSMP) for a proposed development at 59 Wyuna
Court, Noosa Heads. This study is based upon soil chemical analysis data and site
drawings. A copy of this information is included as Appendix 1.

2. SUMMARY OF CONTROL MEASURES

 

The soil is not regarded as acid sulfate soil. Fifteen samples have been tested using the
field screen test method and three have been selected for analysis using the chromium
reducible sulphur test suite. The highest value for equivalent sulphur is 0.006%. This is
well below the threshold value of 0.03% as defined by the QASSIT guidelines. The soil
has the appearance of clean silica (beach) sand. The soil is not regarded as acid sulfate
soil and an acid sulfate soil management plan is not required.

In the event excavation during construction reveals an unexpected change in material
then then further excavation should be prevented. This change may be a significant
change in soil texture (eg. from sand to silty sand/clay etc) or a change in colour (eg.
from white to grey/black/brown) . Soil sampling and analysis of the material should then
be performed. This should involve either SPOCAS or the chromium reducible sulphur
test sulle. A minimum of two samples should be tested using one of these
methods.

If the test results show the equivalent sulphur concentration exceeds 0.03% then lime
treatment will be required. A description of this treatment process is included with this
report. It is stressed that lime treatment would only be required if:

a) the soil conditions change, and ,

b) subsequent analysis shows there is a need for lime treatment.

Page 6

3. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA

The proposed development area has the following attributes:

Location 59 Wyuna Drive, Noosa Heads
Area 616 square metres

Existing Elevation 3m AHD

Elevation of Final Cut 0.8 m AHD

Depth of Cut 2.2m

Volume of Cut ~355 m3

Cut Material sand

Parent Material sand

a. Acid Sulfate Soil Properties

The soil is not acid sulfate soil.

b. Surface Drainage
To Weyba Creek

Cc. Sub-Surface Drainage

To Weyba Creek

d. Groundwater

Not reported.

4. PROPOSED MANAGEMENT

No lime treatment is proposed as the soil is not regarded as an acid sulfate soil.
However the following sections describing lime treatment have been included for use

under the following circumstances:

a) a change in soil conditions is subsequently observed from those that have been

used in this study

b) subsequent analysis of the unexpected soil material reveals the soil is acid
sulfate soil and that lime treatment is required and is the most appropriate form

of treatment.

Observation of excavated soil conditions will be performed by the building contractor or
their nominated representative. Whilst specialist acid sulfate soil experience is not
required it is recommended that a professionally qualified person (eg. architect,
engineer, surveyor, geotechnical engineer, etc) be nominated for this task. A record of

field observations should be retained with the project files.

Page 7

a. Lime Treatment Strategy
IF REQUIRED.

A safety factor of two is recommended for sites regarded as sensitive to acid export.
These include areas:

* within 50 metres of a drainage line, stream or other surface water
* where the watertable is within 2 metres of the surface
* where the site is below the 50 year flood tine.

A safety factor of 1.8 is recommended where more than 5% of samples have a %Spos
or %S¢, greater than 0.03% or TAA greater than 100 moles/ton. A safety factor of 1.6
can be used for samples with lower levels of acidity or potential acidity.

The treatment rate is calculated using the average of all samples with a % S,,, > 0.03%.
The worst case sample must have a minimum safety factor of 1.2.

In the absence of field bulk density measurement the design in-situ bulk density is 1.65
tons/cubic metre and the excavated (loose spread, uncompacted) soil bulk density is 1.2
tons/cubic metre.

b. Lime Application

It is recommended the disturbed soil is spread across fill areas in layers with the
appropriate quantity of lime being spread across the surface. The lime is then cultivated
through the layer to provide uniform mixing. The depth of the fill layer will be affected by
compaction requirements, machinery, the physical condition of the soil and operator
preference. The exact method of mixing is of no consequence provided lime is mixed
uniformly through the placed soil. It is stressed care should be taken with mixing as
validation samples will subsequently be taken for chemical analysis. If the uniformity of
mixing is poor the validation tests are likely to fail.

c. Lime Storage

Agricultural lime and hydrated lime (builders lime, calcium hydroxide) needs to be stored
on-site in a secure manner. It is recommended the hydrated lime (normally supplied in
bags) is held in a locked shipping container or similar site building. It is recommended
the agricultural lime is held in a bunded storage area. If supplied in bulk then the lime
should be covered to prevent dust becoming a nuisance.

d. Placement of Excavated Soil

It is preferred to retain treated soil on the development area. If off-site placement is
required then the following actions must be undertaken:

the land holder must agree in writing to accept the treated material

the land holder must be provided with copies of soil analysis reports and a written
declaration of the volume and placement location

prior to placement local authority must be provided with copies of soil analysis
reports and a written declaration of the volume and placement location. Check
with the local authority to ensure the placement complies with any local
regulations.

transport of treated soil should be performed using covered vehicles and no
drainage water must escape onto public access areas

Page 8

*

the following areas are regarded as having higher environmental sensitivity for
treated soil placement

* within 50 metres of a drainage line, stream or other surface water

* where the watertable is within 2 metres of the surface

* where the site is below the 50 year flood line.

Should these more sensitive locations be selected for placement then it is
recommended the excavated soil be treated at the source and validation tests be
proved successful prior to placement.

e. Bunding of Excavated Soil

*

It is proposed to bund any area with untreated disturbed soil, either at the
excavation site or placement site.

It is proposed to size the bund to retain a Q=2, 60 minute storm event plus
a 200 mm freeboard. For relatively flat areas a surrounding bund height of 500
mm is likely to be adequate.

All excavated soil will be stored in a bunded area by the end of the working day
unless lime treatment has been undertaken.

The bund must either be constructed from non-ASS material or from lime treated
ASS material.

The bund should drain to a sump or other water collection point.

The bund floor and wall should be clay or other impermeable material to
minimise infiltration of water. The floor should have a hydraulic conductivity of
less than 1 x 10% m/d for a minimum depth of 400 mm or have an equivalent
resistance to the passage of drainage water. Compaction is likely to be required
to achieve this level of hydraulic conductivity.

Any water trapped within the bund or excavation site must be pH tested
prior to discharge. The pH must be adjusted to be within the range of 5.5
to 7.5 prior to discharge. The use of calcium hydroxide (builders lime) is
suggested for this purpose.

If a bund is impractical smaller stockpiles can be covered with plastic sheeting
or similar materials to exclude rainwater. The stockpile must not be located in a
runoff flow path.

 

Page 9

f. Treatment Pad Design

If lime is incorporated with soil at a specific mixing area then the treatment pad should
be bunded (as specified in section 4.e).

If the pad floor is constructed from untreated acid sulfate soil then the floor must be lime
treated as specified in section 4.a.

Validation testing of lime treated samples will require time for sampling, sample
transport to a laboratory, sample drying and analysis. This process can easily require
5-7 working days. The treatment pad and any storage areas need to be sized to
accommodate treated soil that remains to be validated.

q. Exposed Cut Surfaces

If excavation areas will be left exposed then these should be capped to minimise
oxidation of sulphidic and acid soil. The minimum depth of limed capping should be 800
mm.

i, Vegetated Cover

If the excavated area is to be revegetated then topsoil should be placed at the surface.
The lime treatment rate is conservative and an alkaline soil pH is expected. This may
not suit re-vegetation and could result in nutrient deficiency (eg. Zn, Fe, Mn & P). To
avoid this problem it is recommended the existing 0-200 mm soil layer is stripped from
the site and

ystockpiled. This assumes the 0-200 mm soil layer is currently vegetated, non-saline,
well oxidised and non-sulphidic. Care must be taken to restrict the topsoil removal to this
depth to avoid sulphidic material deeper down.

The final placement over the cut material should be:

0-200 mm __ replaced topsoil, uncompacted for revegetation (existing pH/acidity)

200-400 mm __ limed cut material, low level of compaction to allow for drainage
and root penetration (strongly alkaline, no acidity)

400-1000 mm _limed cut material, high level of compaction to minimise oxidation
and deep drainage (strongly alkaline, no acidity)

ii. Non-Vegetated Cover

lf the excavated area is not to be revegetated then no topsoil is required.

The final placement over the cut material should be:

0-800 mm _ limed cut material, high level of compaction to minimise oxidation
and deep drainage (strongly alkaline, no acidity)

h. Runoff Control

It is recommended a runoff diversion drain be constructed to divert runoff water away

from untreated excavated soil and excavation areas should these lie within a runoff

pathway. The drain should be checked daily to ensure it is servicable.

i, Ponded Water

Page 10

lf stormwater becomes ponded in bunded or disturbed areas affected by the presence
of acid sulfate soil then the pH should be checked prior to any off-site discharge. The
pH should lie in the range of 5.5-8.5. If the pH is less than 5.5 then then pH can be
raised by adding builders lime (slaked lime or calcium hydroxide). The builders lime is
more soluble than agricultural lime but agricultural lime can be used if necessary. The
lime should be added in doses, mixed and the pH measured. The pH is likely to resist
change until it rises towards a value of 5.5. After this it will often rise quickly with small
additions of lime. The mixed water will be turbid but should settle overnight. It is
preferable to allow the sediment to settle prior to any discharge. If discharge of turbid
water is necessary then sediment can be removed by filtration through sand filter tanks
or by slow overland flow across grassed areas.

Water quality should conform to the following criteria prior to discharge:

pH 5.5-8.5

dissolved oxygen >=80% saturation
turbidity < 100 NTU
suspended solids <25 mg/L
dissolved aluminium <0.1 mg/L
dissolved iron <1 mg/L

i. Groundwater

k. Unexpected Groundwater

Geotechnical studies of the site have not revealed the presence of groundwater or strata
likely to provide a significant groundwater flow. In the event of groundwater being
encountered the management plan will follow the actions described for "Ponded Water"
in section 4.i.

5. VALIDATION

Validation testing is regarded as an essential component of the management pian. Due
to the variable nature of mixing soil and lime, care must be exercise to obtain a
representative sample for validation analysis.

The engineer, project manager, geotechnical officer or other suitably qualified person
must ensure the validation testing has been performed and the results are satisfactory.
A copy of the test certificates is to be submitted to the local authority (or referral
agency).

a. Validation Sampling

*

The sub-samples must be representative of the treated soil volume. The location
of the samples should span the depth as well as the horizontal area for placed
soil. For stockpiled soil the samples should be evenly spaced through the soil
mass.

* The distribution of lime in a lime treated soil mass is typically highly variable on
a small scale. Whilst this mixing is adequate on a "landscape" scale it makes
accurate sampling difficult. It can be expected to collect some sub-samples with
no lime and others with a high lime content. It is necessary to collect a large
number of sub-samples to form a composite sample that provides an "average"

Page 11

lime content.

This process will take from one hour to one day per composite sample depending
on the time required for sub-sample extraction. If sampling is biased towards
samples with a high lime content the analysis results will be at odds with the
known volume of lime that was applied.

Use a sampling device to obtain a minimum of 20 and up to 40 approximately
equal volumes of limed soil. The minimum sub-sample size should be in the
range of 100-200 cc in volume. Mix these carefully on a plastic sheet or container
taking care to avoid segregation of the fine and coarse fraction. Quarter down to
retain a 200 gram composite sample.

The location of the sample area/depth is to be recorded.

Perform validation testing at the following rates:
* one test per 500 cubic metres for on-site placement

one test per 250 cubic metres for off-site placement

one test per 125 cubic metres for off-site placement within 50 metres of
a drainage line, stream or other surface water or where the watertable is
within 2 metres of the surface or where the site is below the 50 year flood
line.

*

*

Validation testing should include chemical analysis (SPOCAS or chromium
reducible sulphur test suites) and calcium carbonate.

Itis recommended the sampling and mixing method is carefully documented and
performed according to plan. A proportion of samples will "fail". This is
statistically predictable even though the correct rate of lime has been applied.
Adherence to rigorous sampling and mixing techniques makes it difficult to blame
the sampling stage should a test fail.

Samples are regarded as successfully treated provided they meet the following
criteria:

a) oxidised pH >6.5
b) equivalent sulphur content below 0.03%

In the event of a validation test failure a re-test is required. If the subsequent test
fails then the material must be re-limed to meet the test standard.

b. Scheduling of Validation Sampling

Validation testing of lime treated samples will require time for sampling, sample
transport to a laboratory, sample drying and analysis. This process can easily require
5-7 working days. Where soils are treated and then placed the schedule of placement
should allow sufficient time for the validation process. In the event of samples failing the
validation test it will be necessary to add additional lime and re-test the treated material
again.

 

Page 12

*

. RECORD KEEPING

It is proposed to maintain a record of the volume of excavation material and the
location of placement. The record is to be updated at the end of each working
day.

It is proposed to maintain a copy of all purchase and delivery documentation
describing the quantity of lime delivered to the site

Itis proposed a suitably responsible person (eg. geotechnical engineer, engineer,
surveyor, project manager, etc) supervise the lime treatment procedure to ensure
the correct quantity of lime is applied. A daily record of this activity is to be
maintained.

If any water is retained on the site and requires discharge then a record of the
water pH and any corrective action is to be maintained by a suitably responsible
person.

All records (eg. validation analysis, excavation, placement, lime delivery, lime
treatment and water quality) are to be retained for a period of five years by the
project manager.

Page 13

i. APPENDIX 1 SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Page 14

a. SOIL CHEMICAL ANALYSIS

The results of the chemical analysis are presented in Section 7.a.

 

Page 15

A.S.S. FIELD SCREEN ANALYSIS REPORT

 

 

Bio-Track
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

Anatysis By: Bio-Track Pty Ltd apn 9: 056 237 275 781 Mt. Glorious Road Kignvals. Brisbane, Austiala, 4520 Ph. 07 3229 7179 EMAIL pegpbrotrach.com.au
DATE OF REPORT 13 SEPTEMBER 2607 Page i of 2 Report Pages.

MR ONEILLE SMOOTHY

SMOOTH SOLUTIONS YOUR PROJECT/JOB REFERENCE ASS SASEMENT EXCAVATION
CLIENT ADDRESS
PROJECT NAME ASS BASEMENT BXCAUATION SAMPLING DATE 11/9/2007
RUMBER OF SAMPLES 15 SAMPLE TYPE SOIL SAMPLE FOR ACID SULFATE STUDY
PACKAGING SAMPLES LABELLED - INTACT
SAMPLES DISPOSED ON 1/1/2003
LOG-IN DATE 13 SEPTEMBER 2007 LAB REF. 1R13097.502

 

TEST METHODOLOGY FOR pk_f AND pH_ fox AS P=R QASSIT 2004 Laboratory Methods. Indications based on pH data only.
RATE: Oenone l=siight “2=moderate 3=high 4=very high (steam evolved) visual observation at 6-5 minutes.
TEMP; Surface temperature rise ('C) oxidised sampie at S minutes.

 

SAMPLE iD Uppers Lower (mm) pi_f pH_fox change RATE TEMP INDICATION

BH 1 00 250 6.6 4.0 3 4 no TAA & 6Gulphide possible

BHU 250 sco 5.2 3.8 3 i low TAA

BH 1 500 750 5.2 4.2 2 3 iow TAA & low suiphide

BH Y 750 1000 $.6 4.2 2 2 iow TAA

BH OL 1G00 1250 5.7 4.6 2 4 iow TAA & low TPA

BH 1 1250 1500 6.2 4.5 2 i low TAA

BH i 1506 1750 8.8 4.2 2 i low TAA

BH 2 oo 250 4.7 2.6 2 2 low 7 & moderate TPA & sulphide possible
BH 2 250 500 5.0 3.4 2 2 low TAA & moderate TPA

Bu 2 500 750 §.5 4.8 2 2 low TAA ¢ low TPA & low sulphide

Be 2 750 1000 5.3 5.3 2 i iow TAA & low TPA & low sulphide

BH 2 2000 i2s5¢ 7.1 6.3 2 i mo TAA & low TPA & low suiphide

BH 2 1250 i500 7.8 6.3 2 i no TAA & iow TPA

BE 2 1500 3750 7.8 6.2 2 5 no TAA & low TPA

BH 2 1750 2600 3.30447 3 2 no TAA & iow TPA & sulphide possible

f ELA? __. Signatory For and behalf of BSio-Track Pty Ltd

 

Page 16

DETERMINATION OF ACID SULFATE SOIL PROPERTIES

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

Analysts By: Blo-Track Pty Ltd aan 91 086 287 773 ‘TMLMt, Glorious Road Ilighy ale, Brisbane, Austealis, 4920 Ph. O7 2097179 Fx, 07 3209-7139
1A8 REFERENCE UR17097.434 DATE OF REPORT 26 SEPLEMBER 2007 @19:35:57 Page 1 of 1 Report Pages.

CLIENT WAKE NR WEILLE SMOOTIY c/o SMOOTH SOQUTICHS

PROJECT MAKE ASS BASENENT EXCAVATION YOUR PROJECT/s00 REFERIWCE ATS BASEMEHT BXCAUATION

SWAPLING DATE 11/0/2007 AMBER OF SAMPLES 3 Samplon supplied by cl(ant SAMPLE TYPE:SOIL SAMPLE FOR ACID SULFATE STUOY

QATE RECEIVED 17 SEPTEMBER 2007 PACKAGING SAMPLES LABELLED ~ INTACT Ground Oven Dry Gonplas DISPOSED ON 1/6/2008

Sample 10 es received, NETHOOOLOGY: As per (OMA OASSIT May 2006), oven drled (85'C}, »1000 um shalt removed, fine grind. ALL reported values gravimetric, cry mate.

{INET rates calculated to neutralise TPA Cor TAA if >TPA)+ oS RAS “ANC_E/1.5 LIMEZ rates calculated to neutralise TAA + oS POS of $ Cr + aS RAS -ANC BI/N.S

RO. Lime rates assume 97% Lime neutralisation but 00 NOT includy any sotety factors. Suggeated factorst.5-2, Rates sre kg/ton. Wulelpty by Butk denaity to conere to kg/ad.

Finenosa factor<t.5 C&H PUS* moles carbonate atkelinity released by oxidation assuming (Co POS + Co KCL) © {Mo POS = Ma KCL) im due to carbonate aoturion.

Blanks represent unmeasured values, tered & <O.x represent measured vatues. If pl KCU>4,5 then a-RAS (calculoted from acid extract) may be rero for undisturbed soil. Cavar ta the acid

reactive cetelun cetculated as the difference between 1M KCI and 4 H HCI sotuble Co.

10. GEPTH pe pH TAR OTPA TSA $ KCL SP SPOS S Cr e-RAS 9 BO Ce XCL CaP Mg KCL Mp P CON POS CIMED LINS2 SANG BT Ce/ar
om Ken, on tomtom x x x % X ag/kg mg/kg mg/kg mgeko mt kg/t kg /t x mevke

Analytical Nethod Cotes 23a 238 23F USGS ASH ABCD Ee «= bRBsROJO © 23Vh) 23Wh 235m 3 Tem w2SUeK e19A2

BH 1 500-750 5.65 oi] 0,01 <0.0% 0.01 0.003 av 7 0 vo

8H 1 1000-1250 5.8e 1 0,08 0,01 0.01 0.006 ww 4 9 i

BH 1 1500-1750 6.02 a 0,01 9.01 <0,01 0.002 33 ? o Mw

 

For and on Pstuall of Hio-Trmek Pry Lat

 

Page 17

b. SITE & ENGINEERING DRAWINGS

 

Page 18

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

vache ms ars

Rai ADP vO) te

-

L
ant
HiRes es

      

   

     
  

~

 

 

 

TR Ae ret

ounddé

ariag

tonto

, ateet
:

 

 

 

 

 

Page 19

 

 

eh, RY, ‘

ue

 

a

 

(Sumner
ames 2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

x Sanat,
J: SER |

       
 

,

 

 

 

3 ue d qd
Q-@ NOILOZS _ a
|

 

9-9 NOLOAS

] abenig (20g

he eee ah : Bhan : 4 - ie
ag Aug fT eee 3 ma |! 3

li ei | (=| 4 . j | : [ 4 SRG eee |

   
 
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Page 20

BL weOCN
LAA 8S

“aan

  

48OdOUd

Satie

ww YRS

  

OWT

 

   
 

 

ah muck seni

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

(og) of nBeses, .
ees 4 : . oO

  

 

ee bal

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SOOT atu sey

 

Fay a

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

ters

 

a

   

=

 

male a i...

    

halt

: TER ee Pee et pet —

rN

 

 

| abesg og

 

 

498Q ANU
| oY uff |

 

= aac aT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Page 21

 

       

                                

3° Minimum
Roof Pitch

‘ip

Balustrade
Type |

Boundary

‘Gee
Timber Top

  

Aluminium Post:
Sy

 

Boat Garage Floor FFL 2.62

Basement FFLO.6

Existing N.G.L. at face of
boat storage Area.

boot storage EAST ELEVATION

Access. "
Timber Stats. ( River )

Existing Block Wall
(Render Finish)

Existing
Revetment Wall

 

Balustrade
Type |

Basement FFLO.6
Glass

WEST ELEVATION:

| | ( Street Elevation - Front Fence Not Shown )

a

Doveway Gates

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ground Floor FFL 3.02
ate Bost Garage FFL 2.62
SNS S OS S ~
RR
RA
¢ x Z RR 1 ° “KEKE Basement FFLO.8 ,
|e | WEST ELEVATION! |

( Street Elevation - Front Fence Elevation )

 

EXTERNAL WALL FINISHES

RC - Rendered Concrete

FC - 6mm Fibre Cement Sheeting
M_ - Colorbond Metal Wail Sheeting
R8 - Rendered Block

FB - Face Block

J - Timber Veneer - Extemal
ASS - Aluminium Shutter Screan
ZINC 1 VM Zinc Intenocking (300w)
ZINC 2 - VM Standing Seam (300w)
ALUM - Aluminium Stnp

8 22/10/07 Roof Pitch, Levels Indicated
A 16/10/07 First issue

tssue Date = Detale

Architects
MIDDAP DITCHFIELD Pty Ltd

‘Archit Rog. No.~ P Middap - 001850 T Dichfield - 002185
a.b.n. 49 084 468 708

Cnr Mary and Thomas Streets
NOOSAVILLE QLD 4566

Ph - (07) 5474 0877 Fax - (07) 5474 0806
Email - [email protected]

 

 

CUENT

G & N Smoothy
PROJECT

PROPOSED HOUSE

LOCATION
59 Wyuna Court
Noosa Heads

DRAWING

Working Drawings
Elevations East & West
wae das awn

4:100 Aug 2007 KAG

Proj re. Dwg ac.
0629 WD 06 B
Seer

 

Page 22

           
                  

 

 

NGL - 2.11
RL- 9.44

 

   

GUTTER
(Rbof Under)

 

 

  

Low Level
‘Roof Type B'

See
Detail Plan

B 23007 Levels Indidcated, Pitches, Materials.

A 16/10/07 Fast issue.
sue Dain Detats

 

       

Architects
MIDDAP DITCHFIELD Pty Ltd

1 I
Architect Rag. No.- P Middap - 001850 T Ditchfield - 002195,
abn, 49 064 466 708

Cnr Mary and Thomas Streets

Roof Type ‘A’ Roof Type 'B’ Roof Type 'C' —- Roof Type D’ NOOSAVILLE QLD 4566

ROOF PLAN Metal Root Sheeting. Metal Roof Sheeting. = VM Zinc’ Concrete Stab. Ph - (07) 5474 0877 Fax - (07) 5474 0906

Email - dasign€jmadarc.com.au
Stcamt RKiiplock Standing Seam As Per Engineer.
FINISHES Speed Deck Ultra 1° Pitch 3° Pitch Slope to Trough. CUENT
ZING 1 - VM Standing Seam (300w} 4° Pitch G &N Smoothy

NGL - Natural Groursi Level. PROJECT

RL - Relative Level. Top of Roof. PROPOSED HOUSE
LOCATION
59 Wyuna Court
Noosa Heads

GUTTER

     

 

 

  

 

DP oP
Low Level ‘Roof Type B'

 

 

DRAWING
Working Drawings

 

Roof Plan

scale ne own

4:100 Aug 2007 KAG

Proj no. Dwg no.
0629 WD 04 B

—

Page 23

    

200 x 100
Column

Timber Slat

Gate 4 Fence. First Floor FFL 6.22

 

Spitter.

             
      

WYUNA
COURT
Ground Floor FFL 3.02

Existing
Block Wall

Boundary

Basement FFLO.8

Existing Beach

( I | |

Existing Block Wall on
Neighbouring Property

 

 

               

Side Fence
(Not Shown for
Clarity)

 

Spitter. Spitter

WYUNA

Timber Slat
COURT Swinging Gate

Main Vehicle Shiding
FFL 3.02

      

 

e

®

. Q
no, 5
Clothes, $
Ling o

     

    

Basement FFLO.8

        

      
 

    

tural Ground
ry

Exsting
boat ramp

SOUTH ELEVATION level st
| |

    

EXTERNAL WALL FINISHES

 

RC - Rendered Concrete

FC - 6mm Fibre Cement Sheeting
M_ - Colorbond Metal Wal! Sheeting
RB - Rendered Block

FB - Face Block

T ~~ - Timber Veneer - Extemal

ASS - Aluminium Shutter Screen
ZINC 1- VM Zine Interlocking (300w)
ZINC 2 - VW Standing Seam (300w)
ALUM - Aluminium Strip

B 23/10/07 Root Pitch, Levels Indicated
A 16/10/07 First issue

Issvo ata = Dotaks

Architects
MIDDAP DITCHFIELD Pty Ltd

‘Architect Rog. No. + P btiddlap - 001850 T Ditchibekd - 002195
a.b.n. 49 064 468 708

Cnr Mary and Thomas Streets
NOOSAVILLE QLD 4566

Ph - (07) 5474 Q877 Fax - (07) 5474 0906
Email - [email protected]

 

 

 

QUENT

G &N Smoothy
PROJECT

PROPOSED HOUSE

LOCATION
59 Wyuna Court
Noosa Heads

DRAWING
Working Drawings
Elevations North & South

wae dale oraen
47100 Aug 2007 KAG

Proj no. Dwg ro.
0629 WD 05 B
=e

 

Page 24

      
       

14
Was

O12 soo? f} ‘S006
t t

     
 

5m height limit

    
      

    
    

1
10

 

Pitching P

 

First Floor FFL 6.220

bine of Existing
Ground Surtace

4u

  

Boundary

  

Se aa

     

1 Bed 4
ed
Boat Storage

     

Laun | nau

 

       

  

sting
Revetment Wall,

 
   

Timber

 

Sliding Gate.
1 Aluminium Frame.

Waterproof 1 '
Timber Slats.

Membrane. | | |

  

EXTERNAL WALL FINISHES

 

Retractable

—_— | - — RC - Rendered Concrate
FC + 6mm Fibre Cemert Sheeting

M+ Cotorbond Meta! Wall Sheeting

RB - Rendared Block

FB - Face Block

T+ Timber Veneer - extemal

ASS - Aluminium Shutter Screen

ZINC 1 - VM Zinc Interlocking (300w)

ZING 2 - VM Standing Seam (300w)

ALUM - Aluminium Stop

First Floor FFL 6.22

 

B 23/10/07 Roof Pitch, Levels Indicated
A 16/10/07 First Issue

tseve Dele = Dotais

Architects

   

Existing
Block Wall

 

Ground Floor FFL 3.02

 

ab.n, 49 064 466 708
Cnr Mary and Thomas Streets
NOOSAVILLE QLD 4566

Basement FFLO.6

  

Email - [email protected]

          

CAJENT
Existing Beach | Ground Surf SECTION B-B | G &N Smoothy
§ ! 7 1 PROPOSED HOUSE
~ | 59 Wyuna Court
Noosa Heads

I 4 ' DRAWING

Working drawings

Sections A&B

ale ome can
1:100 Aug 2007 KAG

Proj no. Derg no.
0629 WD 07

 

=i.

 

MIDDAP DITCHFIELD Pty Ltd

Architect Rag. No.- P Middap 001850 T Diachtield - 002185

Ph - (07) 5474 0877 Fax - (07) 5474 0906

 

Page 25

 
     

Balustrade
Type |

—_—

First Floor FFL E.22

 

Bxsting
Block Walt

Ground Floor FFL 3.02
Pathway

 

    

       

Revetment CEES IOL GET:

Wall.

LELLIELE.

Basement FFLO.6

       

1g
Existing Beach Ground Surat

7

Existing Block Wallon WYUNA
Neighbouring Property COURT

                  
         

  

Existing
Boat Ramp

Boundary Fence.
Timber Slat
Swinging Gate

Boundary

Ground Floor FFL 3.02
rage

 

EXTERNAL WALL FINISHES:

RC - Rendered Concrete

FC - 6mm Fibra Cement Sheeung
M_ - Cotorbond Metal Wall Sheating

SECTION D-D vo. eae

Il 1 ' ' FB - Face Block

T _- Timber Veneer - External

ASS - Aluminium Shutter Screen

ZINC 1 - VM Zine Interlocking (300w)

ZINC 2- VM Standing Seam (300w)

ALUM - Aluminium Strip

                 

  

Retractable
Awning.

   

15

Fall Roof
B 240/07 Root Piich, Levels Indicated
A 1GAQO7 First Issue

fesue Date Dotals

Architects
MIDDAP DITCHFIELD Pty Ltd

‘Architect Rag. No.- P Middap -O01850 T Dlxhield - 002185
e.b.n. 49 064 455 708

Cnr Mary and Thomas Streets
NOOSAVILLE QLD 4566

Ph - (07) 5474 0877 Fax - (07) 5474 0906.
Emai - [email protected]

Trough

 

a

undary

first Floor
FFL 6.22

 

= Garage Floor
With door to Entry
Hall. Fall to Front
Garage Doors. CUENT

Ground Floor G & N Smoothy
FFL_3.02 PROJECT
Bast Garage — PROPOSED HOUSE

                     

 

Ground Floor
FFL 3.0.

 
       

 

                              
   

43 EM GE

   

    

   

         

  
     

   

  
   

 

   
 
 

YEG GL55,
IIE IE S 2.82 LOCATION
ULE 59 Wyuna Court
LES Noosa Heads
Basement. Compacted Basement cman
FFL Working Drawings
te Slab Under Deck. x
Fale Drain Fround Pool Sections C&D &E&F
Une of Exsting Natural a : ——— =
Surtace levels. ! Ground tne : ' 1 1 Selected Waterprooi 4:100 Aug 2007 KAG
see, SECTION E-E | SECTION) F-F | sce von hase
Membrane. 0629 WO 08 B

—_—_—_—_——__