Original source · versioned page text
Geotechnical Investigation
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Proposed Calile Hotel Noosa Development
3 – 7 Serenity Close, Noosa Heads
Report for: Calile Malouf Investments Pty Ltd
22239-001-Rev0
7 October 2022
Tectonic Geotechnical Pty Ltd
PO Box 899, Buderim QLD 4556
Office: 07 5478 9016
Email: [email protected]
www.tectonicgeo.com.au
A.B.N. 83 165 727 828
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Large file: the download may take up to a minute.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of pages 2 to 34 (of 48)
Page 2
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
Document Review
Document No. Revision Prepared By Reviewed By Date Issued
001 - DRAFT 0 Michael Cocks Ashley Davey 28 July 2022
001 0 Michael Cocks Ashley Davey 7 October 2022
Report Distribution
Document Revision Method of Delivery Issued To
Michael Malouf
001 0 Electronic
([email protected])
Prepared By: Reviewed By:
Michael Cocks BEng MIEAust NER RPEQ 25740 Ashley Davey RPEQ 8159
Senior Geotechnical Engineer Managing Director
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 i
Page 3
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
Executive Summary
This report details the results of a geotechnical investigation undertaken for the proposed the proposed
Calile Hotel Noosa Development at 3 – 7 Serenity Close, Noosa Heads. The investigation was performed by
Tectonic for Calile Malouf Investments Pty Ltd. The investigation comprised drilling of boreholes at 10
locations across accessible areas of the development footprint, together with in-situ strength and laboratory
testing of soils. This report summarises the results of the investigation and provides geotechnical
recommendations regarding earthworks and footings, together with temporary and permanent basement
retention.
Preliminary drawings indicate that the proposed development will comprise a building ranging between
three and six storeys high, over a single to double level basement carpark. Buildings forming an east and
west wing are proposed, connected by at grade structures, pathways and carparking. New stormwater
infrastructure/easements will connect to the existing infrastructure through the central part of the
development area. A combination of hotel rooms, retail buildings, carparking, recreational facilities (e.g.
pools, gym, bar etc.) and landscaping are proposed. Provided sections indicate that excavations for the
proposed development will generally be in the order of about 4 m deep; however, will range up to about
6 m deep in the north-eastern corner of the site. Filling is generally anticipated to range up to about
1.5 m high to form final levels; however, about 3 m of filling is proposed along the southern edge of the west
wing building.
Subsurface conditions encountered in the boreholes are summarised as follows:
Fill – was encountered in all boreholes except BH4 and BH9 to depths of between 0.1 m to 0.7 m
below ground level (BGL), comprising mostly very loose to medium dense gravel/silty sandy or
very dense sandy gravel (BH5 and BH6 only); then or from the ground surface
Natural Sands – initially being very loose to loose to depths between 0.2 m and 1.2 m BGL, then
medium dense, becoming dense (or denser) below depths between 1.9 m and 3.7 m BGL to the
borehole/DCP termination depths.
No signs of groundwater seepage (‘springs’) were observed during our walk-over. Groundwater was not
encountered in the boreholes at the time of investigation.
Provided the recommendations within this report are adhered to, and subject to detailed design and
construction of the footing and retention systems by a structural RPEQ (including internal and global stability
checks for retaining walls), there would be a Low Risk to property from slope instability.
Excavations through the soils encountered in the boreholes would be achievable using conventional
earthmoving plant (e.g. small or larger excavators with toothed buckets). Temporary, unsurcharged cuts
could be formed at 1V:2H in very loose to loose sands, and at 1V:1.5H in medium dense (or denser) sands,
for batters up to 4 m in height, provided groundwater seepage is not encountered and sands do not slough
from the batter face as they dry out. Space restrictions will likely prevent battering to form stable temporary
cuts in some parts of the site and so some form of temporary retention will likely be required such as sheet,
contiguous or secant pile walls. Unsupported excavations proposed to extend deeper than 4 m BGL should
be assessed by a geotechnical RPEQ by inspection of the earthworks before exceeding 4 m BGL.
In accordance with previous practice in the area, it is recommended that all structures are founded below a
plane rising at 27° from the toe of the dune to the south of the site. Footings for the proposed development
and any ancillary structures must penetrate through any unsuitable natural soils (i.e. very loose to loose
sands) or future fill to found into medium dense (or denser) natural sands. Medium dense natural materials
were encountered from depths of between 0.4 m and 1.5 m BGL (existing ground levels) in the boreholes and
DCPs. Based on the anticipated excavation depths, such materials are generally anticipated to be at or near
the design subgrade levels. Where medium dense (or denser) sands are not present at the subgrade levels,
over-excavation and re-compaction of the loose materials as outlined in Section 6.2.3 herein could be
undertaken to achieve a medium dense foundation subgrade. High level footings founded in medium dense
sand may be designed using an allowable bearing pressure of 200 kPa. A suitably qualified and experienced
geotechnical RPEQ must carry out inspections and testing of the foundations during construction to confirm
the allowable bearing pressures. Given the sandy soil profile, where deepened footings are required, steel
screw piles could be adopted.
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 ii
Page 4
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................ 1
2.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................................................... 1
3.0 METHOD OF INVESTIGATION ................................................................................................................................. 2
4.0 RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION ................................................................................................................................ 3
4.1 Site Description............................................................................................................................................. 3
4.2 Topography................................................................................................................................................... 5
4.3 Geology ........................................................................................................................................................ 6
4.4 Subsurface Conditions.................................................................................................................................. 6
4.5 Geotechnical Laboratory Test Results .......................................................................................................... 7
4.6 Groundwater ................................................................................................................................................. 7
4.7 Surface Drainage .......................................................................................................................................... 7
5.0 SLOPE STABILITY ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................................... 8
5.1 Existing Conditions ....................................................................................................................................... 8
5.2 Slope Stability Assessment .......................................................................................................................... 8
5.2.1 Qualitative Assessment........................................................................................................................... 8
5.2.2 Quantitative Assessment ...................................................................................................................... 10
6.0 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................................. 14
6.1 Development Limitations ............................................................................................................................ 14
6.2 Earthworks – General ................................................................................................................................. 14
6.2.1 Site Preparation and Trafficability ......................................................................................................... 14
6.2.2 Excavations ........................................................................................................................................... 15
6.2.3 Filling..................................................................................................................................................... 15
6.3 Building Foundations .................................................................................................................................. 16
6.3.1 Indicative Site Classification.................................................................................................................. 16
6.3.2 Footing Design ...................................................................................................................................... 16
6.4 Temporary and Permanent Retention......................................................................................................... 17
6.5 Drainage ..................................................................................................................................................... 18
7.0 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................................ 19
8.0 LIMITATIONS .......................................................................................................................................................... 19
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 iii
Page 5
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
TABLES
Table 1: Summary of Subsurface Profiles ........................................................................................................................... 6
Table 2: Stability Risk Levels .............................................................................................................................................. 8
Table 3: Details of Qualitative Risk Assessment for Property (AGS 2007) ....................................................................... 10
Table 4: Slope/W Analysis Results ................................................................................................................................... 11
Table 5: Retaining Structure Design Parameters .............................................................................................................. 18
TEXT FIGURES
Text Figure 1: Level four layout plan (upper) and some cross-sectional views (lower) of the development, courtesy
of Richards + Spence ......................................................................................................................................... 2
Text Figure 2: 2022 aerial image of the site and immediate surrounds (courtesy Nearmap imagery)................................. 3
Text Figure 3: Panoramic view of the central part of the site looking north-east ................................................................. 4
Text Figure 4: Panoramic view over the north-eastern corner of the site, looking south towards the existing office ........... 4
Text Figure 5: Panoramic view of the western part of the site, looking north-east towards existing demountable
building ............................................................................................................................................................... 4
Text Figure 6: Tectonic oblique drone image of the site looking south................................................................................ 5
Text Figure 7: Site plan showing ground surface contours (courtesy Noosa Council ‘Intramaps’) ...................................... 5
Text Figure 8: Extract of Laguna Bay Surface 1:100,000 Geology Map ............................................................................. 6
Text Figure 9: Erosion scours parallel to the gravel tracks in the south-eastern corner of the site...................................... 7
Text Figure 10: Extract from NSC landslide hazard overlay mapping ................................................................................. 8
Text Figure 11: Slope/W output for long term conditions – Case 1 ................................................................................... 11
Text Figure 12: Slope/W output for long term conditions – Case 2 ................................................................................... 12
Text Figure 13: Slope/W output for long term conditions – Case 3 ................................................................................... 12
Text Figure 14: Slope/W output for long term conditions – Case 4 ................................................................................... 13
Text Figure 15: Footing depth required to prevent undermining....................................................................................... 17
FIGURES
Figure 1: Site Plan
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
Borehole & DCP Reports & Explanatory Notes
APPENDIX B
Geotechnical Laboratory Test Certificates
APPENDIX C
AGS Guidelines - Qualitative Terminology for Use in Assessing Risk to Property
Some Guidelines for Hillside Construction
APPENDIX D
Limitations
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 iv
Page 6
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report details the results of a geotechnical investigation undertaken for the proposed the proposed
Calile Hotel Noosa Development at 3 – 7 Serenity Close, Noosa Heads. The investigation was performed by
Tectonic for Calile Malouf Investments Pty Ltd, generally in accordance with Proposal P22341-Rev0, dated
6 July 2022.
The investigation comprised drilling of boreholes at 10 locations across accessible areas of the development
footprint, together with in-situ strength and laboratory testing of soils. This report summarises the results of
the investigation and provides geotechnical recommendations regarding earthworks and footings, together
with temporary and permanent basement retention.
In summary, subject to the implementation of the recommendations made herein, it is assessed that there
would be a Low Risk of slope instability affecting the proposed development in accordance with the
Australian Geomechanics Society Guidelines for Landslide Risk Management, dated March 2007 (AGS
2007).
2.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
Preliminary drawings have been provided to Tectonic (Ref. Richards + Spence, Project No. 2100004,
Drawing Nos. SD-A-01-01 to 07 [not inclusive], Revs E to S, dated 6 October 2022) which indicate that the
proposed development will comprise a building ranging between three and six storeys, over a single to
double level basement carpark. Buildings forming an east and west wing are proposed, connecting by at
grade structures, pathways and carparking. A combination of hotel rooms, retail buildings, carparking,
recreational facilities (e.g. pools, gym, bar etc.) and landscaping are proposed. Building details have not
been supplied; however, we anticipate that the structures will include concrete framing, on-grade and
suspended concrete floors, and masonry retaining walls. A new overland stormwater flow path within a
dedicated volumetric easement is proposed between the eastern and western wings of the development,
which will connect to existing and future stormwater infrastructure and an infiltration area to the south of the
buildings.
No earthworks details were available at the time of reporting; however, provided sections indicate that
excavations for the proposed development will generally range from about 4 m deep up to about 6 m deep
in the north-eastern corner. Filling is generally anticipated to be less than 1.5 m high to form final levels;
however, filling up to about 3 m high is proposed along the southern edge of the west wing building.
Excavations are anticipated to extend close to the site boundaries and, therefore, some form of temporary
retention will likely be required. Isolated deeper excavations may be required for the lift overrun pits and
other elements.
Text Figure 1 overleaf provides a layout plan and some cross-sectional views of the proposed development.
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 1
Page 7
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
Text Figure 1: Level four layout plan (upper) and some cross-sectional views (lower) of the development, courtesy of
Richards + Spence
3.0 METHOD OF INVESTIGATION
As part of our assessment, a desk-top study was carried out comprising a review of published geological
maps, slope stability studies as well as Noosa Council (NC) planning overlays and site information.
An experienced geotechnical engineer from Tectonic undertook a site walk-over on 21 June 2022 to visually
assess any indicators of past slope instability. The walk-over included assessment of soil exposures,
surface drainage conditions, topography, evidence of erosion or past instability, and vegetation
coverage/condition.
This was followed by a subsurface investigation comprising the drilling of ten boreholes (designated BH1 to
BH10) in accessible areas across the site. Boreholes were drilled using Tectonic’s 4WD mounted solid flight
auger rig, and hand augering equipment, to depths between 3 m and 6 m below ground level (BGL).
In-situ testing, using the dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) method, was carried out from the ground surface
adjacent to and within each borehole, with DCP testing continued beyond the borehole termination depths in
borehole BH4 and BH9. Boreholes were backfilled on completion using spoil arising during drilling, with
excess material slightly mounded at surface.
Borehole locations are shown in Figure 1 attached at the end of this report, with borehole and DCP logs
presented in Appendix A, together with explanatory notes. Borehole coordinates were recorded using a
handheld global positioning system (GPS) with an accuracy of ± 3 m.
Selected soil samples were dispatched to a NATA accredited laboratory for geotechnical testing. Laboratory
testing was undertaken in accordance with Australian Standard AS1289 Methods for Testing Soils for
Engineering Purposes and comprised two particle size distribution (PSD) tests for soil classification.
Geotechnical laboratory test results are summarised in Section 4.5. Laboratory certificates are attached in
Appendix B. The results of the desk-top study and walk-over survey are included in Section 4 below.
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 2
Page 8
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
4.0 RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION
4.1 Site Description
The site is formally described as Lots 10 and 11 on SP195871, covering a combined area of about 2.4 ha,
with frontage to Serenity Close and Banksia Avenue along the northern and eastern boundaries,
respectively. At the time of the investigation the western part of the site contained unsealed carparking and
a small demountable building. A small single-story office/residence with a gravel driveway was located in the
north-eastern corner of the site. Remaining areas of the site primarily comprised bushland, with sporadic
clearings and tracks prevalent to the north. Relict electrical boxes, power cables and concrete slabs were
observed across the northern part of the site, with a historic aerial review suggesting the area may have
been used as a caravan park (or similar).
Based on an external visual assessment the existing structures appeared to be in relatively good structural
condition and exhibited no obvious signs of distress (e.g. cracking, misalignment, etc.) that could be
attributed to slope instability. Surrounding allotments to the north and west of the subject site contained
multi-storey unit developments, with a relatively densely vegetated allotment directly to the south. Sewer
and stormwater infrastructure was contained in an easement which traversed the central part of the site.
A 2022 aerial image of the site and surrounds is shown in Text Figure 2.
Existing Residence/Office
Demountable Building
Subject Site
Indicative Sewer/Stormwater Easement
Text Figure 2: 2022 aerial image of the site and immediate surrounds (courtesy Nearmap imagery)
Site conditions at the time of our assessment are shown in Text Figures 3 to 6 on the following pages.
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 3
Page 9
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
Text Figure 3: Panoramic view of the central part of the site looking north-east
BH10
Text Figure 4: Panoramic view over the north-eastern corner of the site, looking south towards the existing office
Text Figure 5: Panoramic view of the western part of the site, looking north-east towards existing demountable building
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 4
Page 10
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
Text Figure 6: Tectonic oblique drone image of the site looking south
4.2 Topography
During the site walk-over, topographic features were noted, and ground slopes were recorded using a hand-
held clinometer. As illustrated in Text Figure 7, the site is located on the southerly and south-east facing
flanks of an inland dune which crests along Serenity Close to the north.
Based on a visual assessment it appeared that minor cut and fill earthworks (<0.5 m depth/height) had been
undertaken across the northern part of the site to create the existing site features (i.e. access tracks and
existing buildings). A cutting was observed along the northern frontage, ranging up to about 0.5 m high and
dipping at about 28°.
Most of the proposed development area comprised gently to moderating sloping ground ranging between
about 8° to 12°. Steeper gradients were recorded in the southern-eastern part of the site, generally beyond
the proposed development footprint, which range up to about 20°. A steeply incised drainage feature was
observed adjacent to the south-eastern corner of the site, with gradients up to 30°. No irregular surface
features were noted which would indicate global slope instability.
Subject Site
Text Figure 7: Site plan showing ground surface contours (courtesy Noosa Council ‘Intramaps’)
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 5
Page 11
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
4.3 Geology
Available geological information 1 indicates that the site is underlain by “man-made deposits of gravel, sand
and silt being generally associated with land-fill or mining” (Ref: Text Figure 8); however, the site is in close
proximity to Pleistocene age dune sand deposits. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in the
investigation and our experience with the surrounding area, the site is underlain by the dune sand deposits.
Approx. Site Location
Text Figure 8: Extract of Laguna Bay Surface 1:100,000 Geology Map
4.4 Subsurface Conditions
Detailed descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered in the boreholes are provided in the
borehole reports attached in Appendix A, along with definition sheets which describe terms and
abbreviations used on the reports. DCP results are also provided on the borehole logs. Subsurface
conditions encountered in the boreholes are summarised as follows:
Fill – was encountered in all boreholes except BH4 and BH9 to depths of between 0.1 to 0.7 m
BGL, comprising mostly very loose to medium dense gravel/silty sandy or very dense sandy gravel
(BH5 and BH6 only); then or from the ground surface
Natural Sands – initially being very loose to loose to depths between 0.2 m and 1.2 m BGL, then
medium dense, becoming dense (or denser) below depths between 1.9 m and 3.7 m BGL to the
borehole/DCP termination depths.
Table 1 below summarises the subsurface profile in each borehole.
Table 1: Summary of Subsurface Profiles
Very Loose/ Medium Dense Dense (or denser)
Borehole No. Fill
Loose Sands Sands Sands
BH1 0.1 0.1 – 0.4 0.4 – 1.9 1.9 – 6.0TD
BH2 0.4 0.4 – 0.5 0.5 – 3.7 3.7 – 6.0TD
BH3 0.3 0.3 – 1.2 1.2 – 3.4 3.4 – 6.0TD
BH4 NE 0 – 0.8 0.8 – 3.6 3.6 – 4.8*DCP
0.6 – 1.3 1.3 – 2.0
BH5 0.6 NE
2.4 – 3.3 3.3 – 6.0 TD
0.6 – 0.9 0.9 – 1.5
BH6 0.6 NE
1.5 – 3.1 3.1 – 6.0TD
BH7 0.3 NE 0.3 – 3.3 3.3 – 6.0TD
BH8 0.4 NE 0.4 – 3.5 3.5 – 6.0 TD
1
Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy, 1:100,000 Laguna Bay Surface Geology Map, Sheet 9545, 2018
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 6
Page 12
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
Very Loose/ Medium Dense Dense (or denser)
Borehole No. Fill
Loose Sands Sands Sands
BH9 NE 0.0 – 1.2 1.2 – 3.2 3.2 – 4.6*DCP
BH10 0.7 NE 0.7 – 3.7 3.7 – 6.0TD
Notes: 1. Depths noted in m BGL at time of investigation (21 June 2021)
2. NE denotes not encountered
3. TD denotes borehole terminated at target depth
4. * inferred from DCP testing
5. DCP denotes DCP termination depth
4.5 Geotechnical Laboratory Test Results
PSD analyses of two samples from boreholes BH1 and BH5 indicate that the soils generally comprised
poorly graded fine to medium grained sands. Full test results (laboratory certificates) are presented in
Appendix B.
4.6 Groundwater
No signs of groundwater seepage (‘springs’) were observed during our walk-over. Groundwater was not
encountered in the boreholes at the time of investigation. Groundwater conditions are expected to be
reflective of prevailing weather conditions and seepage may develop, particularly following periods of
prolonged or heavy rainfall.
4.7 Surface Drainage
Surface drainage would be expected to follow natural surface contours in a southerly direction, towards
lower lying ground and ultimately a watercourse to the south. Most runoff from upslope of the property is
anticipated to be intercepted by the existing stormwater infrastructure along Serenity Close.
Given the sandy nature of the site, rainfall would normally be anticipated to infiltrate the ground surface.
However, as the proposed development will occupy a large part of the block, significant run-off from hard
surfaces will occur. Nevertheless, where directed into swales rather than pipes, such run-off would be
expected to infiltrate into the natural sands relatively rapidly. Some erosion scours were observed along the
gravel tracks in the south-eastern part of the site (Ref. Text Figure 9 overleaf) which indicates that
concentrated stormwater runoff develops in these areas. It is inferred that the concentrated runoff in these
areas is due to anthropogenic activities, rather the natural surface features. No significant erosion features
were noted across inferred natural ground slopes during our assessment. Recommendations to improve
surface drainage as part of the development works are provided in Section 6.5.
Text Figure 9: Erosion scours parallel to the gravel tracks in the south-eastern corner of the site
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 7
Page 13
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
5.0 SLOPE STABILITY ASSESSMENT
5.1 Existing Conditions
The Noosa Planning Scheme 2020 includes a landslide hazard overlay map (Ref. extract in Text Figure 10)
which indicates that the northern parts of the site present a Very Low/Low Landslide Hazard (no shading),
whilst the steep, southern part has a Moderate (pale yellow shading) Landslide Hazard.
Subject Site
Text Figure 10: Extract from NSC landslide hazard overlay mapping
It should be noted that the Noosa landslide hazard map is a broad-scale indication of the potential
landslide susceptibility and is superseded by this site-specific assessment. The allotment did not exhibit
any visible surface features which would indicate global slope instability during our walkover; no landslide
back scarps, noteworthy groundwater seepage or areas of naturally ‘hummocky’ ground were observed.
5.2 Slope Stability Assessment
5.2.1 Qualitative Assessment
The risk assessment for this project has been carried out following AGS 2007 Practice Note Guidelines for
Landslide Risk Management. Relative levels of risk and their implications are given in Table 2 and the
Qualitative Terminology for Use in Assessing Risk to Property is also attached in Appendix C.
Table 2: Stability Risk Levels
Risk Level Example Implications(1)
Unacceptable without treatment. Extensive detailed investigation and research, planning
Very High
VH and implementation of treatment options essential to reduce risk to Low; may be too
Risk
expensive and not practical. Work likely to cost more than value of property.
Unacceptable without treatment. Detailed investigation, planning and implementation of
H High Risk treatment options required to reduce risk to Low. Work would cost a substantial sum in
relation to the value of the property.
May be tolerated in certain circumstances (subject to regulators’ approval) but requires
Moderate
M investigation, planning and implementation of treatment options to reduce risk to Low.
Risk
Treatment options to reduce to Low risk should be implemented as soon as practicable.
Usually acceptable to regulators. Where treatment has been required to reduce the risk to
L Low Risk
this level, ongoing maintenance required.
Very Low
VL Acceptable. Manage by normal slope maintenance procedures.
Risk
Note: (1) The implications for a particular situation are to be determined by all parties to the risk assessment and may
depend on the nature of the property at risk; these are only given as a general guide.
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 8
Page 14
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
Given the geology and topography of this site, it is unlikely that a landslide could affect the proposed
development area. Sand dune slopes are generally close to the ‘limit of equilibrium’ where the surface
gradient is about 30°, although often lower (26˚ to 28˚) for very loose sands. Our measurements indicate that
the overall natural gradients typically vary between about 8° and 12°. Steeper gradients were recorded in the
southern part of the site, ranging up to about 20°.
The limit of equilibrium is the ‘tipping point’ to instability, where the factor of safety (FOS) of the slope is
approximately 1.0. The FOS of a slope is the balance (ratio) between the forces driving instability (e.g. soil
weight, groundwater pressure) and the resisting forces (e.g. soil friction and cohesion).
Sand dune slopes generally remain stable (i.e. FOS greater than 1.0) when they are:
well vegetated (mix of ground cover, shrubs and small trees);
not subjected to concentrated stormwater flows;
not surcharged with additional loads (e.g. fill); and
not undercut by excavation or erosion.
Where dunes are well vegetated, the plant roots can provide a surface reinforcing layer which may enable
dunes to stand up relatively steeply. Relatively dense vegetation across the southern part of the site will be
retained. Direct discharge of stormwater onto dune slopes may cause channel erosion, undermining and
disturbance of vegetation, and development of generally localised instability. Uncontrolled stormwater will not
be directed into the southern part of the site.
Cut and fill earthworks have the potential to overload and/or undermine the stability of sand dune, therefore
must be carefully planned and implemented.
The primary trigger for large-scale instability of sand dunes is when the toe of the dune is disturbed. This may
be caused by excavations or natural erosion. At this site, the dune around and below the site contains dense
vegetation along a natural watercourse. Previous experience in the area indicates that the ground surface to
the south is underpinned by indurated sand ‘coffee rock’ and, as the toe of the dune is heavily vegetated,
significant disturbance by natural forces (e.g. erosion during a flood event) in the vicinity of the proposed
development area is considered unlikely.
In accordance with previous practice along Serenity Close, it is recommended that all structures are founded
below a plane rising at 27° from the toe of the dune to the south of the site.
Considering the existing site conditions (Ref. Section 2), and subject to the implementation of
recommendations given below, it is assessed that there would be a Low (L) Risk of global slope instability
affecting the proposed development. Regulators (NC) normally require that a Very Low or Low Risk of
landslide affecting the property must be demonstrated to enable development approval. Summarised in Table
3 overleaf is our qualitative assessment of landslide risk for the development site. A summary of qualitative
terminology for use in assessing risk to property is attached (taken from AGS 2007).
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 9
Page 15
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
Table 3: Details of Qualitative Risk Assessment for Property (AGS 2007)
Assessed
Hazard Likelihood Consequence Risk Comments
Given the low to moderate natural gradients through
the proposed building area and retention of batters
1: Failure through very loose to proposed it is considered Unlikely that a landslip
loose natural sands above the Unlikely Medium Low would develop in these materials, subject to
foundation depth implementation of the recommendations in Section 4.
Given a potential Medium impact from such instability
the resultant risk would be Low as per AGS 2007.
The likelihood of a deep failure through the medium
dense (or denser) natural sand below the proposed
2: Deep failure through the foundation depth is assessed as Rare due to the lack of
medium dense (or denser) sands Rare Major Low precedence of such movements locally, no signs of any
below the foundation depth existing slope instability and a lack of groundwater.
Although the consequence of such a failure would be
Major, the resultant risk is Low as per AGS 2007.
The likelihood of a slip/failure through the temporary
retention system (if required) as outlined in Section 6.4, is
3: Instability through temporary assessed as Rare, subject to detailed design by a
sheet pile retention system, or suitably qualified RPEQ and construction by a specialist
Rare Major Low
similar, as discussed in Section contractor which accounts for the required factors of
6.4. safety against slope instability. Although the
consequence of such a failure would be Major, the
resultant risk is Low as per AGS2007.
The potential impacts on slope stability of the development components have been assessed, and the
measures recommended below in Section 4 have been designed to mitigate those impacts.
5.2.2 Quantitative Assessment
In order to estimate the factor of safety (FOS) against slope instability for the proposed development,
numerical analysis has been conducted using Slope/W. The ground surface profile has been modelled using
a combination of preliminary design drawings and slope angles measured in the field by Tectonic. The
analysed subsurface profiles were compiled based on the results of our subsurface investigation. Some
inferences regarding subsurface conditions were made between test locations. A minimum FOS against
global instability of 1.5 is the commonly adopted industry standard for long term conditions.
No groundwater was encountered at the time of investigation. Given the gradients across the site and highly
permeable nature of the sandy soil, development of shallow groundwater is considered unlikely. Should
groundwater seepage be encountered during construction Tectonic must be notified to assess the impacts
on temporary instability.
To replicate future landscaping and light live loads, a surcharge load of 10 kPa has been applied to areas
with no significant structures. Although building loads were not available at the time of reporting; a gross
building load of 10 kPa per floor level has been applied to building areas likely to be supported using high-
level footings (i.e. up to 50 kPa). Other areas will be supported by piles taken into the underlying medium
dense (or denser) natural sands.
Soil shear strength was based upon effective parameters which were estimated based on our interpretation
of the subsurface investigation results, while also considering the values recommended for similar materials
in Appendix D of Australian Standard AS4678-2002 Earth Retaining Structures. Adopted soil parameters
are shown on the Slope/W outputs presented in Text Figures 11 to 14 on the following pages. Analyses
were undertaken for specified ranges of landslide failure surface entry and exit points that could impact the
proposed development. It is assumed that all future controlled filling will use site won sands, which have
been modelled accordingly.
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 10
Page 16
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
The analysed profiles represent two critical sections for the proposed development, which cover a section
through the east and west wings, depicted in Section 01 and Section 02 of the provided drawings (Ref.
Richard + Spence Project No. 2100004, Drawing Nos. SD-A-30-01 & 02 G, Rev C, dated 28 July 2022).
Modelling has been carried out for four separate cases, summarised as follows:
Case 1 – Proposed upslope profile through the west wing.
Case 2 – Proposed downslope profile through the west wing.
Case 3 – Proposed upslope profile through the east wing.
Case 4 – Downslope profile through the east wing.
Commonly adopted industry standards generally require minimum FOS values against slope instability of 1.5
for long-term conditions. Administering authorities such as NC normally require a minimum FOS of 1.5 or
greater for long-term conditions. Results of the stability analyses are presented in Table 4, with the Slope/W
outputs illustrated in Text Figure 11 to 14 on the following pages.
Table 4: Slope/W Analysis Results
Analysis Description Factor of Safety
Global instability of the proposed upslope profile through west
Case 1 1.5
wing.
Global instability of the proposed downslope profile through west
Case 2 wing. Retaining wall supported on piles being 3 m in length with a 1.7
nominal 50 kN/m shear force resistance (unfactored).
Global instability of the proposed upslope profile through the east
Case 3 1.5
wing.
Global instability of the proposed downslope profile through the
Case 4 2.5
east wing.
Text Figure 11: Slope/W output for long term conditions – Case 1
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 11
Page 17
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
Text Figure 12: Slope/W output for long term conditions – Case 2
Text Figure 13: Slope/W output for long term conditions – Case 3
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 12
Page 18
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
Text Figure 14: Slope/W output for long term conditions – Case 4
Results of the analyses indicate the following:
Case 1 – Our analysis indicates that the upslope side of the west wing would achieve at least the
required minimum FOS for long-term stability (i.e. 1.5), subject to permanent retention of the
proposed cuts using engineer designed and certified structures.
Case 2 – Our analysis indicates that the downslope side of the west wing could achieve an
acceptable FOS of 1.7 for long-term stability, provided the proposed new retaining wall is supported
on piles at least 3 m deep, with a minimum shear force resistance of 50 kN/m (unfactored).
Case 3 – Our analysis indicates that the upslope side of the east wing would achieve at least the
required minimum FOS for long-term stability (i.e. 1.5), subject to permanent retention of the
proposed cuts using engineer designed and certified structures.
Case 4 – Our analysis indicates that the downslope side of the east wing would achieve at least the
required minimum FOS for long-term stability (i.e. 1.5), provided all structures are founded in
accordance with Section 6.3.2.
Please note no building loads have been applied to the proposed retaining walls, with all loads transferred by
footings below the zone of influence. This analysis does not address global or internal stability for any
retaining walls that are proposed, which were modelled as high strength structures. As required under
Australian Standard AS4678-2002 Earth-retaining structures, global stability of retaining walls must be
assessed by the wall designer as part of the detailed design process.
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 13
Page 19
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
6.0 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS
General recommendations to help maintain the stability of the site are given in the document Some
Guidelines for Hillside Construction, which is attached.
6.1 Development Limitations
In accordance with previous practice along Serenity Close, it is recommended that all structures are founded
below a plane rising at 27° from the toe of the dune to the south of the site. It is anticipated earthworks will
include cuts for the basement level of up to about 6 m depth, with filling up to about 3 m high to form finished
surface levels. Should proposed cuts/fills exceed these quantities, Tectonic must assess the impacts on
slope stability before construction.
Due to the depth of excavations proposed and temporary shoring required, to evaluate the deeper
subsurface conditions for detailed design a deeper investigation would likely be required. Such an
investigation would likely require a series of boreholes along the proposed temporary retention alignment
using a specialised rig adopting a combination of open hole auger drilling and cased wash boring to depths
in the order of 15 m BGL. Tectonic can provide a fee proposal to undertake such an investigation following
preparation of detailed design drawings and removal of existing vegetation.
6.2 Earthworks – General
6.2.1 Site Preparation and Trafficability
Following removal of the existing vegetation (where required), buildings and associated construction
elements (e.g. footings, services, etc.), any tree stumps and large roots should be ‘grubbed out’. Any
organic rich topsoil should then be stripped and set aside. Based on the boreholes, topsoil stripping depths
should generally range between 0.1 m and 0.4 m BGL. Existing uncontrolled fill across the proposed
development area should be stripped and set aside. It is possible that deeper pockets of topsoil or
uncontrolled fill may exist and deeper, localised grubbing out of tree roots may be required. Following
stripping of any unsuitable materials, the subgrades must be ‘proof rolled’ and visually assessed by a
civil/geotechnical RPEQ to ensure no heaving or unacceptable subgrade deflection occurs.
Topsoil materials must not be used in structural fill; however, may be placed across landscaping areas.
Unsuitable natural material such as any saturated, loose or soft materials encountered should also be
removed during subgrade preparation for bulk earthworks.
It should be noted that compaction of such relatively ‘clean’ sands as structural fill requires the addition of
substantial volumes of water (‘flooding’) combined with the use of vibratory compaction equipment (typically
a vibrating plate). Care must be taken with the use of vibratory equipment (e.g. compactors or sheet piling)
to ensure that there are no adverse impacts on surrounding structures. The impacts from ground vibration
must be closely monitored and managed during construction. It would be prudent to conduct a dilapidation
survey of neighbouring structures prior to commencement of construction.
The exposed natural subgrade following excavations will likely be in a loose condition and must be
compacted by several passes of a vibrating plate or minimum 4 tonne vibrating smooth drum roller, in
conjunction with surface application of ample water, to achieve the required compaction.
Due to the potential for development of poor trafficability during construction, placement of a minimum
150 mm thick granular working platform may be required across laydown areas. Specific platform design
would be required prior to mobilisation and trafficking of any heavy mobile plant on the site (e.g. mobile
cranes, concrete pumps or piling rigs).
Due to the highly permeable nature of the sands at this site, stormwater is expected to rapidly infiltrate the
ground, making un-sealed surface drainage ineffective for the control of flows. Any sealed areas should be
graded to ensure free drainage of stormwater away from construction areas, and to a control point(s).
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 14
Page 20
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
6.2.2 Excavations
Excavations through the soils encountered in the boreholes should be achievable using conventional
earthmoving plant (e.g. small or larger excavators with toothed buckets). Temporary, unsurchaged cuts
could be formed at 1V:2H in the very loose to loose sand, and at 1V:1.5H in medium dense (or denser) sand,
for batters up to 4 m in height. Flatter batters or temporary retention may be required if groundwater seepage
is encountered or if sloughing of dry sand occurs at the batter surface. Deeper cuts, if required, should be
specifically assessed by Tectonic, unless supported by temporary retention measures.
Permanent cuts or fills greater than 1 m high must be retained. Permanent cut and fill batters up to 1 m high
shall not exceed 1V:2.5H. Any permanent soil and fill batters will require erosion protection (e.g.
revegetation or surface protection).
Due to spatial restraints and the depth of excavations proposed, temporary shoring will likely be required
(e.g. sheet piles) as per the recommendations in Section 6.4 below. Excavations in close proximity to
existing structures and infrastructure (e.g. sewer main and stormwater infrastructure through the central part
of the site), including on neighbouring properties, will need to be specifically designed to prevent
undermining. It is recommended that existing pipe invert levels be assessed by non-destructive pot holing to
assess the possibility of undermining. If undermining is a potential issue the existing structures may need to
be underpinned or excavations may require temporary shoring.
The advice of a suitably qualified and experienced structural RPEQ must be sought regarding any potential
undermining and design and construction of any underpins/temporary shoring (if required).
The above recommendations do not supersede any existing safety regulations or legislation applicable to
excavations (e.g. limits on personnel entry into trenches).
6.2.3 Filling
The natural sandy soils and existing sandy fill materials where free of deleterious materials (e.g. vegetation,
organics etc.) may be reused as structural fill, subject to appropriate moisture adjustment. It should be noted
that compaction of such relatively ‘clean’ sands as structural fill requires the addition of substantial volumes
of water (‘flooding’) combined with the use of vibratory compaction equipment (typically a smooth drum roller
or heavy vibrating plate).
Should importation of fill be required, it is recommended that such fill should comply with the following:
Minimum CBR of 10%
Maximum plasticity index of 15%
Shrink-swell index ≤ 1%
Maximum particle size of 100 mm
Any fill should be compacted at moisture contents within the range of ±2% of optimum moisture content for
Standard Compaction. Fill material should be placed in 250 mm thick (loose thickness) layers and be
compacted by repeated rolling using a minimum 4 tonne smooth drum roller (or equivalent, with vibration on
if safe to do so) to achieve a dry density ratio of at least 98% of the maximum Dry Density Ratio (DDR),
based upon the Standard Compaction method, or a Dry Density Index of at least 75%.
Confirmatory compaction testing must be carried out at regular intervals. A minimum of two tests per vertical
lift is recommended where structural fill heights are to exceed 300 mm. Further details for control and testing
of fill are given in Australian Standard AS 3798-2007 Guidelines on Earthworks for Commercial and
Residential Developments. We recommend that the fill be placed as a minimum under Level 1 testing, with
density testing conducted at a Type 2 frequency.
Fill embankment edges must be over-filled by 0.5 m (horizontally) and then trimmed back to well compacted
material.
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 15
Page 21
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
6.3 Building Foundations
6.3.1 Indicative Site Classification
Site classifications for footing design are determined in accordance with AS 2870-2011 Residential Slabs and
Footings, and depend on the depth of cut / fill undertaken at a site, variations in the natural soil/rock depths,
and the reactivity of the in situ soil / rock and any imported fill materials. It should be noted that the proposed
works are outside of the scope of AS2870.
Based on the results of the investigation, the site is classified as Class P in accordance with AS 2870-2011
Residential Slabs and Footings, due to the presence of poor bearing capacity soils at shallow depths,
uncontrolled fill and trees. If not for these factors, the site would have the characteristics of Class S, with the
estimated characteristic surface movements (‘ys’) ranging up to about 20 mm. However, due to the potential
variability in subgrade density a site classification of Class M is recommended in relation to assessment of
flexibility requirements for ground slabs, footings and plumbing design.
6.3.2 Footing Design
No design loadings were available at the time of reporting. Footings for the proposed development and any
ancillary structures (e.g. retaining walls, pool etc.) must penetrate through any unsuitable soils or fill (i.e. very
loose to loose sands) to found at least 0.5 m into medium dense (or denser) natural sands or future granular
controlled fill. Medium dense natural materials were encountered from depths of between 0.4 m and 1.2 m
BGL (existing ground levels) in the boreholes and DCPs.
Based on the anticipated excavation depths, such materials are generally anticipated to be at or near the
design subgrade level. Where medium dense (or denser) sands are not present at the subgrade level, over-
excavation and re-compaction of the loose materials as outlined in Section 6.2.3 could be undertaken to
achieve a medium dense (or denser) foundation subgrade. High level footings, where achievable, may be
designed using an allowable bearing pressure of 200 kPa, provided that they are founded in the natural
medium dense (or denser) sands or Level 1 granular fill as outlined above. A suitably qualified and
experienced geotechnical RPEQ must carry out inspections and testing of the foundations during construction
to confirm the allowable bearing pressures. Settlement under such loads is expected to be in the order of up
to 20 mm or 1% of footing width; however, detailed settlement analysis should be undertaken following
confirmation of building loads.
In general, it should be noted that excavations for concrete strip/pad footings (or similar) may loosen the
base. Therefore, the use of a vibrating plate with ample water would be required to densify any high-level
footing bases prior to the placement of reinforcing steel.
Where high-level footings cannot be achieved (e.g. adjacent to existing retaining walls, in areas of deeper
loose soil/future fill) piled footings will be required. Due to the presence of loose sands and nearby
structures, open bored piers or driven piles are not recommended for this site and it is expected that steel
screw piles could be utilised. Steel reinforced concrete bored piles may be possible; however, the use of
sacrificial liners (e.g. Formatube) would be required. Piles founded at least 1 m into medium dense (or
denser) sands may be designed using an allowable end bearing pressure of 300 kPa, or 1 MPa if founded in
dense sands at about 4 m to 6 m BGL (existing ground levels).
The advice of a specialist piling contractor must be sought regarding feasibility, design and installation of any
piling system for this site, including an assessment of potential vibration effects on nearby structures, and
monitoring requirements.
If steel screw piles are adopted, it will be important to ensure close supervision of installation, as piling may
not encounter sufficient drilling resistance (from torque measurement) in sands at the suggested founding
depth, and piles could extend to much greater depth than necessary.
It is therefore recommended that site specific static load testing be conducted from screw piles, if adopted, at
a minimum. Where tension or compression capacity developed in the footings is critical for the future
structure (e.g. resistance to uplift forces from high winds), then cyclic load tests (including measurement of
deflections under tension and compression cycles) should also be undertaken prior to construction.
Kentledge for static testing, or simulated cyclic loads, should prove the piles to a minimum of two times the
expected working load within tolerable deflections.
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 16
Page 22
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
Footing design should also account for potential soil reactivity to be equivalent to Class M. It should be noted
that placement of reactive clay may result in a more severe equivalent site classification, such as H1 or
greater.
All footings should found such that they are not adversely affected by any adjacent excavations, trenches,
retaining walls, or in ground structures that are not designed to support building loads. Footings should
found at least below a plane extending 1 m horizontally from the base of trenches/excavations/retaining
walls/swimming pool, then rising up at 1V:1H, as illustrated in Text Figure 15 overleaf.
Text Figure 15: Footing depth required to prevent undermining
If any soil conditions encountered during construction are found to differ from those noted in the geotechnical
investigation, Tectonic should be notified immediately and an inspection carried out to determine if changes
to footing design are required.
6.4 Temporary and Permanent Retention
Excavations are expected to range up to around 5.5 m BGL (existing ground levels) and, given that the
planned excavations extends close to some of the site boundaries and underground infrastructure (e.g.
sewer), some form of temporary shoring will likely be required to support the excavation.
Based upon our experience with similar sites, we anticipate that temporary shoring may be achieved by use
of sheet piles, however Unitywater requirements for the sewer/stormwater infrastructure may restrict the use
of sheet piles. Shoring of deeper cuts would likely require lateral restraint, and this is conventionally
achieved by helical steel anchors (similar to screw piles). However, the proximity to neighbouring properties
may require permissions to be obtained for subterranean access. Therefore, where lateral support by
cantilever only is not feasible, it is suggested that internal struts/propping be considered to provide lateral
restraint for the shoring system.
Anchored or propped sheet piles may require pre-drilling to prevent adverse vibrations during sheet pile
installation.
Other shoring methods that could be considered include bored contiguous or secant piles. Non-contiguous
or soldier pile walls are not feasible for the proposed development due to the likelihood that loose sands
would ‘flow’ through gaps between the piles.
An advantage of contiguous or secant pile wall retention systems is that they are ultimately used for the
permanent walls, whereas sheet piles would be temporary to provide retention during construction only,
therefore requiring a permanent structural wall to be constructed. Bored pile walls generally require greater
width (horizontally) for installation as compared to sheet piles and are often more expensive.
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 17
Page 23
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
The advice of a specialist shoring contractor must be sought regarding feasibility, design and installation of
the proposed retention and subsurface drainage system. It will be necessary to conduct numerical analysis
to optimise the retention system. Detailed design will also need to account for relevant factors of safety to
maintain the temporary and long-term stability of the retention system.
Retaining structures greater than 1 m high, or those required to support surcharge loads or sloping backfill,
will require engineer design and certification of construction. Retaining wall design should be carried out in
accordance with AS4678-2002 Earth retaining structures.
Design for temporary and permanent retaining structures could be carried out using a trapezoidal (for
propped or anchored walls) pressure distribution applicable to the wall type and based on the parameters
listed in Table 5. These values do not include allowance for hydrostatic pressures nor transient (e.g.
construction) or adjacent footing loadings.
Table 5: Retaining Structure Design Parameters
Lateral earth pressure coefficients
Unit
Friction
Retained material weight
angle (°) Ka Ko
(t/m3) Kp
(Cantilever wall) (Non-yielding wall)
Very Loose/ Loose
1.8 28 0.36 0.53 2.77
Sands
Medium Dense (or
1.9 34 0.28 0.44 3.54
Denser) Sands
Future Controlled Fill* * * * * *
Note: * Depends on fill material type and level of compaction.
Retaining structures must be founded as per the recommendations in Section 6.3.2 above, with the footings
also designed to account for lateral loads imposed by the retaining wall. Detailed design must include an
assessment of internal and global stability. A solution using screw piles to support retaining walls, possibly
including raked piles, may be feasible although bending and shear capacities would need to be carefully
checked in design from a soil-structure interaction viewpoint. Additional lateral capacity may be achieved by
incorporating a deeper pile cap that also acts as a shear key attracting passive resistance from the sands in
front of the wall.
6.5 Drainage
Site drainage should be designed to readily remove surface water and to prevent ponding of water on
subgrade areas during construction and also adjacent to foundations and perimeter slabs once construction
is completed.
Although unlikely, if groundwater seepage is encountered during excavations, Tectonic must be notified to
assess the impact on stability.
Subsurface drainage must be installed behind any retaining walls (e.g. slotted ‘aggi’ pipe wrapped in filter
‘sock’ placed in gravel backfill). Depending on matters such as the extent of drainage installed and site-
specific groundwater conditions, the designer must make an assessment of hydrostatic pressure to be
accounted for in the design of the retaining structure. It is assumed that any pool floors will include a
hydrostatic pressure relief valve. The outlet pipe from this valve must be taken to ‘daylight’ at the ground
surface.
All excess stormwater collected around the site (including overflow from rainwater tanks etc.) must be
directed by pipes or lined channels to discharge into the existing stormwater infrastructure (e.g. along
Serenity Close or within the central/southern easements) where possible, or at least 10 m downslope of any
structure or embankment to a legal point of downstream discharge. Stormwater must not be allowed to
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 18
Page 24
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
outlet onto the dune face or toe to the south. Surface dissipation devices such as rock weirs or rock lined
contour drains should be installed at stormwater outlet(s) where not discharging into a constructed pit.
Subsurface disposal of stormwater must not be undertaken.
Design of the stormwater system should be undertaken by a civil/hydraulic RPEQ.
7.0 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS
Based on the findings of our assessment it is assessed that there would be a Low Risk of slope instability
affecting the proposed development subject to implementation of the recommendations given in this report.
8.0 LIMITATIONS
Your attention is drawn to the document Limitations, which is included in Appendix D of this report. The
statements presented in this document are intended to advise you of what your realistic expectations of this
report should be, and to present you with recommendations on how to minimise the risks associated with the
services provided by Tectonic for this project.
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0 19
Page 25
Tectonic Geotechnical Pty Ltd
BH10 PO Box 899
Buderim Qld 4556
Ph: 07 5478 9016
East Wing
PROJECT:
BH6 BH8
PROPOSED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE,
NOOSA HEADS
BH5 BH9
TITLE:
SITE PLAN
BH7
West Wing CLIENT:
CALILE MALOUF INVESTMENTS
BH4
DRAWN: DATE:
BH3
MS 6/10/2022
CHECKED: DATE:
BH1
MCC 6/10/2022
SCALE:
AS SHOWN (APPROX.)
LEGEND:
BH2
APPROX. BOREHOLE
LOCATIONS
APPROX. SLOPE/W
SECTION
Notes:
Base plan adopted from Nearmap imagery dated 5 June 2022 & Layout Plan Courtesy of PROJECT NO.: FIGURE: REV:
Richard & Spence (Ref. Drawing No. SD-A-01-03-G, Rev Q, dated 6 October 2022 0m 40m 80m 22239-001 1 0
Page 26
PROPOSED CALILE HOTEL NOOSA DEVELOPMENT
3 – 7 SERENITY CLOSE, NOOSA HEADS
APPENDIX A
Borehole & DCP Reports & Explanatory Notes
7 October 2022
Report No. 22239-001-Rev0
Page 27
Borehole No.
BH1
Page 1 of 1
Engineering Log - Borehole Project No.: 22239
Client: Calile Malouf Investments Commenced: 21/6/2022
Project Name: Calile Hotel Noosa Development Completed: 22/6/2022
Hole Location: 3-7 Serenity Close, Noosa Heads Logged By: MS
Hole Position: 508474.0 m E 7080671.5 m N 56J Checked By: MCC
Drill Model and Mounting: 4WD Auger Inclination: -90° RL Surface: No survey
Hole Diameter: 100 mm Bearing: 360° Datum: AHD Operator: Tectonic
Drilling Information Material Description and Observations
Relative Density
Classification
Pocket DCP TEST
Penetration
Consistency
Graphic Log
Samples Material Description (AS 1289.6.3.2-1997)
Penetrometer
Recovery
Condition
Tests soil type: plasticity or particle characteristics,
Moisture
UCS Blows per 100 mm
Symbol
Method
Remarks secondary and minor components, colour
Water
RL Depth (kPa)
(m) (m) 0 5 10 15 20 25
100
200
300
400
500
Gravelly SAND (FILL), fine to medium grained,
SP fine to medium sized gravel, grey and pale grey L
SAND, fine to medium grained, pale grey
(AEOLIAN)
DS
0.7-1m
1
MD
2
TECTONIC 3.00.2 LIB.GLB Log 1 TECTONIC BOREHOLE 22239.GPJ <<DrawingFile>> 15/7/2022 09:37 10.02.00.04 Datgel Lab and In Situ Tool - DGD | Lib: Tectonic 3.00.2 2021-03-30 Prj: Tectonic 3.00.2 2021-03-30
Not Encountered
D
AD/T
3 M
Augered to 4.2m
4
20/90mm
Refusal
VD Augered to 5.7m
5
>20
Refusal
6
Hole Terminated at 6.00 m
Target depth
Method Penetration Water Samples and Tests Moisture Condition Consistency/Relative Density
AD/T-Auger Drilling TC Bit VE - Very Easy Level (Date) U## - Undisturbed Sample (## mm) D - Dry VS - Very Soft
AD/V-Auger Drilling V Bit E - Easy DS - Disturbed Sample M - Moist S - Soft
RT - Rotary Tri-cone Bit Inflow BDS - Bulk Disturbed Sample W - Wet F - Firm
RD - Rotary Drilling F - Firm SPT - Standard Penetration Test VSt - Very Stiff
Partial Loss
NMLC -Rock Core H - Hard H - Hard
VH - Very hard Complete Loss
HA - Hand Auger Plastic Limit VL - Very Loose
Graphic Log/Core Loss L - Loose
Classification Symbols and < PL MD - Medium Dense
Core recovered (hatching Soil Descriptions
indicates material) = PL D - Dense
Based on Unified Soil < PL VD - Very Dense
Core loss Fr - Friable
Classification System
Page 28
Borehole No.
BH2
Page 1 of 1
Engineering Log - Borehole Project No.: 22239
Client: Calile Malouf Investments Commenced: 21/6/2022
Project Name: Calile Hotel Noosa Development Completed: 22/6/2022
Hole Location: 3-7 Serenity Close, Noosa Heads Logged By: MS
Hole Position: 508469.9 m E 7080632.3 m N 56J Checked By: MCC
Drill Model and Mounting: 4WD Auger Inclination: -90° RL Surface: No survey
Hole Diameter: 100 mm Bearing: 360° Datum: AHD Operator: Tectonic
Drilling Information Material Description and Observations
Relative Density
Classification
Pocket DCP TEST
Penetration
Consistency
Graphic Log
Samples Material Description (AS 1289.6.3.2-1997)
Penetrometer
Recovery
Condition
Tests soil type: plasticity or particle characteristics,
Moisture
UCS Blows per 100 mm
Symbol
Method
Remarks secondary and minor components, colour
Water
RL Depth (kPa)
(m) (m) 0 5 10 15 20 25
100
200
300
400
500
Silty SAND (FILL), fine to medium grained, dark
grey, trace organics VL to
L
SP SAND, fine to medium grained, pale grey
(AEOLIAN)
1
2
MD
TECTONIC 3.00.2 LIB.GLB Log 1 TECTONIC BOREHOLE 22239.GPJ <<DrawingFile>> 15/7/2022 09:37 10.02.00.04 Datgel Lab and In Situ Tool - DGD | Lib: Tectonic 3.00.2 2021-03-30 Prj: Tectonic 3.00.2 2021-03-30
Not Encountered
AD/T
3 M
4
Augered to 5.6m
D to
5 VD
>20
Refusal
6
Hole Terminated at 6.00 m
Target depth
Method Penetration Water Samples and Tests Moisture Condition Consistency/Relative Density
AD/T-Auger Drilling TC Bit VE - Very Easy Level (Date) U## - Undisturbed Sample (## mm) D - Dry VS - Very Soft
AD/V-Auger Drilling V Bit E - Easy DS - Disturbed Sample M - Moist S - Soft
RT - Rotary Tri-cone Bit Inflow BDS - Bulk Disturbed Sample W - Wet F - Firm
RD - Rotary Drilling F - Firm SPT - Standard Penetration Test VSt - Very Stiff
Partial Loss
NMLC -Rock Core H - Hard H - Hard
VH - Very hard Complete Loss
HA - Hand Auger Plastic Limit VL - Very Loose
Graphic Log/Core Loss L - Loose
Classification Symbols and < PL MD - Medium Dense
Core recovered (hatching Soil Descriptions
indicates material) = PL D - Dense
Based on Unified Soil < PL VD - Very Dense
Core loss Fr - Friable
Classification System
Page 29
Borehole No.
BH3
Page 1 of 1
Engineering Log - Borehole Project No.: 22239
Client: Calile Malouf Investments Commenced: 21/6/2022
Project Name: Calile Hotel Noosa Development Completed: 22/6/2022
Hole Location: 3-7 Serenity Close, Noosa Heads Logged By: MS
Hole Position: 508489.6 m E 7080681.3 m N 56J Checked By: MCC
Drill Model and Mounting: 4WD Auger Inclination: -90° RL Surface: No survey
Hole Diameter: 100 mm Bearing: 360° Datum: AHD Operator: Tectonic
Drilling Information Material Description and Observations
Relative Density
Classification
Pocket DCP TEST
Penetration
Consistency
Graphic Log
Samples Material Description (AS 1289.6.3.2-1997)
Penetrometer
Recovery
Condition
Tests soil type: plasticity or particle characteristics,
Moisture
UCS Blows per 100 mm
Symbol
Method
Remarks secondary and minor components, colour
Water
RL Depth (kPa)
(m) (m) 0 5 10 15 20 25
100
200
300
400
500
Gravelly SAND (FILL), fine to medium grained,
fine to medium sized gravel, brown grey and pale L
grey
SP
Silty SAND (FILL), fine to medium grained, dark
grey
SAND, fine to medium grained, pale grey L to
(AEOLIAN) MD
1
2
TECTONIC 3.00.2 LIB.GLB Log 1 TECTONIC BOREHOLE 22239.GPJ <<DrawingFile>> 15/7/2022 09:37 10.02.00.04 Datgel Lab and In Situ Tool - DGD | Lib: Tectonic 3.00.2 2021-03-30 Prj: Tectonic 3.00.2 2021-03-30
Not Encountered
Augered to 2.9m
AD/T
3 M
MD
Augered to 4.6m
4
5
D to
VD
6
Hole Terminated at 6.00 m
Target depth
Method Penetration Water Samples and Tests Moisture Condition Consistency/Relative Density
AD/T-Auger Drilling TC Bit VE - Very Easy Level (Date) U## - Undisturbed Sample (## mm) D - Dry VS - Very Soft
AD/V-Auger Drilling V Bit E - Easy DS - Disturbed Sample M - Moist S - Soft
RT - Rotary Tri-cone Bit Inflow BDS - Bulk Disturbed Sample W - Wet F - Firm
RD - Rotary Drilling F - Firm SPT - Standard Penetration Test VSt - Very Stiff
Partial Loss
NMLC -Rock Core H - Hard H - Hard
VH - Very hard Complete Loss
HA - Hand Auger Plastic Limit VL - Very Loose
Graphic Log/Core Loss L - Loose
Classification Symbols and < PL MD - Medium Dense
Core recovered (hatching Soil Descriptions
indicates material) = PL D - Dense
Based on Unified Soil < PL VD - Very Dense
Core loss Fr - Friable
Classification System
Page 30
Borehole No.
BH4
Page 1 of 1
Engineering Log - Borehole Project No.: 22239
Client: Calile Malouf Investments Commenced: 21/6/2022
Project Name: Calile Hotel Noosa Development Completed: 22/6/2022
Hole Location: 3-7 Serenity Close, Noosa Heads Logged By: MS
Hole Position: 508538.9 m E 7080681.2 m N 56J Checked By: MCC
Drill Model and Mounting: Hand Auger Inclination: -90° RL Surface: No survey
Hole Diameter: 100 mm Bearing: 360° Datum: AHD Operator: Tectonic
Drilling Information Material Description and Observations
Relative Density
Classification
Pocket DCP TEST
Penetration
Consistency
Graphic Log
Samples Material Description (AS 1289.6.3.2-1997)
Penetrometer
Recovery
Condition
Tests soil type: plasticity or particle characteristics,
Moisture
UCS Blows per 100 mm
Symbol
Method
Remarks secondary and minor components, colour
Water
RL Depth (kPa)
(m) (m) 0 5 10 15 20 25
100
200
300
400
500
SM Silty SAND, fine to medium grained, dark grey,
with silt and trace organics (NATURAL)
VL
SP SAND, fine to medium grained, pale grey
(AEOLIAN) L
1
Not Encountered
M
HA
MD
2
TECTONIC 3.00.2 LIB.GLB Log 1 TECTONIC BOREHOLE 22239.GPJ <<DrawingFile>> 15/7/2022 09:37 10.02.00.04 Datgel Lab and In Situ Tool - DGD | Lib: Tectonic 3.00.2 2021-03-30 Prj: Tectonic 3.00.2 2021-03-30
3
Hole Terminated at 3.00 m
Target depth
4 Augered to 4.1m
20/20mm
Refusal
5
6
Method Penetration Water Samples and Tests Moisture Condition Consistency/Relative Density
AD/T-Auger Drilling TC Bit VE - Very Easy Level (Date) U## - Undisturbed Sample (## mm) D - Dry VS - Very Soft
AD/V-Auger Drilling V Bit E - Easy DS - Disturbed Sample M - Moist S - Soft
RT - Rotary Tri-cone Bit Inflow BDS - Bulk Disturbed Sample W - Wet F - Firm
RD - Rotary Drilling F - Firm SPT - Standard Penetration Test VSt - Very Stiff
Partial Loss
NMLC -Rock Core H - Hard H - Hard
VH - Very hard Complete Loss
HA - Hand Auger Plastic Limit VL - Very Loose
Graphic Log/Core Loss L - Loose
Classification Symbols and < PL MD - Medium Dense
Core recovered (hatching Soil Descriptions
indicates material) = PL D - Dense
Based on Unified Soil < PL VD - Very Dense
Core loss Fr - Friable
Classification System
Page 31
Borehole No.
BH5
Page 1 of 1
Engineering Log - Borehole Project No.: 22239
Client: Calile Malouf Investments Commenced: 21/6/2022
Project Name: Calile Hotel Noosa Development Completed: 22/6/2022
Hole Location: 3-7 Serenity Close, Noosa Heads Logged By: MS
Hole Position: 508497.7 m E 7080727.8 m N 56J Checked By: MCC
Drill Model and Mounting: 4WD Auger Inclination: -90° RL Surface: No survey
Hole Diameter: 100 mm Bearing: 360° Datum: AHD Operator: Tectonic
Drilling Information Material Description and Observations
Relative Density
Classification
Pocket DCP TEST
Penetration
Consistency
Graphic Log
Samples Material Description (AS 1289.6.3.2-1997)
Penetrometer
Recovery
Condition
Tests soil type: plasticity or particle characteristics,
Moisture
UCS Blows per 100 mm
Symbol
Method
Remarks secondary and minor components, colour
Water
RL Depth (kPa)
(m) (m) 0 5 10 15 20 25
100
200
300
400
500
20/70mm
Sandy GRAVEL (FILL), fine to medium sized,
Refusal
grey, fine to coarse grained sand VD Augered to 0.5m
Silty SAND (FILL), fine grained, dark brown
SP SAND, fine to medium grained, pale grey
(AEOLIAN)
1
DS
1.3-1.7m
2
TECTONIC 3.00.2 LIB.GLB Log 1 TECTONIC BOREHOLE 22239.GPJ <<DrawingFile>> 15/7/2022 09:37 10.02.00.04 Datgel Lab and In Situ Tool - DGD | Lib: Tectonic 3.00.2 2021-03-30 Prj: Tectonic 3.00.2 2021-03-30
MD Augered to 2.8m
Not Encountered
AD/T
3 M
Augered to 4.2m
4
Augered to 5.8m
5
D to
VD
20/80mm
Refusal
6
Hole Terminated at 6.00 m
Target depth
Method Penetration Water Samples and Tests Moisture Condition Consistency/Relative Density
AD/T-Auger Drilling TC Bit VE - Very Easy Level (Date) U## - Undisturbed Sample (## mm) D - Dry VS - Very Soft
AD/V-Auger Drilling V Bit E - Easy DS - Disturbed Sample M - Moist S - Soft
RT - Rotary Tri-cone Bit Inflow BDS - Bulk Disturbed Sample W - Wet F - Firm
RD - Rotary Drilling F - Firm SPT - Standard Penetration Test VSt - Very Stiff
Partial Loss
NMLC -Rock Core H - Hard H - Hard
VH - Very hard Complete Loss
HA - Hand Auger Plastic Limit VL - Very Loose
Graphic Log/Core Loss L - Loose
Classification Symbols and < PL MD - Medium Dense
Core recovered (hatching Soil Descriptions
indicates material) = PL D - Dense
Based on Unified Soil < PL VD - Very Dense
Core loss Fr - Friable
Classification System
Page 32
Borehole No.
BH6
Page 1 of 1
Engineering Log - Borehole Project No.: 22239
Client: Calile Malouf Investments Commenced: 21/6/2022
Project Name: Calile Hotel Noosa Development Completed: 22/6/2022
Hole Location: 3-7 Serenity Close, Noosa Heads Logged By: MS
Hole Position: 508520.9 m E 7080748.7 m N 56J Checked By: MCC
Drill Model and Mounting: 4WD Auger Inclination: -90° RL Surface: No survey
Hole Diameter: 100 mm Bearing: 360° Datum: AHD Operator: Tectonic
Drilling Information Material Description and Observations
Relative Density
Classification
Pocket DCP TEST
Penetration
Consistency
Graphic Log
Samples Material Description (AS 1289.6.3.2-1997)
Penetrometer
Recovery
Condition
Tests soil type: plasticity or particle characteristics,
Moisture
UCS Blows per 100 mm
Symbol
Method
Remarks secondary and minor components, colour
Water
RL Depth (kPa)
(m) (m) 0 5 10 15 20 25
100
200
300
400
500
Sandy GRAVEL (FILL), fine to coarse sized, fine
to medium grained sand VD
Silty SAND (FILL), fine grained, dark grey Augered to 0.5m
SP SAND, fine to medium grained, pale grey
(AEOLIAN)
1
Augered to 1.7m
MD
2
TECTONIC 3.00.2 LIB.GLB Log 1 TECTONIC BOREHOLE 22239.GPJ <<DrawingFile>> 15/7/2022 09:38 10.02.00.04 Datgel Lab and In Situ Tool - DGD | Lib: Tectonic 3.00.2 2021-03-30 Prj: Tectonic 3.00.2 2021-03-30
Not Encountered
AD/T
3 M
4
Augered to 4.4m
D to
VD
20
Refusal
5
Augered to 5.6m
6
Hole Terminated at 6.00 m
Target depth
Method Penetration Water Samples and Tests Moisture Condition Consistency/Relative Density
AD/T-Auger Drilling TC Bit VE - Very Easy Level (Date) U## - Undisturbed Sample (## mm) D - Dry VS - Very Soft
AD/V-Auger Drilling V Bit E - Easy DS - Disturbed Sample M - Moist S - Soft
RT - Rotary Tri-cone Bit Inflow BDS - Bulk Disturbed Sample W - Wet F - Firm
RD - Rotary Drilling F - Firm SPT - Standard Penetration Test VSt - Very Stiff
Partial Loss
NMLC -Rock Core H - Hard H - Hard
VH - Very hard Complete Loss
HA - Hand Auger Plastic Limit VL - Very Loose
Graphic Log/Core Loss L - Loose
Classification Symbols and < PL MD - Medium Dense
Core recovered (hatching Soil Descriptions
indicates material) = PL D - Dense
Based on Unified Soil < PL VD - Very Dense
Core loss Fr - Friable
Classification System
Page 33
Borehole No.
BH7
Page 1 of 1
Engineering Log - Borehole Project No.: 22239
Client: Calile Malouf Investments Commenced: 21/6/2022
Project Name: Calile Hotel Noosa Development Completed: 22/6/2022
Hole Location: 3-7 Serenity Close, Noosa Heads Logged By: MS
Hole Position: 508568.9 m E 7080723.7 m N 56J Checked By: MCC
Drill Model and Mounting: 4WD Auger Inclination: -90° RL Surface: No survey
Hole Diameter: 100 mm Bearing: 360° Datum: AHD Operator: Tectonic
Drilling Information Material Description and Observations
Relative Density
Classification
Pocket DCP TEST
Penetration
Consistency
Graphic Log
Samples Material Description (AS 1289.6.3.2-1997)
Penetrometer
Recovery
Condition
Tests soil type: plasticity or particle characteristics,
Moisture
UCS Blows per 100 mm
Symbol
Method
Remarks secondary and minor components, colour
Water
RL Depth (kPa)
(m) (m) 0 5 10 15 20 25
100
200
300
400
500
Silty SAND (FILL), fine to medium grained, dark VL to
grey, trace organics L
SP SAND, fine to medium grained, pale grey
(AEOLIAN)
DS
0.7-1m
1
MD
2
TECTONIC 3.00.2 LIB.GLB Log 1 TECTONIC BOREHOLE 22239.GPJ <<DrawingFile>> 15/7/2022 09:38 10.02.00.04 Datgel Lab and In Situ Tool - DGD | Lib: Tectonic 3.00.2 2021-03-30 Prj: Tectonic 3.00.2 2021-03-30
Not Encountered
Augered to 2.9m
AD/T
3 M
Augered to 4.1m
4
D
Augered to 5.6m
5
>20
Refusal
6
Hole Terminated at 6.00 m
Target depth
Method Penetration Water Samples and Tests Moisture Condition Consistency/Relative Density
AD/T-Auger Drilling TC Bit VE - Very Easy Level (Date) U## - Undisturbed Sample (## mm) D - Dry VS - Very Soft
AD/V-Auger Drilling V Bit E - Easy DS - Disturbed Sample M - Moist S - Soft
RT - Rotary Tri-cone Bit Inflow BDS - Bulk Disturbed Sample W - Wet F - Firm
RD - Rotary Drilling F - Firm SPT - Standard Penetration Test VSt - Very Stiff
Partial Loss
NMLC -Rock Core H - Hard H - Hard
VH - Very hard Complete Loss
HA - Hand Auger Plastic Limit VL - Very Loose
Graphic Log/Core Loss L - Loose
Classification Symbols and < PL MD - Medium Dense
Core recovered (hatching Soil Descriptions
indicates material) = PL D - Dense
Based on Unified Soil < PL VD - Very Dense
Core loss Fr - Friable
Classification System
Page 34
Borehole No.
BH8
Page 1 of 1
Engineering Log - Borehole Project No.: 22239
Client: Calile Malouf Investments Commenced: 21/6/2022
Project Name: Calile Hotel Noosa Development Completed: 22/6/2022
Hole Location: 3-7 Serenity Close, Noosa Heads Logged By: MS
Hole Position: 508587.8 m E 7080747.6 m N 56J Checked By: MCC
Drill Model and Mounting: DCP Inclination: -90° RL Surface: No survey
Hole Diameter: 100 mm Bearing: 360° Datum: AHD Operator: Tectonic
Drilling Information Material Description and Observations
Relative Density
Classification
Pocket DCP TEST
Penetration
Consistency
Graphic Log
Samples Material Description (AS 1289.6.3.2-1997)
Penetrometer
Recovery
Condition
Tests soil type: plasticity or particle characteristics,
Moisture
UCS Blows per 100 mm
Symbol
Method
Remarks secondary and minor components, colour
Water
RL Depth (kPa)
(m) (m) 0 5 10 15 20 25
100
200
300
400
500
Gravelly SAND (FILL), fine to coarse grained, fine VL
sized gravel, dark grey, with organics
becoming without organics
SP SAND, fine to medium grained, pale grey
(AEOLIAN) Augered to 1.3m
1
MD
2
TECTONIC 3.00.2 LIB.GLB Log 1 TECTONIC BOREHOLE 22239.GPJ <<DrawingFile>> 15/7/2022 09:38 10.02.00.04 Datgel Lab and In Situ Tool - DGD | Lib: Tectonic 3.00.2 2021-03-30 Prj: Tectonic 3.00.2 2021-03-30
Not Encountered
AD/T
3 M
4
>20
Refusal
Augered to 5.4m
D to
VD
5
>20
Refusal
6
Hole Terminated at 6.00 m
Target depth
Method Penetration Water Samples and Tests Moisture Condition Consistency/Relative Density
AD/T-Auger Drilling TC Bit VE - Very Easy Level (Date) U## - Undisturbed Sample (## mm) D - Dry VS - Very Soft
AD/V-Auger Drilling V Bit E - Easy DS - Disturbed Sample M - Moist S - Soft
RT - Rotary Tri-cone Bit Inflow BDS - Bulk Disturbed Sample W - Wet F - Firm
RD - Rotary Drilling F - Firm SPT - Standard Penetration Test VSt - Very Stiff
Partial Loss
NMLC -Rock Core H - Hard H - Hard
VH - Very hard Complete Loss
HA - Hand Auger Plastic Limit VL - Very Loose
Graphic Log/Core Loss L - Loose
Classification Symbols and < PL MD - Medium Dense
Core recovered (hatching Soil Descriptions
indicates material) = PL D - Dense
Based on Unified Soil < PL VD - Very Dense
Core loss Fr - Friable
Classification System
The text continues on page 35.