07/1571 - Response to Information Request [As Published] · 142007.1571

Page 2

Item 14

Item 12

Item 13

“Item 14

Item 15
Item 16

We trus'

Refer to Tods revised drawings.

The clearance at the gate is 2.2m

Floor Level is RL 2.25

Uls of soffit is RL 4.45

As discussed on the 25 September meeting the Surf Clubs' Contractor will
make application for site specific construction traffic and parking plan and
confirm ail details at the pre start meeting.

Refer Tods amended drawings for line marking and signage.

Amended drawings indicate tank location. _

Refer attached report from Soil Surveys.

t the above is satisfactory. Please call if you require any further information.

Yours faithfully

  

P & DITCHFIELD PTY LTD

ARCHITECTS

Page 3

   

SOIL SURVEYS

PROJECT NO. 305-2325
FEBRUARY, 2006
NOOSA HEADS SLSC

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
SURF CLUB REDEVELOPMENT

NOOSA HEADS SLSC
HASTINGS STREET, NOOSA HEADS

at

Page 4

   

~ y
Soil Surveys Engineering Pty Limited Directors Wh}
Specialists in Apptiad Geotechnics.
A.B.N, 70 054 043 631 PJ Dixon BE(Hons) RPEQ
. PR Cosh BE(Civil) CPEng MIE Aust RPEQ.
www. soilsurveys.cam.au NT Perkins SAppSC(AppGeol} BEng(Hons1)
MV Geale — BEng(Civil) MBA CPEng MIE Aust RPEQ
. GEJ Gray
SOIL SURVEYS P Elkington BE(Civil)
Associates

AM Rutten BE(Hons1) MEngSe LGE CPEng
MIE Aust RPEQ
SL Gamble BE(Geol) CPEng MIE Aust RPEQ

Sunshine Coast Office
REF: 305-2325
Author: Brett Egen

16" February, 2006

Noosa Heads SLSC
PO Box 7 .
NOOSA HEADS QLD 4567

ATTENTION: MR ROSS FISHER

Dear Sir,

4

RE: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION - PROPOSED SURF CLUB REDEVELOPMENT
NOOSA HEADS SLSC - HASTINGS STREET, NOOSA HEADS

Enclosed is one copy of our report for the above project dated February, 2006. Three copies
of the report have been issued; one copy to Tod Noosa Consulting Engineers and two copies
to Noosa Heads SLSC.

The report details the scope of the investigation works undertaken and provides discussion on
existing ground conditions and recommendations on geotechnical design parameters to assist
with the design and construction of the proposed surf club redevelopment. In addition, results
from laboratory testing to assess the presence and severity of Acid Sulfate Soils (ASS) with
recommendations to the management and treatment of ASS material.

Should you have any queries regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact Brett
Egen or the undersigned at our Sunshine Coast Office.

Yours faithfully,

 

S.L. GAMBLE (RPEQ 6644)

for and on behalf of

SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING PTY LIMITED

 

Brisbane Gold Coast Sunshine Coast

Level 2, 19 Finchley Street ‘Unit 9, 38 Lawrence Drive 11 Production Avenue

Millon Qid Nerang Qld Kawana Waters Qid

PO Box 317 PO Box 2743 PO Box 2

Paddington Qld 4064 _ Nerang Qid 421+ - Buddina Old 4575 &
mot - Australia . . Australia... eee Australia = > a
~ . . — Ph 617 3369 6000 Ph 647 5598 1528 Ph 617 5493 1980 i

Fax 617 3369 6660 Fax 617 5578 3916. Fax'617 5493 2837 3

[email protected] [email protected] — sunshinecoast@sollsurveys,com.au

Page 5

 

 

i a
§
TABLE OF CONTENTS
F.OINTRODUCTION cence vee vtvevvevee. 1
asco F GEOTEC E SERVICES Oo cercceen 1
3.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT oceeeeeees 2
4.0 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION, 2
4.1 Site Description Lecce cess eeeeeeeenaes 2
feld investigation eevee eeeec eens: 2
4.3 Laborato BO eccecceeeseseecteneseeena eens 3
5.3.1 Preliminary Screening Tests 3
4.3.1 Quantitative Tests i leeees 4
) 5.0 GEOTECHNICAL MODEL 5
SAGroundwater 6
8.0 ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT voceeecccees 7
§.1 Traffickability and Site Preparation 7
B.2 Earthworks i cecccceeceseveeeesuevess 7
6.2.4 Subgrade Preparation ae 7
6.2.2 Compaction Procedures & Specifications = 8
6.2.3 Excavation Characteristics 8
G2 Bate cece ccucuesuceeteceeeetaessenes 9
6.3 Building Foundations le eccecees ean es 9

a 40

6.3.3 Deep Foundations i ecceuee nes 10

6.3.4 Construction Considerations 11

48 FOUN ees 13
B41 Gomera cece ec cscs eeeeeeeteeeeees 13

G42 SU BASE ceccecsnssuesaseusenereetaees 13

6.5 Retainin Scene been cbt ce tbe eas 14
2.0 CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION nn, 14
8.0 ACID SULFATE SOILS ASSESSMENT 15
9.0 LIMITATIONS oo vvvvccecceccccceeeeeeeveves 16

Page 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS

APPENDICES

A Notes Relating to this Report
B Borehole Records

c Previous Borehole Records
D Laboratory Test Results

E Site Plan

Page 7

a
a Project 305-2325
= 2006
NTI CTION

 

 

 

This report presents the results of the geotechnical investigation carried out by Soil
Surveys Engineering Pty. Limited at the site of the proposed surf clubhouse
redevelopment at Noosa Heads SLSC; Hastings Street, Noosa Heads.

The report details the scope of the investigation works undertaken and provides
discussion on existing ground conditions and recommendations on geotechnical design
parameters to assist with the design and construction of the proposed redevelopment. In
addition, results from laboratory testing to assess the presence and severity of Acid
Sulfate Soils (ASS) with recommendations to the management and treatment of ASS
material.

Results from previous geotechnical investigation carried out by. Soil Surveys and
Exploration Pty Ltd (Report No. 90K/324, dated January 1991) in the area of the
proposed redevelopment have also been reviewed in this investigation. Where

appropriate, the information from the previous investigation have been included in this
report.

2.0 - SCOPE OF GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES

The scope of geotechnical services provided by Soil Surveys Engineering Pty. Limited
was directed towards evaluating the following items as detailed in our proposal 305-2325
dated 21° November, 2005.

f * Investigation of the subsurface profile by drilling, sampling and insitu testing with
, three (3) boreholes.
* Laboratory testing on selected samples to assess the geotechnical properties of the
subsurface material.
* Laboratory testing on samples obtained from three (3) boreholes to ‘a depth of 3.0m
to assess the Acid Sulfate Soil properties of the subsurface material.
* €ngineering analysis of site investigation and laboratory test results to evaluate:-
- Site preparation and earthworks recommendations
- Foundation parameters for design
- Retaining wall design recommendations
- Identification of Acid Sulfate Soils, (ASS)
- Available management and treatment options of the ASS material.

 

2% SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 8

fox
Project 305-2325
February, 2006 . Page 2

3.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT a

 

We understand that a staged redevelopment of the existing surf club is proposed, which
is to involve the construction of a 3-storey extension to the east of the existing building, as
part of Stage 1. Stage 2 of the redevelopment is understood to consist of the replacement
of the existing building, which would be carried out at some later date.

It is understood that the ground level of the new extension (Stage 1 Construction) would
be set below the existing ground surface elevation on the northern side, requiring some
excavation. It is estimated that the Stage 1 works would require less than 1,000m? of
excavation.

4.0 G CHNICAL INVESTIGATION
4.1 Site Description —- , _

The existing Noosa Heads SLSC clubhouse is located on the northern/beach side of
Hastings Street, Noosa Heads.

At the time of the investigation the site was occupied by the existing surf clubhouse
building. A grassed and sandy beach area is located to the northern side of the clubhouse
and is separated from the beach by a concrete footpath. A small sand dune is located in
the area of proposed extensions to the east of the clubhouse and is vegetated with grass
and small trees/shrubs. The front of the site is occupied with footpath and carparking
areas along Hastings Street.

Subsurface conditions at the site were investigated by drilling and sampling a total of
three (3) boreholes, consisting of two (2) deep boreholes to depths of 15.0m (BH3) and
20.2m (BH1) for deep profiling to weathered rock for a deep foundation system and one
(1) shallow boreholes to a depth of 2.25m for acid sulfate soi! sampling. The fieldwork
was conducted over three separate days using a track mounted Hydrapower drilling rig
and a truck mounted Gemco HP7 drilling rig.

In-situ testing consisted of standard penetration tests - SPT (Test Method AS.1289 6.3.1)
and pocket penetrometer (PP) testing of undisturbed samples taken using 50mm
diameter thin-wall tubes.

 

- % SOW SURVEYS ENGINEERING -

Page 9

“

a

sp

 

%

Project 305-2325
——— February; 2006 - -- - = -- : -———Page.3

 

The positions of boreholes have been located over the site of the proposed
redevelopment in order to provide representative coverage of subsurface conditions.

The classification of soils in the field is subjective, based on the experience and
judgement of the supervising geotechnician and some variations in the soil description,
from the actual material type may occur. In order to reduce any inconsistencies which
may have occurred, the field descriptions have been corrected, where appropriate, to
reflect the available laboratory test results.

The soil classification descriptions, field and laboratory testing were carried out in general
accordance with the following Australian Standards. ‘

¢ AS.1726 - 1993 ‘ Geotechnical Site Investigations
* AS.1289 Methods of Testing Soils for Engineering Purposes
* State Planning Policy 2/02 Planning and Managing Development Involving

~ Acid Sulfate Soils
* Queensland Acid Sulfate Soils Investigation Team (QASSIT)
“Guidelines for Sampling and Analysis of Lowland Acid Sulfate Soils (ASS) in
Queensland” October 1998 (Revision 4.0).
“Soil Management Guidelines’ November 2002 (Version 3.8).

A description of the investigation method, borehole records and a site plan showing the
location of the boreholes are included in the Appendices.

4.3 Laboratory Testing

The scope of ASS testing has been carried out in accordance with the Guideline to State
Planning Policy 2/02.

Two stages of laboratory testing were undertaken for this project as part of the acid
sulfate soil (ASS) testing program. A total of 34 No. soil samples were submitted to the
staged ASS testing program.

5.3.1 Preliminary Screening Tests

The first stage consisted of the initial qualitative screening of the disturbed samples,
conducted using the field pH (pHr) and oxidised (pHrox) test method to provide
preliminary assessment of the presence of Acid Sulfate Soils (ASS). This testing was in
the form of assessing the pH of the sample before and following oxidation with 30%

 

# SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 10

Project 305-2325
February, 2006 , Page 4
hydrogen peroxide (H202). This is a quick, qualitative-assessment of the potential acidity

 

of the soil.

Reactivity to hydrochloric acid (HCI) was also assessed as a qualitative determination of
the neutralising carbonate content including calcium carbonate (shells) within the soil.
Reaction to Hydrogen Peroxide was also assessed as a qualitative determination of
oxidisable material. The results of these screening tests were used as an additional too!
in determining which soil samples should be further assessed by quantitative laboratory
testing.

The pH values ranged from 5.7 to 9.2 (Avg. 8.2) with pHrox ranging from 3.6 to 6.0 (Avg.
5.0), and the full results for the pH and pHrox tests are presented in Appendix D.

Where the measured pHr is <4, oxidation of the sulfides has probably occurred in the
past, indicating the presence of Actual Acid Sulfate Soils (AASS). A pHr > 4 but <5
indicates an acid soil where the cause of the acidity needs further investigation. The
PHrox test is used to indicate the presence of potential acid sulfate soils (PASS). If the
PHrox <3 and a significant reaction with hydrogen peroxide has occurred, then it strongly
indicates PASS and the more the pHrox drops below 3 the more positive the presence of
sulfides. The lower the final pHrox result and the greater the difference between pHrox
and pH, the more likely that PASS is present. |

4.3.1. Quantitative Tests

The second stage of laboratory testing was carried out on a selection of samples showing
the most severe potential acid sulphate readings, i.e. those showing low pH and large
change between the pHr and the pHrox readings. The second stage of laboratory testing
consisted of Chromium Reducible Sulfur (Scr) tests, and Titratable Actual Acidity (TAA)
tests.

The Scr test provides data on sulfuric acids, without influence from organic acids. The
TAA test is a measure of the soils existing acidity prior to oxidation of sulfidic material.

The results from the second stage quantitative ASS tests show negligible presence of
oxidisable sulphur (<0.01 %S). Full results of the testing are summarised below in Table
1, and test report sheet is included in Appendix D. :

 

# SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

ae.

Page 11

Project 305-2325

 

 

 

 

   
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

February, 2006 su oe 7 "Page §
QUANTITATIVE TEST RESULTS SUMMARY
Sank =e
0
BH1 2.5 - 2.75 0.01 0
BH2 1.0.- 1.25 0.01 0
BH2 1.5-1.75 0.00 0
BH3 1.0-1.25 0.00 0
BH3 2.0 - 2.25 0.01 0

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.0 GEOTECHNICAL MODEL

The subsurface profile encountered in the boreholes consisted of fine to medium grained
sands to depths of 9.5m (BH3) and 10.6m (BH1). The profife of sand density varied
between the borehole locations. Borehole BH1, located adjacent to the beach, consisted
of loose sand, becoming medium dense at a depth of 7.6m. Borehole BH3, located in the
south-eastern carpark off Hastings Street, consisted predominately of medium dense
sands to a depth of 9.5m.

Stiff sandy/silty clay soils was encountered in borehole BH1 underlying the deep sand
profile, to a depth of 17.45m. In borehole BH3, hard sandy clay was encountered
underlying the sand profile and continued to a depth 11.0m.

Extremely weathered sandstone was encountered underlying the stifffhard clays. The
strength ‘of the sandstone was extremely weak, with bands of residual clay soils
interbedded. Standard Penetration Test (SPT) results within the extremely weak and very
weak sandstone, ranged between N=15 and N=33. SPT refusal was achieved at 20.2m
depth in BH1 in very weak sandstone.

A summary of the subsurface profile is presented in Table 2 with detailed borelogs
included at the rear of this report.

 

#% SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 12

Project 305-2325
February, 2006

 

TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE PROFILE

 

aT:

ER ee

 

 

   

   

 

   

- Loose 0.00-4.50

 

 

- Loose to 4.50-7.60
Medium Dense

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- Medium Dense 7.60-10.60 - 0.00-9.50
CLAY - Stiff 40.60-17.45 ~- ad
~ Hard : - ~- 9.50-11.00
SANDSTONE _ |- Extremely Weak 17.45-TD - 11.00-14,00
- Very Weak - - 14.00-TD
Termination Depth 20.20 2.25) 15.00

 

 

Notes:- 1) All depths in metres, below existing ground surface at time of investigation
2) Borehole BH2, effective “TC” auger refusal on boulder at termination depth.

 

 

§.1 Groundwater

Groundwater was only observed in borehole BH1 at a depth of 4.1m. The drilling methods
used (water circulation) prevented the observation of groundwater below the open hole

auger drilled sections in BH3.

The groundwater level is expected to fluctuate with climatic conditions and may show a
damped response to tidal variations due to the close proximity of the site to the beach.
Seepage should be expected through the upper granular material following periods of
prolonged rainfall. However, typically the standing groundwater level is expected to be at
about RL 0.5m with fluctuations of +0.5m under normal (non-flood) conditions.

 

# SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

eh,

aan

sy

Page 13

%

Project 305-2325

 

February, 2006 . 7 we oe Page 7

 

6.0 ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT
6&1 Iraffickability and Site Preparation

The fieldwork for this investigation which required site access along the beach was
carried out using a track mounted Hydrapower drilling rig, therefore no problems were
encountered over the loose sands on the site. A truck mounted drilling rig was utilised for
the borehole located in the front eastern carpark.

It is recommended that the exposed surface in the construction area be proof rolled to
delineate loose areas and improve traffickability.

The use of a sub-base gravel overlay (MRS 11.05, Subtype 2.3, B or C Grading/150mm
nominal layer thickness) should also be considered in vehicle access areas to improve
general traffickability during construction. Use of tracked equipment may be necessary for
traffickability on the sand subgrade.

The relevant contractors should therefore fully inform themselves of the ground conditions
on site prior to commencement of earthworks.

§.2 Earthworks

It is understood that the proposed earthworks will consist of excavations to construct
ground floor level at RL 2.0m.

Earthwork procedures should be carried out in a responsible manner in accordance with
AS.3798-1996 "Guidelines on Earthworks for Commercial and Residential
Developments".

6.2.1 Subgrade Preparatio,

Subgrade preparation procedures should include the following:-

* Clearing, stripping and grubbing should be carried out in areas subject to earthworks.
Also all soils containing organic matter should be stripped from the construction area;
this material is not considered suitable for use as structural fill.
* The subgrade should be proof rolled (where appropriate) under the supervision of
Soil Surveys Engineering using a vehicle with a tare of at least 5.tonnes and then
compacted to the required degree.

 

# SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 14

a,
Project 305-2325 .
February, 2006 . Page 8

 

6.2.2 ‘ompacti ‘oc 1S ecifications

While it is noted that significant filling is not anticipated, additional filling should be carried
‘out in accordance with AS.3798-1996, and the following should be noted:

* The insitu soils, where free of organic and deleterious material, may be used for
structural fill provided the moisture content of the soils on placement approximates
the optimum moisture content required for compaction. This may require
conditioning to bring the soils to optimum.

+ Any imported fill, if needed to make up earthwork deficiencies, should have a soaked
CBR of not less than 10 percent and a maximum aggregate size of not greater than
75mm with not more than 20% greater than 20mm.

Provided the placement moisture content of the imported fill or select insitu material
approximates the optimum moisture content for compaction, suitable compaction should
be achievable using a large static smooth drum roller. Guidelines for minimum relative
compaction values for insitu soils and imported fill for the building and pavements are -
presented in Table 3.

 

 

 

Building Area 98i . 70
Notes:- i)% of the max. dry density determined by AS1289 5.1.1 (Std Compaction)

 

 

 

 

 

 

6.2.3 Excavation Characteristics

It is anticipated that excavations will consist of the following:-

* Bulk Cuts - for site stripping and excavation to construct basement levels.

Excavations on site should be within the capabilities of light plant, small dozer (Cat D4C
or similar) in bulk cuts and a medium sized backhoe (Case 580 or similar) or small
excavator (12t - 15t) in trenching, based on the investigation findings. Should substantial
excavations be required in these soils, larger plant could be budgeted to expedite
workings.

 

7 : 2. 2 SOL SURVEYS ENGINEERING .....

eA

Page 15

a .
e ' Project 305-2325
February, 20067 ~~ sate - wee - “Page 9

6.2.4 Batters

 

 

The following general recommendations are made for short term stability of batters for
bulk excavation of the site.

* Batter angle not greater than 1V:2.5H from horizontal.

* Top of batter to be a minimum of 2.0m inside any boundary line, in addition to 3.0
metres distance from any building or structure.

* If batters are to be left untreated for any length of time, a batter angle of 1V:2.25H is

recommended and berm width are to be strictly maintained.

If seepage is encountered in the batters, slumping will occur. If seepage is not controlled,
‘slumping to angles half that described above (and flatter) is expected.

Inspection of batters should be carried out by a geotechnical engineer from Soil Surveys
Engineering, during bulk excavation works, to confirm the stability of temporary batters.

' 6.3 Building Foundations
6.3.1 Site Classification

While a site classification in accordance with AS.2870 ‘Residential Slabs and Footings’
relates to residential type construction and is not directly applicable for this development,
it is, however, a valuable method of classification.

Given the investigation drilling encountered predominantly sandy soils only, which are

non-reactive to variations in soil moisture, the site is classified as “Class A“ in

, accordance with AS.2870.1-1996 ‘Residential Slabs and Footings’. While no surface

: - movement would be expected due to changes in moisture, some settlements would be
expected due to the underlying loose sand layers at depth.

Settlement of less than 20mm (maximum) has been estimated for the encountered
subsurface profile. Potential differential settlement would typically be in the order of 25%
to 50% of the total settlement. This settlement would be expected to occur as elastic
settlement as the construction loads are applied.

It is recommended that the designers satisfy themselves that the use of AS.2870 is
applicable for the proposed design.

 

YF SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 16

Project 305-2325
February, 2006 ‘ Page 10

6.3.2 High Level Footings

 

Shallow foundations do not meet the Noosa Shire Council's requirements for scour
protection at this location.

For temporary works such as the support of formwork etc., strip footings between
columns maybe designed for an allowable bearing capacity of 75 kPa in the anticipated
foundation soils (ie. Loose to medium dense sands). Loose sand, either as existing fill,
backfill in overexcavated areas’ or natural, should be compacted to provide the required
allowable bearing capacity. It is recommended that the bearing capacity of the founding
soil be confirmed prior to construction.

6.3.3 Deep Foundations

The choice of suitable deep foundation types should be made from non-vibration piling
methods. Continuous flight auger (CFA) grout or concrete; or conventional bored piles
may be suitable, although the construction of the latter may be problematic in loose sand,
where collapse of the pile hole is likely. Other proprietary non vibration piling methods
may also be suitable. :

It is recommended that the deep foundations used on this project are designed in
accordance with AS 2159-1995 Piling - Design and installation. This code uses the limit
state design method.

The design of a single pile or a pile group must be such that both the geotechnical
strength R*, and the structural strength R*., are greater than or equal to the design action
effect S*, ie.

R‘,>S* and R*, > S*

The design geotechnical strength (R*,) can be calculated as the ultimate geotechnical
strength (Ru) multiplied by the geotechnical strength reduction factor @,. Based on the
field test results, the following ultimate geotechnical strength (Ru,) parameters for the
materials encountered on the site maybe used for preliminary design.

 

- SOM SURVEYS-ENGINEERING

ad.

Page 17

o

 

Project 306-2325

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. NR - Not Recommended; NC - Not Considered in skin friction calculations.

2. Higher design parameters may be adopted depending on final pile type. Recommended
geotechnical strength reduction factor (@,) = 0.45 to 0.55.

3. Considering limit state analysis (AS 2159-1995), the design geotechnical strength R*, is
calculated by multiplying: the. ultimate geotechnical strength Ru by the geotechnical strength
reduction factor @,, ie. R*y = Rug x By.

4. Should a "working stress" approach be adopted, a minimum factor of safety of 3.0 on base and
2.0 on skin friction is recommended.

 

 

 

Based on the range of values provided in AS2159-1995 it is recommended that the
geotechnical strength reduction value of 0.45 be adopted for the design of deep
foundations on this site in conjunction with the ultimate strength values provided in Table
4.

Depending on the load requirements, and the piling contractors design, it is
recommended that the piles are founded in material which is at least dense, and at a
minimum depth to meet the scour requirements.

6.3.4 Construction Considerations
inspections

It is recommended that inspections be undertaken by an experienced and qualified
geotechnical engineer following footing excavations to confirm the adequacy of the
founding soils. Inspections should be carried out prior to placement of reinforcing steel
and ordering of concrete.

 

Y SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

February; 2006——_____—+ Tre memes Paget? =
TABLE 4 ULTIMATE GEOTECHNICAL STRENGTH PARAMETERS
Sand - Loose — NR NR
~ Medium Dense 1000 20
Clay - Stiff to Very Stiff 675 30
- Very stiff to Hard 1350 45
Sandstone - Extremely Weak 1800 60
- Very Weak to Weak 2200 75
Notes: :

Page 18

Project 305-2325

 

February, 2006 ; Page 12
Underground Services

Where footings are located adjacent to existing structures, revetment walls etc. the
footings should extend to base a minimum of 200mm below the base level for a distance
of 1m out from the trench. Beyond 1m, the footings should be taken a minimum of

200mm below an imaginary line drawn up at 30 degrees from the base level. Figure 1
refers.

These requirements do not override minimum footing base levels.

 

 

 
     

 

 

 

 

Service
0 Trench
All footings 200mm
below this line 30°
1.0
‘ FIGURE 1
Pile Groups

Where higher column loads are involved, pile groups may need to be used to achieve the
required load bearing capacities.

Where pile groups are required, a pile spacing of not less than 2.5 times the pile diameter
is recommended. Larger pile spacing can be used if the efficiency of the pile groups
needs to be increased. Table 5 indicates the relationship between pile spacing and group
efficiency (after Tomlinson 1969).

TABLE 5 PILE GROUP EFFICIENCY

 

 
    

 

 

4%
2 x Pile Diameter 0.7
4 x Pile Diameter 0.8

 

 

 

 

 

2% SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 19

o°

Project 305-2325
February, 2006 . 7 . — : ~ Page 13

 

‘ucti id i

Borehole BH2 was obstructed by boulders, thought to be part of an old seawall
constructed in the past as a shoreline protection wall. Previous investigations carried out
along Hastings Street encountered similar obstructions with boulders associated with the
old seawall at depths of approximately RL 1.0m to RL 0.0m (top of obstruction). These
obstructions are understood to have resulted in difficulties with the installation of steel
sheet piles and have required removal of boulders for some piling operations.

It would therefore be prudent to allow for the likelihood of boulders on this site in the form
of removal of the boulders by excavator. | ,

Should any doubt arise as to the integrity or capacity of the installed piles being affected
by obstructions, compliance testing of piles in the form of integrity testing and/or PDA
testing should be considered.

$4 Slab On Ground

6.4.1 General

Field test results indicate that the existing natural soils, along with any controlled fill, are
suitable for slab on ground construction provided that site preparation earthworks are
carried out in accordance with recommendations in Sections 6.1 and 6.2.

In addition, as noted in Section 6.3.1, the slab on ground floor should be designed to
accommodate the anticipated potential ground surface movement.

6.4.2 Sub-Base

It is suggested that a 150mm layer of sub-base be provided under all concrete slabs. The
sub-base material should be compacted to a density not less than 95% of maximum dry
density in accordance with AS.1289 5.2.1 (Modified compaction). The sub-base is
provided under a concrete slab to:-

* Provide a stable ‘working platform' on which to operate construction equipment;

* Facilitate the provision of a uniform bearing surface under the slab.
Sub-base material should be of good quality conforming to requirements (minimum)
of Material Type 2.4 as specified in the Queensiand Department of Transport,
Standard Specification MRS 11.05, Unbound Pavements (December, 1993).

 

# SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 20

Project 305-2325
February, 2006 Page 14

 

6&5 Retaining Walls

Retention systems should be designed in accordance with AS 4678-2002 ‘Earth- retaining
structures’. :

Basement walls should be designed using a pressure coefficient for the at rest case of Ko
= 0.5.

Unit wall force P is given by:-

Pp = 0.5 Ko y H:? (kKN/m cun of wall)
«where y = density of sand = 18kN/m?

Ko = 0.5

Hy = height of wall (m)

Until the base of the wall is prevented from inward movement by the strutting action of the
first floor, the resistance of movement is provided by the friction of the soil beneath the
base slab, and by the passive resistance of the soil against the vertical face of the toe of
the wall. The intensity of passive resistance can be calculated from:-

P = 0.5K, yH?
where K, = 3.25 (ignores wall friction effects)
He = front face of wall contributing to passive resistance (m)

For the calculation of sliding resistance, the angle of friction for sand (¢) compacted to not
less than 75% density index can be taken as 32° for walls with a key, For walls without a

key, the angle of friction for sliding resistance may be taken as 2/3 ¢ or 21°.

Note: The above expressions assume a horizontal plane ground surface and no
surcharge.

CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION

 

It is recommended that groundfloor foundation and footing excavations be inspected by
Soil Surveys Engineering Pty. Limited. or a duly qualified Geotechnical Engineer. Should
subsurface conditions other than those described in this report be encountered, Soil
Surveys Engineering Pty. Limited. should be consulted immediately and appropriate
modifications developed and implemented if necessary.

 

WB SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 21

Project 305-2325

~~~" “February, 2006 ° ~~ ~ oo “Page 15

 

80 ACID SULFATE SOILS ASSESSMENT

As shown in the summary table of quantitative ASS laboratory test results (Table 1), the
Scr values are 0.00 - 0.01 %S which is well below the DNR’s defined acid sulfate soil
“action level” of 0.03 %S, and this indicates there is only negligible levels of oxidisable
sulphur, or potential acid sulfate soils (PASS). The measured total actual acidity (TAA)
values are all 0 mol. H+/t, which indicates that the sand samples are not actual acid
sulfate soils (AASS).

It is concluded: from the observations made during the field investigation drilling and
sampling, as well as from subsequent laboratory testing, that the amount of acid sulfate
soil material present in the sand profile at this location, should be described as negligible
to non-existent. Thus it is recommended that no treatment of soil material would be
required for soil excavated from this location.

 

Y SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 22

wy

Project 305-2325
February, 2006 Page 16

9.0 LIMITATIONS

 

We have prepared this report for the use of NOOSA SURF LIFE SAVING CLUB, for
design purposes in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering
practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice
included in this report. This report has not been prepared for use by parties other than
NOOSA SURF LIFE SAVING CLUB or their associated consultants. It may not contain
sufficient information for purposes of other parties or for other uses.

There are always some natural variations in subsurface conditions across a site, which
cannot be fully defined by investigation. The samples taken and used for laboratory
testing are representative of site conditions. It is however unlikely that the measurements
and values obtained from sampling and testing during the investigation will represent the

Han,

extremes of conditions that may exist within the site. Hence, it is recommended that if
ground conditions encountered during construction significantly differ to those described
in this report, further advice should be immediately sought from Soil Surveys Engineering.

Soil Surveys Engineering offer a documentation review service to verify that the intent of
geotechnical recommendations is properly reflected in the design. It is recommended
that the client avail themself of this service; our standard rates will apply.

 

S.L. GAMBLE (RPEQ 6644) B. W. EGEN
SENIOR GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER

for and on behalf of

SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING PTY LIMITED

 

# SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

uF

Page 23

———— ~——_— Project 305-2325- -

February, 2006

 

 

 

 

# SOM SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 24

Project 305-2325
February, 2006

 

 

 

 

# SOM SURVEYS ENGINEERING - -

Page 25

om

i

 

NOTES RELATING TO THIS REPORT

 

 

INTRODUCTION

These notes are provided by Soil Surveys Engineering
Pty Limited (the Company) to complement the
geotechnical report in regard to classification methods
and field procedures.
televant to all reports.

Not all notes are necessarily

The ground is a product of continuing natural and
man-made processes and therefore exhibits a variety
of characteristics and properties which vary from place
Geotechnical
engineering involves gathering and assimilating limited
facts about these characteristics and properties in

to place and can change with time.

“™ order to understand or predict the behaviour of the

ground on a particular site under certain. conditions.
This report may contain such facts obtained by
inspection, excavation, probing, sampling, testing or
other means of investigation. If so, they are directly
relevant only to the ground at the place where and at
the time when the investigation was carried out.
DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION METHODS
Soils - The methods of description and classification of
soils and rocks used in this report are based on
Australian Standard 1726-1993 (Geotechnical Site
Investigations), where appropriate. in general,
descriptions cover the following properties - soil or rock

type, colour, structure, strength or density, and |

inclusions. Identification and classification of soil and
‘rock involves judgement and the Company infers
- accuracy only to the extent that is common in current
geotechnical practice. :
Soil types are described according to the dominant
particle size and behaviour as set out in AS

1726-1993.

Cohesive soils are classified on the basis of strength.

(consistency) either by use of hand penetrometer,
shear

vane, laboratory testing or engineering
examination. The strength terms are defined in
AS1726-1993 Table A4.

Non-cohesive soils are classified on the basis of
felative density usually based on insitu testing or
engineering examination (see AS1726-1993 Table A5).
Rocks - Rock types are classified by their geological

names (AS1726-1993 Table A6), together with

 

Table 1 Estimated strength descriptions given to rock

based on engineering examination

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Very Weak 1.0-5.0
Weak 5.0-25
Medium Strong 25 - 50
Strong 50 - 100
Very Strong 100 - 250
Extremely Strong > 250

 

 

 

 

Ref ISRM "Suggested Methods for the Quantitative
Description of Discontinuities in Rock Masses"

descriptive terms regarding weathering (AS1726-1993

- Table A9), strength (refer Table 1

below), defects (AS1726-1993 Table A10), etc. Where
strength testing (ie Point Loads) is carried out,
AS1726-1993 Table A8 is used. Where relevant,
further information regarding rock classification is
attached. ,
SAMPLING .
Sampling is carried out during drilling or from other
excavations to allow engineering examination (and
laboratory testing where required) of the soit or rock.
Disturbed samples taken during drilling provide
information on plasticity, grain size, colour, moisture
content, minor constituents and, depending upon
sample disturbance, (information on strength and
structure).

Undisturbed samples are taken by pushing a thin
walled sample tube, usually 50mm diameter (U50), into
the soil and withdrawing it with a sample of the soil
contained in a relatively undisturbed state. Such
samples yield information on structure and strength,
and are necessary for laboratory determination of
shear volume change potential
Undisturbed sampling is generally
effective only in cohesive soils.

strength, and

compressibility.

Details of the type and method of sampling used are
given on the attached logs.

 

NOTEREP.SAM

SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 26

-2-

 

INVESTIGATION METHODS

The following is a brief summary of investigation
methods currently adopted by the Company and some
comments on their use and application.

Test Pits - These are normally excavated with a
backhoe or a tracked excavator, allowing close
examination of the insitu soils if it is safe to descend
into the pit. The depth of penetration is limited to about
3m for a backhoe and up to 6m for an excavator.
Limitations of test pits are the problems associated
with disturbance and difficulty of reinstatement and the
consequent effects on close-by structures. Care must
be taken if construction is to be carried out near test pit
locations to either properly recompact the backfill
during construction or to design and construct the

structure so as not to be adversely affected by poorly :

compacted backfill at the test pit location.

Hand Auger Drilling - A borehole of 50 to 100mm
diameter is advanced by manually operated
equipment. Refusal of the augers can occur on a
variety of materials such as hard clay, gravel or rock
fragments and does not necessarily indicate rock level.
Continuous Spiral Flight Augers - The borehole is
.advanced using 75 to 300 mm diameter continuous
Spiral flight augers, which are withdrawn at intervals to
allow sampling or insitu testing. This is a relatively
economical means of drilling in clays and in sands
above the water table. Samples are retumed to the
surface by the flights or may be collected after
withdrawal of the augers. Information from the drilling
{as distinct from specific sampling) is of relatively lower
reliability due to remoulding, inclusion of cuttings from
above or softening of samples by groundwater, or
uncertainties as to the original depth of the samples.
Augering below the groundwater table has a lower
reliability than augering above the water table. Various
drill bits are attached to the base of the augers during
the drilling. The depth of refusal of the different bit
types can provide information as to the strength of the
material encountered. Generally two different bit types
are used. The 'V' bit is a V shaped steel bit and the
‘TC’ bit is a tungsten carbide tipped screw type bit.
Wash Boring - The borehole is usually advanced by a
rotary bit with water or fluid pumped down the hollow
drill rods and returned up in the space between the

NOTEREP.SAM

 

rods. and the soil or casing, carrying the drill cuttings.
Only major changes in stratification can be determined
from the cuttings, together with some information from
and
information on soil strata is gained by regular testing
and sampling using the Standard Penetration Test
(SPT) and undisturbed thin walied tube samples (U50).
Mud_ Stabilized Drilling - Either Wash Boring or
Continuous Core Drilling can use drilling mud as a
circulating fluid to stabilize the borehole.

“feel” rate of penetration. More accurate

The term
"mud" encompasses a range of products ranging from
bentonite to polymers such as Revert or Biogel. The
mud tends to mask the cuttings and
identification is only possible from regutar intact
sampling (eg. from SPT and U50 samples) or from
tock coring, etc.

Continuous Core Drilling - A continuous core sample
is obtained using a diamond or tungsten carbide
tipped core barrel.

reliable

Provided full core recovery is
achieved (which is not always possible in very weak
tocks and granular soils), this technique provides a
very reliable method of investigation. In rocks, NMLC
coring (nominal 52 mm diameter) is usually used with
water flush. The length of core recovered is compared
fo the length drilled and any length not recovered is
shown as CORE LOSS. The location of losses is
determined on site by the supervisor. If the location of
the loss is uncertain, it is placed at the top end of the
tun, when the core is placed in a storage tray and
recorded on the log.

Standard Penetration Tests - Standard Penetration
Tests (SPT) are used mainly in non-cohesive soils, but
can also be used in cohesive soils, as a means of
indicating density or strength. The test procedure is
described in Australian Standard 1289, “Methods of
Testing Soils for Engineering Purposes" - Test 6.3.1.
The test is carried out in a borehole by driving a 50mm
diameter split sample tube with a tapered shoe, under
the impact of a 63 kg hammer with a free fall of 760
mm. It is normal for the tube to be driven in three
successive 150 mm increments and the 'N’ value is
taken as the number of blows for the last 300 mm, the
upper 150 mm being neglected due to possible
disturbance from the drilling method. In dense sands,
very hard clays or weak rock, the full 450 mm

SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING ,

gil

oy

“i

Page 27

nn Be

 

penetration may not be practicable and the test is
discontinued at a reduced penetration.
In the case where full penetration is obtained with
successive blow counts for each 150 mm of, say 4, 6
and 7 blows, the record shows,
4,6,7 N=13
In a case where the test is discontinued short of full
penetration, say after 15 blows for the first 150 mm
and 30 blows for the next 40 mm, the record shows:
15, 30/40mm
The results of the test can be related empirically to the
engineering properties of the soil.
Occasionally, the drop hammer .is used to drive 50mm
diameter thin walled sample tubes (U50) in clays. In
such circumstances, it is noted on the borehole logs.
A Modification to the SPT test is where the same
driving system is used with a solid 60° tipped steel
cone of the same diameter as the SPT hollow sampler.
The solid cone can be continuously driven for some
distance in soft clays or loose sands, or may be used
where damage would otherwise occur to the SPT. The
results of this Solid SPT are shown as "N<" on the
borehole logs, together with the number of blows per
150 mm penetration.

Cone. Penetration Tests - Test Method - Cone
Penetration Tests (CPT) are carried out in accordance
with AS 1289 Test 6.5.1-1977, using an electrical
friction-cone penetrometer.

The test essentially comprises the measurement of
resistance to penetration of a cone of 35.7 mm
diameter pushed into the soil at a rate of'10-20 mm per
second by hydraulic force. The resistance to
penetration is recorded in terms of pressure on the end
area of the cone (cone resistance, qe, in MPa) and
friction on the side of the 135 mm tong sleeve
immediately above the top of the cone (friction
resistance, fs, in kPa). These forces are measured by
electrical transducers (strain gauges) within the cone
device. The ratio between friction resistance and cone
resistance is also calculated as a percentage, ie.-
Friction Ratio (FR) = FHstoa Resistance. (kPa) x 100 SE
The friction ratio, FR, is generally low in sands (less
than 1% or 2%) and generally higher in clays (say 3%
or more). The interpretation of sandy clays, clayey
sands and material with a high silt content is more

 

difficult, but intermediate values (between 1% and 3%)
would be expected. Highly organic clays and peats
generally have a friction ratio in excess of 5%.

Static cone data is recorded in the field on disc for later
presentation using computer aided drafting.

The equipment can be operated from any conventional
drill rig. A total applied load in the range of 4 to 10
tonnes is required for practical purposes, although
lighter loads may be used. The cone penetrometers
are available with various capacities of cone resistance
ranging up to 100 MPa for genera! purpose
investigations, while a range of 0 to 10 MPa can be
used where more sensitive investigations of soft clay
are required.

The cone resistance value provides a continuous
measure of soil strength or density, and together with
the friction ratio, provide very useful indications of the
presence of narrow bands of geotechnically significant
layers such as thin, soft clay layers or lenses of sand
which might otherwise be missed using conventional
drilling methods.

The lithology of the encountered soils is interpreted
from static cone data and is generally presented on the
Static cone log sheets.

It is important to note that the lithology is interpreted
information and is based on research by Schmertmann.
(1970), Sanglerat (1972), Robinson and Campinaili
(1986), modified to suit local conditions as indicated by
borehole information and laboratory testing.

As soils generally change gradually it is sometimes
difficult to accurately describe dépths of strata
changes, although greater accuracy is obtained with
the static cone compared with conventional drilling. In
addition, friction ratios decrease in accuracy with low
cone resistance values, and in desiccated soils. As a
result, some overlap and ‘minor discrepancies may
exist between static cone and nearby borehole
information.

Portable Dynamic Cone Penetrometers - Portable
Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) tests are carried
out by driving a rod into the ground with a falling weight
hammer and measuring the blows for successive
100mm increments of penetration.

 

NOTEREP.SAM

SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 28

-4-

 

The DCP comprises a Cone of 20 mm diameter with

30 degree taper attached to stee! rods of smaller

section.

The cone end is driven with a 9 kg hammer falling 510
mm (AS. 1289 Test 6.3.2). The test was developed
initially for pavement subgrade investigations, and
empirical correlations of the test results with California
Bearing Ratio have been published by various Road
Authorities. The Company has developed their own
correlations with Standard Penetration tests and
Density Index tests in sands.

LOGS

The borehole or tést pit logs presented herein are an
engineering and/or geological interpretation of the
subsurface conditions, and their reliability will depend
to some extent on the frequency of sampling and the
method of drilling or excavation. Ideally, continuous
undisturbed sampling. or core drilling will enable the
most reliable assessment but is not always practicable
or.possible to justify on economic grounds. In any
case, the boreholes or test pits represent only a very
small sample of the total subsurface conditions.

The attached explanatory notes define the terms and
symbols used in preparation of the logs.

Interpretation of the information shown on the logs,
and its application to design and construction, should
therefore take into account the spacing of boreholes or
test pits, the method of drilling or excavation, the
frequency of sampling and testing and the possibility of
other than "straight line" variations between the
boreholes or test pits. Subsurface conditions between
boreholes or test pits may vary significantly from
conditions encountered at the borehole or test pit
locations.

GROUNDWATER

Where groundwater levels are measured in boreholes,
there are several potential problems.

“Although groundwater may be present in lower
permeability soi!s, it may enter the hole slowly or
perhaps not at all during the time the hole is open.

*A localized perched water table may lead to an
erroneous indication of the true water table.

«Water table levels will vary from time to time with
seasons or recent weather changes and may not be
the same at the time of construction.

NOTEREP.SAM

 

«The use of water or mud as a drilling fluid will mask
any groundwater inflow. Water has to be bailed out of
the bore and mud must be washed out of the hole or
“reverted” if water observations are to be made.

More reliable measurements can be made by use of
standpipes which are read after stabilizing at periods
tanging from several days to perhaps weeks for low
permeability soils. Piezometers, sealed in a particular
stratum, may be advisable in low permeability soils or
where there may be interference from perched water
tables or surface water.

FILE .

The presence of fill materials can often be determined
only by the inclusion of foreign objects (eg. bricks,
Steel, etc.) or by distinctly unusual colour, texture or
fabric. Identification of the extent of fill materials will
also depend on investigation methods and frequency.
Where natural soils.similar to those at the site are used
for fill, it may be difficult with limited testing and
sampling to reliably determine the extent of the fill.

The presence of fill materials is usually regarded with
caution as the possible variation in density, strength
and material type is much greater than with natural soil
deposits. Consequently, there is an increased risk of
adverse engineering characteristics or behaviour. If
the volume and quality of fill is important to a project,
then frequent test pit excavations are preferable to

boreholes.
ABORA
Laboratory testing is normally carried out in

accordance with Australian Standard 1289 "Methods of
Testing Soil for Engineering Purposes”. Details of the
test procedure used are given on the individual report
forms and the attached explanatory notes summarize
important aspects of the Laboratory Test Procedures
adopted. ,

ENGINEERING REPORTS

reports are prepared by qualified
personnel and are based on the information obtained

Engineering

and on current engineering standards of interpretation
and analysis. Where the report has been prepared for
a specific design proposal the information and
interpretation may not be relevant if the design

proposal is changed. If this happens, the Company will

SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 29

we ee ne 5.

 

be pleased to review the report and the sufficiency of
the investigation work.

Every care is taken with the report as it relates to
interpretation of subsurface conditions, discussion of
geotechnical and

aspects fecommendations or

suggestions for design and construction. Since the
test sites in any exploration represent a very small
proportion of the total site and since the exploration
only identifies actual ground conditions at the test sites,
even under the best circumstances actual conditions
may vary from those inferred to exist. No responsibility
is taken for:-
*Unexpected variations if ground and/or groundwater
conditions.
«Changes in policy or interpretation of policy by
Statutory authorities.
* The actions of other persons, .
*Any work where the company is not given the
opportunity to supervise the construction using the
_ Companies designs/recommendations. ;
if differences occur, the Company will be pleased to
assist with investigation or advice to resolve any
problems occurring.
SITE ANOMALIES
in the event that conditions encountered on site during
construction appear to vary from those expected from
the information contained in the report, the Company
requests that it immediately be notified. Most
problems are more readily resolved when conditions
are exposed than at some later stage, well after the
event.
REPRODUCTION OF INFORMATION FOR

Cc uy SES
Attention is drawn to the document "Guidelines for the
Provision of Geotechnical Information in Tender
Documents", published by the Institution of Engineers,
Australia. Where information obtained from this
investigation is provided for tendering purposes, it is
recommended that all information, including the written
report and discussion, be made available. in
circumstances, where the discussion or comments
section is not relevant to the contractual situation, it
may be appropriate to prepare a specially edited
document. The Company would be pleased to assist

 

in this regard and/or to make additional report copies
available for contract purposes at a nominal charge.
REVIEW OF DESIGN —

Where major civil or structural developments are
proposed of where only a limited investigation has
been completed or where the geotechnical conditions/
constraints are quite complex, it is prudent to have a
joint design
geotechnical engineer. We would be happy to assist in

review which involves a_ senior
this regard as an extension of our investigation
commission.

SITE INSPECTION .

The Company will always be pleased to provide
engineering inspection. services for
aspects of work to which this report is related.

geotechnical

i) Site visits during construction to confirm reported
ground conditions _

ii) Site visits to assist the contractor or other site
personnel in identifying various soil/rock types such as
appropriate footing or pier founding depths, the stability
of a filled or excavated slope; or

ii) Full-time engineering presence on site.

In the vast majority of cases it is advantageous to the
principal for the geotechnical engineer who wrote the
investigation report to be involved in the construction
stage of the project.

 

NOTEREP.SAM

SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 30

Soil Surveys Engineering Pty. Limited LEGEND SHEET

septese vachnical engineers RPEOQ No. 165
ACN. 054.043 635
bredaneCsoltsuveye

Information Graphic Legend
DRILLING TYPES

V - open hole driliing using augers and a sise! “V* bit

TC - open hole drilling using augers and a Tungsten Carbide bit

WB - wash boring using a drag or blade bit CH- CLAY of high plasticity

RR - wash boring using a rock roller bil

Casing Revi ect abng core barrel Cl- CLAY of intermediate plasticity

DEPTH ; .
Expressed in metres balow the surface unless otherwise noted CL - CLAY of low plasticity

ROCK DESCRIPTION MH - SILT of high plasticity
Rock name, grain size, colour, texture, fabric and any other relevent comments.

WEATHERING GRADES MI- SILT of intermediate plasticity
XW - Extremely Weathered :

DW - Distinctly Weathered ML - SILT of low plasticity

SW - Slightly Weathered

FR- Fresh

STRENGTH

{estimate of UCS) OH - Organic SILTS and CLAYS of high

VW - very weak 0.7 t 2A MPa plasticity

He nak 2 4 7.0 7 1024 MPa OL - Organi SULTS and CLAYS of low

S - strong 24 to 70 MPa SRO Plasticity

VS - very strong 70 to 240 MPa SAX SC -Clayey SAND

CORING DETAILS PrP 7 .

Rec - core recovery in each run expressed as a % / SM - Silty SAND

RQD - Rock Quality Description expressed as a % 5 .

Defect Description

3.00m;J45;p,s,0,z

Depth in matres; Defect Type and angle with the core axis;planarity, roughness aperture, Infili .

Defect Type Planarity Roughness Aperture GM - Silty GRAVEL

J+ Joint p- Planar 8-Smooth o-

F - Fotiation 8- Sub-planar r- Rough ¢- Closed GP - poorly graded GRAVEL
¢-Curvtlinear v- Very Rough

i u-Undulating | - Slickensides Calcite
S - Shear Zone "9 v GW ~well graded GRAVEL

P- PEAT

SP - poorly graded SAND
SW - Well graded SAND

GC - Clayey GRAVEL

T

c- . Fill
Zz-

RJ- Relict Joint

Testing

SPT

U50 Tube Resove

Poot penetrate aay ™

Vane Shear Testing

‘Seating, peak and residual : Corrected value
Oistrbed Samples

Water Intersections

—_ ‘Water steady level
Granite
aor ‘Water first noted

Basalt

Testing Results . Taf VOLCANIC ASH

pore Point Load Test Result
~~ 1s50=4 (A) A- Axial. - Dlamatral VOLCANIC AGGOLMERATE

MARINE DEPOSITS

ISSUE No. 1.1 08/10/97 RSO05

 

Page 31

. or

a

Project 305-2325
February, 2006

 

# SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

 

 

 

 

Page 32

 

XEN. O84 043 631
‘eral [email protected] au

  

Borehole Number: 1

” Soil Surveys Engineering Pty. Limited BOREHOLE RECORD SHEET

Gactuchrical ayginaere  RPECO No. 195

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

rl 2sa och Breet Unt 039 Cawtance Dr 11 Produion Ave
Revo, See, Sele. ;
meee, | ENA aaa Project Number: 305-2325
Project Name : Surf Club Extension
Easting: Nothing : RL: Location : Hasting St., Noosa Heads
Logger: Drier: Diling Rig: Client : Noosa Surf Club
Date : 21/12/2005 Page : 1
Drilling Method g Sam
ag ples and

>elelele Oepth & Description Remarks
i ‘| SAND (SP) Loose, fine to medium grained, light grey white, moist. Dp q
0.40 Zz J
— SAND (SP) Loose, fine to medium grained, light grey and light brown, moist. mp ~j
E 1.0 the rm D. 4
_— j D _
5 SPT 4
E Nifo q
= - Dd —|
- - op 4
r 20 D q
+— mop J
- an q
E —
¥ D 4
F | a5 7
- 30 cy —
- 3.70 q
- 4 0 ‘| SAND (SP) Loose, fine to medium grained, grey, moist. 7
rw 40 pa 7
- SAND (SP) Loose, fine to medium grained, light grey white, wet. ser Fg
i 4,50 4 | | ie 4
- -| SAND (SP) Loose to medium dense, fine to medium grained, dark brown, moist. “ q
p60 _
ct | SPT 4
— 247 —
- Nell 4
F 6.0 , 4
E 0 Je
= 7.60 7
- SAND (SP) Medium dense, fine to medium grained, grey brown, moist. q
- 8.0 —S
- SPT =
; 611,16 —
I Nei? a
sy 9.10 ~T7
- SAND (SP) Medium dense, medium to coarse grained, blue grey, trace of fine 7
— size gravel, moist. q
F 10.0 1 spr q

 

 

[COMMENTS
1) Groundwater noted at 4.1m.

 

‘w Water First Noted “7 Water Steady Level

 

Approved SIG
Date: _168/2/08

 

 

{88UE No. 1.1 0810/97 RSOOTA

Page 33

Soil Surveys Engineering Pty. Limited

 

 

 

 

~ BOREHOLE RECORD SHEET

 
         

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RRR Gig ae owe _ RPE N48 — = a mn —
Level 210 Cece Breet UR ose Lmearce Dy 11 Prtction tee Borehole Number: 1
Pecan a sos Kerang Suasts bette 2 A573 :
Pasa ea. | RE Project Number: 305-2325
Project Name : Surf Club Extension
Easting: ‘Northing : RL: Location : Hasting St., Noosa Heads
Logger : Diiller : Drilling Rig : Client : Noosa Surf Club
Date : 21/12/2005 Page : 2
Drilling Method g
inti Samples and
(| 910 [3A Depth é Description Remarks
a _J 67.10
C SAND (SP) Loose, fine to medium grained, lorange brown, moist. Nel7
E NY Sandy CLAY (CH) Stiff, high plasticity, red mottled grey, coarse grained
11.0 \ sand, fine size gravel.
— \ | SPT
— , 45.7
rc \ Nel2
F 12.0 \
- 13.0 \ ] ser
+__ 6,10
C 13.20 \ Naié
- \ Silty CLAY (CH) Stiff, high plasticity, orange brown mottled grey.
E 13.80 \
14.0 NY Silty CLAY (CH) Stiff, high plasticity, grey streaked orange brown. ‘
F | srr
+— 24,7
- Nei)
F 15.0
Ewe |g
( ) C
F 17.0
FE 17.45 : SPT
— SANDSTONE (XW) / Sandy CLAY (CH) Extremely to very weak, light grey, wit} Nel6
= bands of high plasticity fines.
18.0
p
F 190 le
c Nails
F200 _

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

COMMENTS
4 1) Groundwater noted at 4.1m.

— LL _____

Approved

Date :
ISSUE No. 1.1 0810/97 ‘RSOO7B

 

Page 34

 

Consutin
ACN, 084 043 631
eran brian,

 

7E.cOM.BL
Level 2 49 Finchisy Bveet Unit 9 30 Lawrence Or
ion @ 4084 Naren 0.4211
PO Bex 317, PO Box 2011

4084 Nerang 0.4214
Ph 61. $389 6000. Phot? 6596 1
Faxes 7 3980 6080 Paxev 78570 3018

Borehole Number: 1
Project Number :
Project Name : Surf Club Extension

11 Production Ave
Waters @ 4578

Gucdina © 4578

Pn 817 5405 1733

Fax 61 7 6493 2337

Soil Surveys Engineering Pty. Limited BOREHOLE RECORD SHEET

Geotechnical engineers — RPECG Wo. 195

305-2325

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ee

ISSUE No. 1.1 O8/10/87-RSO07C ~ —

 

Easting Northing : RL: Location : Hasting St., Noosa Heads
Logger Diller: Driling Rig : Client : Noosa Surf Club
Date : 21/12/2005 - Page : 3

Drilling Method , £ a Samples and

Plelelele 7 Depth E Description Remarks
= 20.20 =
E Borehole 20.20m Fim 3
— Terminated Tq
F 21.0 4
F 22.0 J
F 23.0 =
F 240 4
FE 4
C 4
F 25.0 =
26.0 =
F 27.0 =
28.0 _
280 4
F 30.0 4

COMMENTS.

}) Groundwater noted at 4.1m.
Approved SEG
Date: 4ARi2iMR

 

 

Page 35

e
‘a
a
wt

 

 

  
 

TY y Soil Surveys Engineering Pty. Limited. BOREHOLE RECORD SHEET

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘Gonautting Gectect engineers RPECO No. 195
‘ne com.
_ MS pera aeecie oe Unite ab Lawrence Ov 11 Production Ave Borehole Number: 2 :
ean 24008 feerang e211 Bosna 2 4370 .
Foch y'sse0 sa00 a estat | ROEM SY Project Number : 305-2325
Project Name : Surf Club Extension
Easting: Northing RL: Location : Hasting St., Noosa Heads
Logger : Driller Drilling Rig : Client : Noosa Surf Club
Date : 22/12/2005 Page : 1
Drilling Method 2
he & sg Samples and
Cc elslela 7 Depth & Description Remarks
C ‘| SAND (SP) Loose, fine to medium grained, light brown and white. 7
C 4 q
= J
oy a) . 4
, F_20
- 2.20 q
ae - 2.25 loulders. oe A
— Borehole 2.25m z
F Terminated 4
p30 an
P40 a
F_§0 =
P60 4
r) - q
E70 4
my)
' - q
P_9.0 =
EF _10.0 J
COMMENTS
Approved .SLG_
Date: § 46/2/06
L ‘w Water First Noted ~7 Water Steady Level ISSUE No. 4,1 68/10/57 RSOOTA

 

 

 

 

Page 36

LU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~W Water First Noted ~~ Water Steady Level

Approved :SLG
Date: 46/2/M6
iSSUE No. 1:1 OBMO/87 RSOOTA

 

a ene ra =
Soil Surveys Engineering Pty. Limited BOREHOLE.RECORD SHEET
Sopesting Sastaceen teen cai enginemrs = RPECOQ No. 106
‘rail [email protected]
Loyal? 1einchiy Guest — Unite SELewrance Dr 11 Progucton Ave Borehole Number : 3
Reo ete, ethen ;
Fuster 7 a060 8660 Emeat, ROTA, Project Number : 305-2325
Project Name : Surf Club Extension
: ion : i . leads
Easting : Northing : RL: Location : Hasting St., Noosa Hi
ian Bi ient : Noosa Surf Cl
Logger: JM Driller: JM Drilling Rig: GemcoHP7 Client rarf Club
Date : 07/02/2006 Page : 1
Drilling Method 2
& ag Samples and
>elelele t Depth E Description Remarks
a 0,10 Bitumen. ~
[— 0.25 Clayey SAND (sc) Medium dense, fine to coarse grained, brown, medium q
= 0.50 “Wolasticity fines, moist 7
— ~ SAND (SP) Medium dense fine ta medium grained dark grey moist, a
- | SAND (SP) Medium dense, fine to medium grained, grey, moist. 7
P10 1.00 : - Ss
- ‘| SAND (SP) Medium dense, fine to medium grained, light grey, moist. q
- ] SPT q
- 59.9 q
P_ 2.0 2.00 Ne
i" Me Silty SAND (SM) Medium dense, fine to medium grained, dark brown, low 4
~ 2.25 plasticity fines q
— Silty SAND (SM) Medium dense, fine to medium grained, dark brown, low 4
_ plasticity fines, wet. "x
F 30 4
i ] SPT o
- Of, 34,8 4
a of Nelz a
F 40 GY J
= | sPT q
s 7,10,12 4
50 Nel 3
| = 5.50 . 4
- 5.75". SAND (SP) Medium dense, fine to coarse grained, brown, trace of fine size a
i . eI 4
- 6.0 SAND (SP) Medium dense, fine to medium grained, grey. 3
E | SPT q
— 12,18,20 q
_— . Nwas 7
= Sandy GRAVEL (GC) Very dense, fine to medium size, grey and light grey, D qj
- fine to coarse grained sand. q
p70 SAND (SP) Medium dense, fine to medium grained, light grey. SS
_ | SPT q
a 32,12,14 4
- 80 N=26 4
go 4
a | SPT q
- 15,1911 a
- 9.50 [22 SAND (SP) Medium dense, fine to medium grained, yellow brown mottled grey. N=30 a
- Sandy CLAY (CH) Hard, high plasticity, grey mottled grey brown, fine to 4
medium grained sand. qa
| E 10.0 NS . 7
COMMENTS
1) Groundwater not observed.

 

 

Page 37

Aa

ak

 

 

Fux 61 7 3380 6060

Soil Surveys Engineering Ply. Limited BOREHOLE RECORD SHEET

ere
Gereitog Gevaert eign REECO No. 195
‘email [email protected] 3
wel La :

Huelzso chi Breet Une sa umrance ryt Progusen ve Borehole Number :
Pescigen0 4008 rng 3211 Boxer 0 4575

Pret 73989 e000 Pros? 6499 1753

Project Number :
Project Name : Surf Club Extension -

Pret? 8805 1528
Fox 8t 7 5578 3910

305-2325

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1) Groundwater not observed,

Easting: Northing : RL: Location : Hasting St., Noosa Heads
Logger: JM Driller; JM Drilling Rig: GemcoHP7 Client : Noosa Surf Club
Date: 07/02/2006 Page : 2
Drilling Method 2 :
th 2 a Samples and

> ele |els Depth § Description Remarks
\
C 10.70 N | q
iE Gravelly CLAY (CH) Hard, high plasticity, jotted grey brown, fi 3
rr 1t.0 11.00 WN size ye aah fee ta Ee eae arey ne —
- SANDSTONE (XW) / Sandy CLAY (CH) Extremely to very weak, light grey, with 4
- bands of high plasticity fines. a
F 120 4
~~ Tz
S ] SPT 4
Ss 4,812 -
- N=20 4
F 13.0 =
C | Ser q
F 14.0 Nesp 4
- :] SANDSTONE (XW) Very weak, light grey. q

a F 15.0 J
C 15.00 Borehole 15.00m SPT J
- Terminated 4121 4
F 16.0 3
E ;
C 7
F 17.0 =

| F J

F 18.0
F 90 3
F 20.0 7

COMMENTS

Approved: SIG
Date : -AB/2/08

ISSUE No. 1.1 08/1097 RS007B

 

 

 

Page 38

tyes

ma i
- Project 305-2326

February, 2006

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

X

-- @ SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING ~~ =~

Page 39

Record of Borehole Consuttiny Gooteckolesterigisc

 

 

 

 

Quemaiand 4064
roeeny
Client A. TOO AND PARTNERS (NC) PTY. LTO. Miser
fou Pine Road
Stratteine. Queerstend 4500
vr, NOOSA HEADS.  SOlSurveys: ema
Location Bentrine Brock, Ceeerctang 4575
o7193t733
ber 84M/1175 gre ar ocwome soeet
on 4TH SEPTEMBER, 1984 Page 1 of 2 one
Borehole number 1 | surface Rt Sampling and field testing
Deptnot | crassitcation Be | Depinim | type | retaeen
change tm) | Australian Standara 1726-1981 . used . resurs
0.00) SAND (SP) _ |v
Loose, fine to medium grained, .
light grey and light brown, moist. 3.00-3.45| SPT | 3,4,6
: N=10
» 4,60 SAND (SW)
Loose, fine to coarse grained,
dark brown, moist.
5.00 SAND_(SW) ased
AS above at 4.60m but wet. Wash 6.00-6.45| sPT | 34,6
ore N=10
7.20 SAND
Loose, well graded, light 7.50-7.95| SPT | 3,4,7
grey, large amount of seashells, N=7}

wet.

9.20 SAND_(SW)

As above at 7.20m but some fine
to medium sized gravel.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9.70 Sandy CLAY (CH)

Stiff, medium to high plasticity,
light grey, well graded sand,

( some fine to medium sized grave
moist.

10.50 Sandy CLAY (CH) : 10.50-10.95 SPT | 13,8,13
As above at 9.70m but some N=21
coarse sized gravel in loose
to medium dense layers (100-200mm
thick). .

11.00 SAND (SW)

Well graded, loose to medium
dense, grey with yellow
brown layers, wet.
~--/Cont.
‘Waer
Drilitype JACRO 350 nored = § 00m
Seeacty
Dritter 3. MANNS level

 

 

‘Vane shes valve, kPa
[2 Undtsurbed Soown dem. nie senpte heave
or

me
Non iien bee renown oon Bren 9.0 7a harrrar, toll Otro, driving 30 oecrwe taper cone
Man eta ang Crop toner torte Meee bow coxa nowhT Jethe mermet of Cone tem, .

Race

at roc Bnamer
eo 500mm.
P| Mand penetrometer eximate of aptae screngch, KPa

Page 40

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Borehole Consulting Geotactonnal Engr
ing hla
07369 e000
POR 317 4088
Ctient A. TOD AND PARTNERS (NC) PTY. LTD. Pre
Soother. Goceratend 4500
Project NOOSA SURF CLUB Soll Surveys CTR Me mus
Location NOOSA HEADS Pott a
on 93 173)
84M/1175 Lina 4/3 Thorsborne Sereet
be: 2
cae ~—sATH SEPTEMBER, 1984 Page 1 of 2 own
Borehole number 1 Cont. | surtacer Sampling and field testing
Depth of Classification Bit Depth tm) Type Fietd test
Ehange(m) | Australian Seandard 4726-1981 vedt resus
11.8 Silty Sandy CLAY (CH)
Hard, medium to high plasticity, 12.00-12.30 SPT] 12,23/150m
red brown and light grey, fine N>46
to medium grained sand, some
fine sized gravel.
12.79 Sandy S$ Y /
Stiff, medium plasticity, ligtit 15.00-15.45 SPT| 5,7,9
grey and yellow brown, fine grained N=i6:
sand, moist. 18.00-18.90 USO] pags
21.18 ndy Silt Y 21.00-21.45 SPT; 9,15,22
As above at 12.70m but stronger, N=37
tending to Siltstone (extremely
weathered).
21.49 BOREHOLE TERMINATED.
Orititype JACRO 350 neced 5 .00m
Steady
peter 3. MANNS eels
p> uaeeutes Ston ctam soe meres scomm ¥ vee .
“ Gruagemmenngemstomtermcneent  inewnmort BE SERRE mare prtten enro mann teere

P Band penetrometer eximate of shear srengch, &Pa

ae

: tp

Page 41

Record of Borehole

 

Soil Surveys and Exploration Pty Lto
eys and Expl " y

Consulting

12 Meewesier Torracs
Matron, Queenatand, 4084

Engineers

Unit 1, 27 Lawrence Drive,
Nereng, Quescateed, 4211

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“phone: (07) 388 6000. #0. Boa 22
fox: 157) 208 4680 Ashmore City Cid 4214
CHlent The Tod Group (8C) Pty Ltd 0, Bon 37 na, aonn eam (O7R1 96 1308
Unh 3, 1? Duetroon Street Uni 1, Let 10 Larniernay Sree
Project Proposed Extensions SoliSurveys sie cone oo i ee ,
tocstion = Noosa Surf Life Saving Club meme
om 11 Production Avenue
Kewera Weters, Queensiand, 457+
dobnumper 90K/324 Ciercnemyaore, Qusendand, 455)
Date 21/12/90 Fao tonsa east
Borehole number BH2 Surface RL Sampling and feld testing
Depth of Classification Bit Depth (m) type Field test
Saye tm} Australian Standard 1726-1981 used resutts
0.00]. SAND (SP) loose, fine to medium  <..|V we
grained, light grey, dry.
1.00] SAND (SP) loose, fine grained,
grey, dry. -60-1.95/SPT | 4,5,7
N=12
1.60)" loose to medium dense,
fine to medium grained, light brown
grey, moist.
2.30] SAND (SP) loose to medium dense,
fine to medium grained, dark brown,
moist.
2.60| As above, wet. $.00-3.45|SPT 614.5
N=
4.00! Continuous drilling with mud
circulation.
4.10] SAND (SP) loose, fine to coarse
grained, brown. 4.50-4.95/SPT |3,3,3
N=6
5.40] As above, grey.
$.00-6.465/SPT | 3,4,4
6.80} Gravelly SAND (SP) medium dense, N=8
fine to coarse grained, tight
brown and grey, fine to coarse
sized gravel, wet.
7.20) As above, fine to medium sized
gravel. -50-7.95/SPT | 11,10,8
N=18
7.80) SAND (SP) medium dense, fine to
medium grained, light brown.
(Continued)
Drititype Jacro 350 Water 2.60m
Driller J. Manns. and B. Champ. steady -

 

 

 

 

UW 50 Undisturbed Somm diam, tube sampie

0 Disturbed Sample

SPT Standard Penetration Test. N Vatue is number of blows to drive SOmm sampler 300mm
with a 63.4k9 drop haremer failing 76zmm. Blow caunt shown} Jisthe number of
blows required to drive 50 300mm.

P and pevetromete: estimate of shear strength, kPa

S$ Vane shear value, kPa
V_ Steel V Bt
i Tungsten Carbide Bit

OC Oyram Cone Test. 9.09%g hammer, fall SGBmm, driving SP dnreetaper cone
fied to rods of smatter section.

Page 42

Rate

tou os:

i x,
og v

 

 

 

 

Record of Borehole - Sonauhany Geotecincal engineers
Moon Severn Novag, Oueerennds S20
Ror GSES AE oe ae
Client The Tod Group (SC) Pty Ltd ce. tums, ace Fant” fel bs sone
. Unit 3, 17 Duntroon Bt: unit, Lorne Lschterney per!
Project Proposed Extensions SoilSu Potente foe laa toes
Location Noosa Surf Life Saving Club Drona: 107 08 sass Fen: Riloar
™ Kovara Warr, Gusenind, 457
dobnumber =90K/324 Ratenciny ee, Cuwensiand, 4551
Date 21/12/90 Fen” ont ba dea?
Borehole number BH2 (Cont'd Surtace re Sampting and fieid resting
Bepth at Classification Bh Depth im) Type | Fleldeest
change|m) | — Austratian Standard 1726-1981 used results
8.30} SAND (SP) medium-dense, fine to Vv “How,
medium grained, grey. 9.00-9.45 |SPT oedee tT
=.
10.05 Silty Sandy CLAY (CH) very stiff,
high plasticity, light grey and 0.580 SPT |5,7,8
blewish grey, fine to medium N=15 : Y
grained sand,
11.66 As above with yellow brown and
red brown layers. 2.00 SPT |8,8,12
N=20 |

12.45 Borehole Discontinued

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i ‘Water
Orilltype Jacro 350 need 2.60m
Dritier J. Manns, and B. Champ. seaty =
USO Undisturbed Somm diam. tube sample ‘Vane shear value, KPa
D_ Disturbed Sampte V_ Steeiv Bit
SPT Standard Penetration Test, N Valve is number of blows ta drive 50mm sampler 300mm TC Tungsten Carbide Bit
with a 63.6k9 crop hatrmer falling 762mm. Blow count shown { Jis the number ot oc Symamic Cone Test. 9.079 hammer, fail SOBmm, driving 30 degree taper cone
blows required to drive U50 300mm. ) fitted to rods of smaller section.

P Hand penetrometer estimate of sheay strength, kPa

Page 43

*

“aM

Project 305-2325
February, 2006

 

 

 

# SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 44

vee ‘

° te 7

 

Soil & Water Laboratories P/L

10 Finchiey St Mitton, Queenland 4064.
Phone: (07) 3369

6668; Fax (07) 3503

9063

Screening Test

    

For Sol Surveys Engineering Pty Lid, 11 Production Avenue, Kawana Waters Qid. 4575, RECREDITANION ‘

Ref. Number. 14 - 2325

 

 

 

This Document fs issued in
Project Number: 30S - 2325 accordance «=o with = NATA's
‘accrediation requirements

Noosa SLSC.
Certificate Number: 100701 Accrodited for compliance with
SSOMEC 17025,
Date: 15022008. Date Received: 3001/2008 Date Tested: 31/01/2006 Page: 1 of 1

(1:5 susp.)
1M NaCl

ty

 

for and on behalf of Soll and Water Laboratories PA,

 

‘Samples supplied by others
‘Samples tested in ‘as received condition
‘The results of the tests, calibrations and/or measurements included in this document are traceable to Australianynational standards

1
2
3.
4. NATAis a signatory to the APLAC mutual recognition arrangement for the mutual recognition of the equivalence of tasting, calibration and inspection reports.

Page 45

 

$@0b D3V0S1
Ua Boren GLUnD 40} peypaxoy

swawembas =» uogeypanog

 

ouviiasuoay
‘poeoaee HORE.

 

 

 

 

 

1» o Bs]
SRUEPURIS RUCRELUBIEASTY 0} EER) G42 ]UBLUTOOP 61] LU] PEPNPUY S|UALUENSEALL JO/PUB SUOREAGIED ‘SISE) BY] JO SINSY OUL
uogpuan panRoa se, ul peysen SORES
svatgo Aq papddns saxdiues
“S002 SALE LOU AEIRIONET NOS NERS DEN, sca a pagosgp stmt i Sau BONDS Y FEN 40 WOUIIESOQ PUETSUBEND |

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

40'0 S0z o'o | oo Szz 00Z 90-92+¢t | 9040420 oc
£90 i ¥ i Sz hb 00°8 80-994¢1 | 9009380 Ca
200 ost 90-924-7Z0 | SO-UBMOt
100 O't $0-99+7Z0} BO-UP-OF
190 osz 80-99+Z0 | BO-UEOT
£ loo o 00's 9O-99s70 | BOC OT.
Qn tom) ] (sw) tue ed [GON md) | Oe (core) | mmm) meus] fla | fdecg | eoyscR | PaerkeoD | panos ae
= wea |e ann | Paatres | mae pen ~noneoemuepy am | ca | onde
SZEZCUE JEGUINN POH 904945) FIED
‘OSTS eScON
SETH) JOqUIN J8y ° 0000) 4OqLUNN SyeyNI8D
(ez 8 vez "Ezz ZBL Zve SpoRU)
WL ebeg

“SIS PFD SEM BuBMETy ‘enUaNY LOPONpAlY 11 ‘PT Ad Guyseuug shenns pos 04
SOY TSS APIS TaD SIGE  INTUINS SGTINpSy WT |WOI

 

   

POO? CTD VOM JseKS ARH GL

westsesme NG
1/ dl SO1IOeIOGE'T FIeY\ 2 [10S ieee =e

Page 46

Project 305-2325
February, 2006

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

# SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 47

 

 

 

 

91s

PV! o-czez-soe 9871S SAVAH VSOON|_____ 220310
‘ON ONIMVU . , NV 1d SLIS 90-aa4-St
aiva

 

SYSSANISNA IWOINHDSLOS9S ONILINSNOD

 

 

 

 

OaLIWITALd QNINSSNIONA SASANNS TIOS a,
SABAING oS F- area

ee aren Tema rf

 

    

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

       

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

ace eneneeap--es

io i
ret
ot
| joe
i
; ot 4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Page 48

 

LL] 29590

 

=ay] ‘ey tana se

 

e*t

nual prsattn a Hs

 

OOz 4 398039 “@ ‘SNIQKO "3

210% prow! pepe

 

 

 

£002 AYH Wadd¥) “1 VaNISAdd Ss

a0] wea sta]

 

   

20H OF
vr
OL1 ‘Ald WAds

 

Waly yDuNy snus
SYB3BNIONA ONILINSNOD

VSOON GOL

 

 

No wor2UpoUussep «WYN?
9060 YL4S LO “XWS Lead 9095 LO “Hd
9959 GTO. JTUAVSOON "SLS SYHOHL @ AUYW UN)

PIT Aid GTaIsHOLIG dv¥GdiN
oe Nyuy

nr PEN) CUYDOSSY

 

 

’ JOULNOD NOISONS
GNV SYYOMHLYV4

TUL NAVIN

 

 

‘OSTS
SdV3H YSOON 10)
Sdv3H VSOON
133a1S SONILSVH
SNOILIGGY CNV
SNOMVUALIY daSOd0ud

rad
ed

r

 

parm ton} ad] tay

 

 

NOISSHGNS SHIM TYNOMLYYIO | LOCO} ¥

 

 

 

 

 

"BLS NO
QMO 30 LNAWMIINTHHO) FUOLIG STHAYIS ORUSDG THY
ONILYDO1 YOS TTBISNOdSIY 29 OL St YOLIVYINOD SHL

TAATT JVIENS OIHSINIY SALONIT gz
‘WAAR CRLVAVKY S3L0NI0 a2"

‘TBAT DNUSIXE SILONIO &

 

oe Tei

igen

Sher

|;

Ww lv GSngTUKN M251 ITS

Ee

wa a > 8 4

NVid ALIS

         

LigKOL¥) ONS LY
UTWAVE LNARITES 3HAOYd

 

O66-GELE SY NI IND 135 S¥ GUVONVIS | TAI] ¥ OL

US3NDND TVINHIILOID ¥ AG CIHMLYID 39 OL S| ROWIVGHO) THY TI¥
V2 682L “SV OV

AUSN30 ABO %S6 1S¥I] LY 04 C3I¥dKO) CNY SY2AVT BOOZ
"X¥H NM) GUY 1d 38 OL SI THs SIML “%01 40 2OVNNISHS UVANIT "XY
ONY %02 30 X30NI AIDILSYId “X¥H * GOO) 40 3ZIS INOLS “XYK
%& JO NOLYIUDIGS YA) “NIM ¥ 3AVH OL THd O3AOUddY C3LYCdHt
“TUS OIAOUddY OILYOdH! HLM CIV IdFa 32

OL Sl TVIMALVH SIKL “LIS WOU4 C2AOW3Y ONY OZLYAVIX3 30 OL SI

* M3BNDNG 3AL Ad 031230 S¥ * CNNOYD TIGVLINSNA ANY CNY G3710Y

34004d N3HL 38 O1 SI AVMIAIUO ONY WYOSLYTd ONIOTING JHE
“BUS SIHL NO TU3 Td S¥ 3S BOs

THVANS LON SI TMALYW SIHL “AVAIAIMO ONY HYOJI¥Id OWING
FAL ROU C3ddULS 3@ 01 UY BILEYW JINVOYO ONINIVINO) STOS

* LON SNYOMHLYV

 

 

SHUOK
SNIOTING YOd AYMIA
ALRADNOD DNLLSIXE 35/1

 

 

 

 

 

 

v

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

puorey
owen

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

¥ald FWLX3ILOI9

ONNOYD OLNI
wwa09 N3AC
SLO WLS

"NIG O3A0¥ddY NY _NIHLIM O3NIV1NO)

3@ O1 HSIGANY NOILINYISNOD THY “SxYOM ONIUNG
“ORHSITGV1S3 St ONIDVISONY' ONY Y3A0) SS¥YD

TUNN GANIVINIVW 39 TIVHS GNY “SXYOMHLUY3 40
ANSWIINIWRO) FYOSIG 03193YI 38 OL $3IN3

“SHINAI LNIWIGIS JO AVM Ad
S3BVONNOG FHL OL TOHINOD LNIHIG3S JOIAOYd

* YONINO) INAWIaS

 

FONSI TOYLNOD LNSWIG3SS

e

wuz

Devs
t

   

  

  

   

 

NOILI3UIO

     
  

V38V O38YNLSIO

 

   
        

  

HS3W T33LS
YO J8IM

oe emmy dor

 

 

 

Page 49

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ls to) ena] 695 Way cones ae FITS j NOULYURGA Hos TONNO) JUS YSOON JHL OL C3LLMBNS ONY

ao ———————— eae OLN 38142 38 SMW LIVYINO) ZDNVAGLNYH Y “STVAQBLNI

od ese os 0, 1279 8 O ONY "BAYH 3S¥@ GVH R1D¥<WO) $4 46) 40 [OS] MINOW € LY 'YO12¥4LNO) C3AGUddY {3HLO UO ‘eBYNLIYSONVH

wit | mwa | baono0 > a wwugot NO GVS AVA3ARO 3180N0) 20H. SHS, HHL AG C3AOH3Y 38 OTNOHS 11S ONY SVX ONY TO 3HL
oa i mona

lowe AVM | uaddva | WanusAdd °S | NV 1d JIS GRUNDY SV “NW SZZ HSH 4¥7 STWAGRLNI BV TNSY

 

WAA0) ws? ~ OL SIH 2L1S HLM COINS LV 13NSV@ INVANTI0d SSOWD 3HL NVIT) ONY 1934SNI OL
uct AYES 25¥a OvOR GBL2¥dHOD We 88) 0 [00H] YOLDVAINOD ¥ 3DV9N3 TIVHS GAIT) JUNS 3H1 0 LNSHAOWNVH JHL
LD aL SINVINTIOd $SO¥D SV TAM SY 3S¥3U9 ONY

‘WO $19FTIO) VEL LNVLNTIOd SSOYD 90S0Id SO) CYVHYIAR 3HL

*“V'd'D 0d NV Id JINVNSINIVW

 

yar) youngansys
SUFINIONS_ONITINSNOS

VYSOON GOL

Rorwor2uppow@ubisap —: YVH-3
9060 19S LO "XVS § —-LLBO LYS LO “Hd
9957 G10 3TIAYSOON “SLS SYHOHL ? AUVH "UND

PY Ald 7aISHOLIG dvadIN

      

7006 “ON “DUO “GIS
“TSN HUA DNVGYODY Ne
SNISSON) BV INDHIA 3134)N0)

 

 

 

 

YALVMAYOLS
GNY YVdYdvO

‘YSTS
SGV3H VSOON 40)
Sdv3H VSOON
L3a3uLS SONILSVH

SNOLLIGGY GNV
SNOILVUSL1V G3SOd0ud

ane

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NOISSINGNS SYYOM TWNOLLVYRdO | LO'L'E
SANSH3UINOSY TONG) OL C3SIAIY | 10°68

 

home soo) ee
v
4

 

9 WW eve) doy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“2S NO
MHOM JO LN3W3DNSWNO) 34039 SIWAYIS ONUSIXG TY
NLLYDOT YO4 FIGISNOGSY 38 OL SI YOLIVYNOD 3HL

TAT] DVSUNS CGHSINY S3L0NI0— g-7

 

 

 

‘TRA31 G3LVAVIX3 S3L0N30 wz"

 

TAA31 SNLLSIX] S3L0N30 s

 

 

 

 

Page 50

Fi 4.70

 

 

 

 

EXISTING CONDITIONS
STEP STEP @ STEP @

CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURE :

1. INSTALL STEEL SHEET PILING ADJACENT TO
EXISTING SURFCLUB BUILDING AS SHOWN ON

PROGRESSIVELY EXCAVATE SAND IN FRONT
OF SHEET INSTALLING ‘DEAD MAN’
ANCHORS AS SET OUT ON THE DESIGN
CERTIFIED BY A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER
AND SUPPLIED BY THE PILING CONTRACTOR
ALL EXCAVATED CLEAN SAND IS TO BE

PLACED ON THE BEACH DIRECTLY IN FRON
C OF THE SURF CLUB
t

SHEET PILING NOTE :

OURS TO UOTE Sal Geen eke® ND BESTALL
600 DIA. CONCRETE AND GROUND BEAMS
SPRAY SILICA FUME CONCRETE | 5¢ MPa @ 28 DAYS } TO FACE
OF SHEET PILING TO BASEMENT WALL
« FORH- AND POUR GROUND FLOOR SLAB OVER

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONCRETE VEHICULAR CROSSING g
IW ACCORDANCE WIFH N:S.C.
‘STD, DRG. No. 9002 '
in 24, 219 ls a
i. ol 6
DATUM 0.00 1

    

FOUNDING LEVEL REQUIRED FOR PILE
CAPACITIES, IS TO BE CONFIRMED BY
SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING PTY, LTD.

 

RL. -9.00
ESTIMATED NOMINAL DEPTH

 

VERT. SCALE 1: 100
HOR. SCALE 1: 100

TYPE WALL CONSTRUCTION

‘SECTION A
SECTION B SIMILAR

1000 800 600 400 200 9 ‘Lom
a — rt — eee
SCALE 1; 20, UNREDUCED AT AI

STEP ©

CRACK CONTROL JOINT - C

DRIVEWAY LONGITUDINAL SECTION

PROGRESSIVELY EXCAVATE AND
“DEAD MAN’ ANCHORS AS

 

 

CRACK-A-JOINT
OR SAW CUT

PROVIDE JOINTS TO SLAB ON GROUND
AT 6.0M MAX. CRS. BOTH WAYS

  

POLYTHENE MEMBRANE YQ
(1 Sn SAND BEDDING

| | |

KEYED JOINT - KJ

PROVIDE JOINTS TO SLAB ON GROUND
AT 6.0M MAX. CRS. BOTH WAYS

 

 

REVISED TO COUNCIL REQUIREMENTS
OPERATIONAL WORKS SUBMISSION

PROPOSED ALTERATIONS

AND ADDITIONS

HASTINGS STREET

NOOSA HEADS

for NOOSA HEADS
S.L.S.C.

SITEWORKS AND
DRIVEWAY DETAILS

 
   
 
 

ASSOCIATED CONSULTANT

Architects
MIDDAP DITCHFIELD Pty Ltd

CNR. MARY & THOMAS STS. NOOSAVILLE QLD 4566
PH. 07 5474 0677 FAX. 07 5474 0906
E-MAIL ;  [email protected]

TOD NOOSA

CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Structural Civil

  
     
       
  

20 Mary Street, Noosaville
P.O Box 233, Noosa Heads. 04567
Phone 107) 5449 9600 Fax (07) S449 9496
EMail. tedneesalbigpondnet cu