Original source · versioned page text
Attachment F - Geotechnical Report
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed Commercial & Residential Development 30-32 Doonella St Tewantin Report for Doonella Street Unit Trust Report 18151-001-Rev0 22 June 2018 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 (Attachment F - Geotechnical Report.pdf)
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 29 pages
Page 2
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA ST, TEWANTIN
Document Review
Document No. Revision Prepared By Reviewed By Date Issued
001 0 Ben Zelazny Ashley Davey 22 June 2018
Report Distribution
Document Revision Method of Delivery Issued To
Mr Chris Wright
001 0 Electronic
([email protected])
Mr Adrian Just
001 0 Electronic
([email protected])
Mr Mat Bruton
001 0 Electronic
([email protected])
Prepared By: Reviewed By:
Benjamin Zelazny Ashley Davey RPEQ 8159
Engineering Geologist Principal Geotechnical Engineer
22 June 2018
Report No. 18151-001-Rev0 i
Page 3
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA ST, TEWANTIN
Executive Summary
This report details the results of a geotechnical investigation undertaken for a proposed commercial and
residential development at 30-32 Doonella St, Tewantin. The investigation was performed by Tectonic for
Doonella Street Unit Trust.
The investigation comprised drilling of boreholes at five locations, together with in situ strength testing and
geotechnical laboratory analyses. This report summarises the results of the investigation and provides
geotechnical recommendations regarding the design of earthworks, footings, site classification, retaining
walls, and pavements.
Design drawings prepared by Archicology indicate that the proposed development will comprise two to three
storey commercial and residential buildings, incorporating a partially in-ground basement for carparking.
Excavations for the basement will range up to about 3 m deep, with retaining walls proposed to support cut
batters.
Boreholes generally encountered consistent subsurface profiles which can be summarised as follows:
Loose to medium dense silty/clayey sands and gravels together with firm to stiff sandy/silty clays
(fill and natural materials) to depths of between 0.75 m and 1.5 m BGL; overlying
Mostly very stiff, medium to high plasticity natural silty clays to borehole termination at depths of 3 m
to 6 m BGL.
Groundwater seepage was not encountered in any of the boreholes at the time of investigation, with soils
being moist. However, it should be noted that groundwater seepage may develop at shallow depths within
permeable horizons, particularly following periods of heavy or prolonged rainfall.
A summary of our geotechnical recommendations is as follows:
Stripping depths to remove existing topsoil are likely to range up to about 300 mm.
Excavation to the design levels should be achievable using conventional earthmoving equipment
such as excavators with toothed buckets and small dozers with blades.
The proposed basement excavation extends to within 2 m to 5 m of the property boundaries.
Temporary batters within the existing fill materials may be formed at 1V:1H, say by ‘stepped’
battering and benching, provided that groundwater is not encountered.
Subject to detailed assessment of proposed excavation depths and existing site conditions (e.g.
proximity of existing structures such as buildings and services), it is anticipated that temporary
shoring should not be required.
Excavated materials should comprise mostly silty clays of high plasticity, which would be suitable
for re-use as structural fill subject to appropriate moisture control.
Conventional high level strip and pad footings founded within the very stiff (or stiffer) natural clays
may be designed to support the proposed building walls and columns, adopting an allowable
bearing capacity of 250 kPa.
Footing design may assume an equivalent site classification of Class M (AS2870:2011) based on
the natural soil profiles encountered.
Design of the basement level pavement may be based upon a CBR value of 3%, subject to
excavation and replacement of the natural silty clay subgrade with select granular fill (e.g. minimum
CBR 15% ‘roadbase’) to a minimum depth of 200 mm.
As the proposed basement excavation will not extend below RL 5 m AHD, an acid sulfate soil investigation
is not warranted for this project.
22 June 2018
Report No. 18151-001-Rev0 ii
Page 4
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA ST, TEWANTIN
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................ 1
2.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................................................... 1
3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................................................. 2
4.0 METHOD OF INVESTIGATION ................................................................................................................................. 4
4.1 Fieldwork ...................................................................................................................................................... 4
4.2 Laboratory Testing ........................................................................................................................................ 4
5.0 INVESTIGATION FINDINGS ..................................................................................................................................... 5
5.1 Geology ........................................................................................................................................................ 5
5.2 Subsurface Conditions.................................................................................................................................. 5
5.3 Laboratory Testing ........................................................................................................................................ 6
6.0 ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................................ 7
6.1 Earthworks .................................................................................................................................................... 7
6.1.1 Site Preparation ...................................................................................................................................... 7
6.1.2 Trafficability ............................................................................................................................................. 7
6.1.3 Excavations ............................................................................................................................................. 7
6.1.4 Batter Slopes .......................................................................................................................................... 7
6.1.5 Filling....................................................................................................................................................... 8
6.1.6 Material Suitability for Re-Use ................................................................................................................. 8
6.2 Building Foundations .................................................................................................................................... 8
6.2.1 Indicative Site Classification.................................................................................................................... 8
6.2.2 Footing Design ........................................................................................................................................ 8
6.3 Retaining Structures ..................................................................................................................................... 9
6.4 Pavement Design Parameters ...................................................................................................................... 9
6.5 Drainage ..................................................................................................................................................... 10
6.6 Acid Sulfate Soils ........................................................................................................................................ 10
7.0 LIMITATIONS .......................................................................................................................................................... 10
22 June 2018
Report No. 18151-001-Rev0 iii
Page 5
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA ST, TEWANTIN
TABLES
Table 1: Summary of Shrink-Swell Index Laboratory Testing.............................................................................................. 6
Table 2: Summary of CBR Laboratory Testing.................................................................................................................... 6
Table 3: Retaining Structure Design Parameters ................................................................................................................ 9
TEXT FIGURES
Text Figure 1: Proposed layout plan (upper) and section through building (lower) ............................................................. 1
Text Figure 2: Aerial image of site illustrating existing conditions (courtesy Google Earth) ................................................ 2
Text Figure 3: Looking north toward Lot 903 and position of borehole BH5 ........................................................................ 3
Text Figure 4: Looking north toward position of borehole BH3 on Lot 32 ............................................................................ 3
Text Figure 5: Extract from Gympie Special Geology Map.................................................................................................. 5
Text Figure 6: Footing depth required to minimise risk of undermining .............................................................................. 9
FIGURES
Figure 1: Site Plan
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
Borehole Reports and Explanatory Notes
APPENDIX B
Laboratory Test Certificates
APPENDIX C
Limitations
22 June 2018
Report No. 18151-001-Rev0 iv
Page 6
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA ST, TEWANTIN
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report details the results of a geotechnical investigation undertaken for a proposed commercial and
residential development at 30-32 Doonella Street, Tewantin. The investigation was performed by Tectonic for
Doonella Street Unit Trust in accordance with Proposal P16469-Rev1, dated 16 May 2018. Archicology are
the project architects and Alta Projects are the structural engineers.
The investigation comprised drilling of boreholes at five locations, together with in situ strength testing at
borehole locations, and geotechnical laboratory analyses. This report summarises the results of the
investigation and provides geotechnical recommendations regarding the design of earthworks, footings, site
classification, and retaining walls.
2.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
Design drawings prepared by Archicology (Ref. Project 16416, Drawing Nos. SD 01 to SD18) indicate that
the proposed development will comprise two to three level commercial and residential buildings,
incorporating a partially in-ground basement for carparking. Excavations for the basement will range up to
about 3 m deep, extending to within about 2 m to 5 m of existing boundaries, with retaining walls proposed to
support cut batters.
Text Figure 1 shows the proposed layout and a section through the building.
Text Figure 1: Proposed layout plan (upper) and section through building (lower)
22 June 2018
Report No. 18151-001-Rev0 1
Page 7
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA ST, TEWANTIN
3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
The site occupies two parcels of land described as Lot 32 on RP893427 and Lot 903 on T1631, covering a
total area of 2539 m2. The site has frontage to Doonella Street to the south, is bounded by at-grade
carparking areas to the north and east, with an existing residence to the west.
At the time of investigation, the site was occupied by houses and associated gardens including mature trees
and grassed areas, with driveways providing access from Doonella Street. It is understood that all structures
will be demolished and vegetation cleared. The ground surface dips gently in a south-easterly direction
across the site, falling approximately 3 m across the proposed building envelope.
Underground services generally extend from the Doonella Street frontage into the site, with existing sewers
running parallel to the northern and southern boundaries. Noosa Council stormwater infrastructure is
present along the boundary between Lot 32 and Lot 903.
An aerial photograph illustrating the site position is shown in Text Figure 2. Site conditions are shown in
Text Figures 3 and 4 on the following page.
Site boundary
Text Figure 2: Aerial image of site illustrating existing conditions (courtesy Google Earth)
22 June 2018
Report No. 18151-001-Rev0 2
Page 8
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA ST, TEWANTIN
Text Figure 3: Looking north toward Lot 903 and position of borehole BH5
Text Figure 4: Looking north toward position of borehole BH3 on Lot 32
22 June 2018
Report No. 18151-001-Rev0 3
Page 9
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA ST, TEWANTIN
4.0 METHOD OF INVESTIGATION
4.1 Fieldwork
A total of five boreholes were drilled across the site (designated BH1 to BH5) using a 4WD mounted
rotatory rig, owned and operated by Ground Drill Pty Ltd, utilising solid flight augering methods. Boreholes
BH1 and BH2 were drilled to depths of 6 m below ground level (BGL). Boreholes BH3 to BH5 were drilled
to depths of 3 m BGL. In situ soil strength was assessed by conducting dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP)
testing adjacent to and/or within each borehole, along with pocket penetrometer (PP) testing on clay
samples recovered from the auger and undisturbed (U50) tube samples.
The fieldwork was undertaken in the presence of an experienced engineering geologist from Tectonic on
5 June 2018. The engineering geologist was responsible for logging soil profiles in accordance with AS1726
Geotechnical site investigations, making groundwater observations, and recovering soil samples.
Boreholes were backfilled with auger cuttings on completion, with excess spoil mounded at the surface.
Borehole locations are shown in Figure 1, attached at the end of this report. Boreholes reports are attached
in Appendix A, together with explanatory notes.
4.2 Laboratory Testing
Undisturbed tube and bulk disturbed soil samples were dispatched to Geotech (SC) Pty Ltd, a NATA
accredited geotechnical laboratory located in Kawana, for geotechnical testing. Laboratory testing was
undertaken in accordance with Australian Standard AS1289 Method for Testing Soils for Engineering
Purposes and comprised:
2 (No.) Shrink-Swell Index tests to assess soil reactivity to moisture content changes.
1 (No.) single point CBR test, following a 4-day soak, to determine pavement subgrade strength.
Laboratory certificates are attached in Appendix B.
Laboratory results are summarised and discussed in Section 5.3.
22 June 2018
Report No. 18151-001-Rev0 4
Page 10
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA ST, TEWANTIN
5.0 INVESTIGATION FINDINGS
5.1 Geology
The 1:100,000 scale Gympie Special Geological Map (Sheet 9445 and Part 9545, DME 1999) indicates that
the site is underlain by the late Triassic to Jurassic age Myrtle Creek Sandstone (denoted as “RJdm”)
comprising “quartzose sandstone, orthoquartzite”. Mapping also indicates that this geological unit in the
Tewantin area exhibits a deep weathering profile of leached, kaolinised and mottled rocks. An extract from
the geological map is shown in Text Figure 5 below.
Site position
Weathering
pattern
Text Figure 5: Extract from Gympie Special Geology Map
5.2 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.
Boreholes generally encountered consistent subsurface profiles which can be summarised as follows:
Loose to medium dense silty/clayey sands and gravels together with firm to stiff sandy/silty clays
(fill and natural materials) to depths of between 0.75 m and 1.5 m BGL; overlying
Mostly very stiff, medium to high plasticity natural silty clays (inferred residual soils derived from
weathering of the Myrtle Creek Sandstone) to borehole termination at depths of 3 m to 6 m BGL.
Fill materials were encountered to 0.75 m depth in all boreholes, except borehole BH4 where inferred
natural soils were intersected directly under the silty sand topsoil (which typically extended up to 250 mm
deep).
Groundwater seepage was not encountered in any of the boreholes at the time of investigation, with soils
being moist. However, it should be noted that groundwater seepage may develop at shallow depths within
permeable horizons, particularly following periods of heavy or prolonged rainfall.
22 June 2018
Report No. 18151-001-Rev0 5
Page 11
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA ST, TEWANTIN
5.3 Laboratory Testing
Shrink-Swell Index testing was carried out on two undisturbed samples. Table 1 below summarises the
results of this testing.
Table 1: Summary of Shrink-Swell Index Laboratory Testing
BH No. Depth (m) Linear Shrinkage (%)
BH1 3.5-3.8 1.7
BH3 1.5-1.8 2.1
The above laboratory testing indicates that the natural silty clay materials tested are moderately reactive to
‘normal’ soil moisture content changes.
Table 2 below summarises the results of laboratory testing conducted on a bulk soil sample recovered from
the likely basement carpark subgrade in borehole BH1.
Table 1: Summary of CBR Laboratory Testing
Maximum Optimum
Field Moisture
BH No. Depth (m) Dry Density Moisture CBR (%) Swell (%)
Content (%)
(t/m3) Content (%)
BH1 0.8-1.1 1.69 23.8 19.5 2 3.9
CBR testing returned values of 2% for the natural silty clay sample from borehole BH1, at the approximate
proposed subgrade level. Field moisture content of the clay was 4.3% ‘wet’ of optimum moisture content.
The swell of 3.9% recorded was relatively high but is common when low CBR values are recorded.
Full test results are given on the laboratory certificates presented in Appendix B.
22 June 2018
Report No. 18151-001-Rev0 6
Page 12
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA ST, TEWANTIN
6.0 ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT
6.1 Earthworks
Excavations up to approximately 3 m BGL are proposed for the basement, extending to within about 2 m to
5 m of the property boundaries. No significant filling is proposed.
6.1.1 Site Preparation
Following demolition and clearing of vegetation, stumps, tree roots and disused services should be grubbed
out. Any topsoil should be stripped and stockpiled away from the construction area. We anticipate stripping
depths up to about 300 mm, although deeper pockets of topsoil may exist. Organic rich topsoil materials
should not be used as structural fill, however may be used in landscaping areas.
Following stripping and excavation to the design levels, the subgrade is expected to comprise mostly very
stiff natural clays. Subgrade areas should be ‘proof rolled’ using a fully laden water cart to identify any ‘soft
spots’. Treatment of ‘soft spots’ may involve excavation and replacement with select fill or tyning,
appropriate moisture adjustment and compaction. Proof rolling must be carried out in the presence of a
suitably qualified and experienced RPEQ engineer.
The excavation subgrade should be graded to shed surface water runoff away from the construction area. It
would be prudent to install diversion drains at regular intervals around the site to control stormwater runoff
and to prevent flows over cut batters.
It should be noted that during wet weather, the natural soils will tend to cause turbid stormwater run-off due
to the high clay component. It is recommended that subgrades should be ‘sealed off’ by several passes of a
smooth drum roller at the end of each working day to minimise erosion potential during rainfall events.
6.1.2 Trafficability
Following stripping, the natural clay subgrades should generally be trafficable for most construction plant,
however would tend to lose trafficability when affected by rainfall and from repetitive wheel loadings,
particularly from heavy rubber tyred plant. Placement of a granular select fill (e.g. minimum CBR 15%)
nominally 150 mm thick may be required on heavily trafficked areas (e.g. site entry/driveway) to prevent
softening of the clay subgrade and loss of trafficability, which may be incorporated into the permanent works.
Specific design will need to be carried out for working platform requirements for any heavy plant (e.g. cranes
or piling rigs).
6.1.3 Excavations
Excavations within the existing fill and natural soils to the design levels (about 3 m BGL) and for
services/footings (i.e. up to about 2 m deeper) should generally be achievable using conventional
earthmoving plant (e.g. excavators with toothed bucket attachments or small dozers with blades).
6.1.4 Batter Slopes
Temporary cuts in the natural clay materials on site should be formed no steeper than 1V:1H. This may be
achieved by ‘stepped’ vertical batters and horizontal benches not more than 1 m high/wide. Flatter
temporary batters may be required if groundwater seepage is encountered, or if earthworks are undertaken
during a period of heavy rainfall.
Subject to detailed assessment of proposed excavation depths and existing site conditions (e.g. proximity of
existing structures such as buildings and services), it is anticipated that temporary shoring should not be
required. If necessary, it is anticipated that sheet piles (cantilevered, propped or anchored) would be
suitable for the encountered ground conditions to provide temporary lateral restraint.
Permanent cuts in natural stiff (or stiffer) materials and controlled fill batters may be formed at 1V:2H for
batters up to 3 m in height. We understand that the basement cuts will be supported using engineer
designed retaining walls.
The above recommendations do not supersede any existing safety regulations or legislation applicable to
excavations e.g. limits on personnel entry into trenches.
22 June 2018
Report No. 18151-001-Rev0 7
Page 13
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA ST, TEWANTIN
Any permanent batters must be protected from erosion (e.g. with landscaping and geosynthetic erosion
matting).
Any excavations required adjacent to existing structures, will need to be specifically designed to ensure that
the structures are not adversely affected (refer Text Figure 6 in Section 6.2.2).
6.1.5 Filling
Any structural fill placed on this site must be compacted at moisture contents within the range of ±2% of
optimum moisture content for Standard Compaction. Fill particles greater than 100 mm must be excluded.
Fill should be placed in maximum 250 mm thick (loose thickness) layers and be compacted by repeated
rolling to achieve a dry density ratio of at least 98% of the maximum Dry Density Ratio (Standard
Compaction method), or 75% of the Dry Density Index for cohesionless fills (e.g. sands).
Confirmatory compaction testing must be carried out at regular intervals. Details for inspection and testing of
fill are given in Australian Standard AS 3798-2007 Guidelines on Earthworks for Commercial and Residential
Developments.
6.1.6 Material Suitability for Re-Use
Materials excavated from the basement area are expected to comprise predominantly medium to high
plasticity silty clays. These materials, where free of deleterious matter (e.g. vegetation), should be suitable
for placement as structural fill subject to appropriate moisture control. If placed as controlled fill under a
building pad, it should be noted that the equivalent site classification would likely be at least H1 per AS2870.
6.2 Building Foundations
6.2.1 Indicative Site Classification
Site classifications for residential footing design are assessed 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
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 and the applicability of the AS2870 classification to the
footing design must be assessed by the structural engineer.
Due to the presence of fill to depths of up to 0.75 m, the site is initially classified Class P in accordance with
AS2870. However, based upon the natural soil profiles encountered in the boreholes, the site could be
reclassified as equivalent to Class M if the fill was removed. Ground surface movements of between 20 mm
and 30 mm are estimated due to seasonal moisture content variation.
It should be noted that the predicted order of movement is based on the existing soil profile (i.e. no cutting or
filling), and moisture content changes within soils due to normal seasonal moisture variations only.
6.2.2 Footing Design
Conventional high level strip and pad footings founded within the very stiff (or stiffer) natural clays may be
designed to support the proposed building walls and columns, adopting an allowable bearing capacity of
250 kPa. Should greater load carrying capacity be required, deeper bored piles founded within the very stiff
(or stiffer) clay could be adopted.
Subject to design and construction in accordance with the above recommendations, settlements are
expected to be within building serviceability limits (less than 25 mm).
If any subsurface 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.
All footings should found such that they are not adversely affected by any adjacent excavations, batter
slopes, trenches, or retaining walls that are not designed to support loads. To minimise the potential for any
adverse interaction effects, footings should found at least below a plane extending 1 m horizontally from the
base of trenches/excavations/retaining walls, then rising up at 1V:1H. This requirement is illustrated in Text
Figure 6 on the following page.
22 June 2018
Report No. 18151-001-Rev0 8
Page 14
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA ST, TEWANTIN
Text Figure 6: Footing depth required to minimise risk of undermining
6.3 Retaining Structures
Design for retaining structures could be carried out using a triangular pressure distribution applicable to the
wall type and based on the parameters listed in Table 3. The values in Table 3 assume that the walls are
fully drained and no allowance is included for hydrostatic pressures, construction loading, up-slope footing
loadings, the effects of sloping ground and backfill compaction stresses. Retaining structures should be
engineer designed in accordance with AS4678-2002 Earth-retaining structures.
Table 3: Retaining Structure Design Parameters
Lateral earth pressure coefficients
Unit
Friction
Retained material weight
angle (°) Ka Ko
(t/m3) Kp
(Cantilever wall) (Non-yielding wall)
Stiff/Medium Dense
1.8 27 0.38 0.55 2.7
Materials to 1 m BGL
Very Stiff Natural Clays
1.9 30 0.33 0.5 3.0
> 1 m BGL
Future Fill * * * * *
Note: * Depends on fill material type and level of compaction.
Subsurface drainage must be installed behind any retaining walls in order to prevent the development of
hydrostatic pressure, e.g. slotted ‘aggi’ pipe wrapped in filter ‘sock’ placed in gravel backfill.
6.4 Pavement Design Parameters
Based on laboratory testing results, design of pavements may be based upon a CBR value of 3%, subject to
excavation and replacement of the natural silty clay subgrade with select granular fill (e.g. minimum CBR
15% ‘roadbase’) to a minimum depth of 200 mm.
Proposed pavement subgrades must be ‘proof rolled’ and visually assessed by an experienced RPEQ
engineer to ensure no heaving or unacceptable subgrade deflection occurs. Should heaving or deflection
occur, excavation of ‘soft spots’ may be required, followed by reinstatement with compacted select granular
fill.
The recommended design CBR value is applicable to properly drained subgrades only, and must be
confirmed by subgrade inspection and testing by an experienced engineer following earthworks. ‘Properly
drained subgrades’ require open graded drains, site grades that shed water and prevent ponding, and
subsurface drains adjacent to pavements.
22 June 2018
Report No. 18151-001-Rev0 9
Page 15
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA ST, TEWANTIN
6.5 Drainage
Adequate site drainage must be installed to ensure that surface water runoff is directed away from
pavements and footings. All excess stormwater should be piped or channeled into the existing stormwater
infrastructure along Doonella Street.
6.6 Acid Sulfate Soils
As the proposed basement excavation will not extend below RL 5 m AHD, an acid sulfate soil investigation
is not warranted for this project.
7.0 LIMITATIONS
Your attention is drawn to the document “Limitations”, which is included in Appendix C 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.
22 June 2018
Report No. 18151-001-Rev0 10
Page 16
Tectonic Geotechnical Pty Ltd
PO Box 899
Buderim Qld 4556
Office: 07 5478 9016
Email: [email protected]
PROJECT:
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL &
Carpark BH2
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA ST, TEWANTIN
TITLE:
SITE PLAN
CLIENT:
BH4 DOONELLA STREET UNIT TRUST
DRAWN: DATE:
BAZ 14/06/2018
CHECKED: DATE:
ACD 14/06/2018
SCALE:
AS SHOWN
LEGEND:
BH5 APPROX. BOREHOLE
LOCATIONS
BH3
BH1
Carpark
Notes: 0 5 10 15 20 m
House footprint taken from Archicology project ref. 16416, drawing no. SD-01 PROJECT NO.: FIGURE: REV:
18151 1 0
Page 17
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA STREET, TEWANTIN
APPENDIX A
Borehole Reports and Explanatory Notes
22 June 2018
Report No. 18151-001-Rev0
Page 18
Borehole No.
BH1
Page 1 of 1
Engineering Log - Borehole Project No.: 18151
Client: Doonella Street Unit Trust Commenced: 05/06/2018
Project Name: Commercial & Residential Development Completed: 05/06/2018
Hole Location: 30-32 Doonella Street, Tewantin Logged By: BZ
Hole Position: 503825.0 m E 7080832.0 m N MGA94 Zone 56 Checked By: ACD
Drill Model and Mounting: 4WD Auger Inclination: -90° RL Surface: No survey
Hole Diameter: 100 mm Bearing: 360° Datum: AHD Operator: Ground Drill
Drilling Information Soil Description Observations
Relative Density
Classification DCP TEST
Penetration
Pocket
Consistency
Graphic Log
Samples Material Description (AS 1289.6.3.2-1997)
Penetrometer
Condition
Recovery
Tests soil type: plasticity or particle characteristics,
Moisture
UCS Blows per 100 mm
Symbol
Method
secondary and minor components, colour
Water
Remarks RL Depth (kPa)
(m) (m) 0 5 10 15 20 25
100
200
300
400
500
Silty SAND (TOPSOIL), fine to medium L
grained, dark brown, organics and tree roots,
with silt and clay fines
Clayey SAND (FILL), fine to medium grained, MD
dark brown, with clay fines, trace of organics
Sandy GRAVEL (FILL), fine to medium sized,
CBR CH sub-angular, brown to orange, fine to medium
0.8-1.1m 1 grained sand, trace of clay fines
U50 Silty CLAY, high plasticity, pale grey to brown,
1.0-1.3m trace of fine to medium grained sand
becoming pale grey to yellow red, trace of fine
to medium grained sand
2
CI-CH becoming medium to high plasticity, pale grey
to brown, trace of fine to medium grained >20
sand and fine to medium sized angular gravel Refusal
TECTONIC 2.00.2 LIB.GLB Log 1 TECTONIC BOREHOLE 18151.GPJ <<DrawingFile>> 22/06/2018 15:25 10.0.000 Datgel Lab and In Situ Tool - DGD | Lib: Tectonic 2.00.2 2016-10-13 Prj: Tectonic 2.00 2016-02-16
CI-CH Gravelly CLAY, medium to high plasticity,
Not Encountered
brown to red brown, angular gravel, trace of
fine to medium grained sand
CI-CH Silty CLAY, medium to high plasticity, pale
Augered to 3.0m
AD/T
3 grey to red brown, trace of fine to medium M
grained sand
VSt
>20
U50 Refusal
3.5-3.8m
4
becoming brown to red, sands cease
Augered to 4.5m
becoming pale brown to brown
5 >20
Refusal
becoming brown to pale grey, trace of fine
sized sub-angular gravel
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 No resistance Level (Date) U - Undisturbed Sample D - Dry VS - Very Soft
RR - Rock Roller ranging to D - Disturbed Sample M - Moist S - Soft
RD - Rotary Drilling refusal Inflow SPT - Standard Penetration Test W - Wet F - Firm
NMLC -Rock Core Partial Loss VSt - Very Stiff
HA - Hand Auger Complete Loss H - Hard
Plastic Limit VL - Very Loose
Graphic Log/Core Loss L - Loose
Classification Symbols < PL MD - Medium Dense
Core recovered (hatching and Soil Descriptions D - Dense
indicates material) = PL
Based on Unified Soil < PL VD - Very Dense
Core loss Classification System
Page 19
Borehole No.
BH2
Page 1 of 1
Engineering Log - Borehole Project No.: 18151
Client: Doonella Street Unit Trust Commenced: 05/06/2018
Project Name: Commercial & Residential Development Completed: 05/06/2018
Hole Location: 30-32 Doonella Street, Tewantin Logged By: BZ
Hole Position: 503825.0 m E 7080851.0 m N MGA94 Zone 56 Checked By: ACD
Drill Model and Mounting: 4WD Auger Inclination: -90° RL Surface: No survey
Hole Diameter: 100 mm Bearing: 360° Datum: AHD Operator: Ground Drill
Drilling Information Soil Description Observations
Relative Density
Classification DCP TEST
Penetration
Pocket
Consistency
Graphic Log
Samples Material Description (AS 1289.6.3.2-1997)
Penetrometer
Condition
Recovery
Tests soil type: plasticity or particle characteristics,
Moisture
UCS Blows per 100 mm
Symbol
Method
secondary and minor components, colour
Water
Remarks RL Depth (kPa)
(m) (m) 0 5 10 15 20 25
100
200
300
400
500
Silty SAND (TOPSOIL), fine to medium L to
grained, dark grey to dark brown, organic, with MD
clay fines
Clayey SAND (FILL), fine to medium grained, MD
pale brown to dark grey, high plasticity clay
fines, trace of organics
CH Sandy CLAY, high plasticity, pale brown to
1 brown, with fine to medium grained sand
CH >20
Silty CLAY, high plasticity, brown to orange St Refusal
trace of fine to medium sized sub-angular
gravel
CI becoming medium plasticity, pale brown to red
2 brown
becoming pale grey to pale brown
TECTONIC 2.00.2 LIB.GLB Log 1 TECTONIC BOREHOLE 18151.GPJ <<DrawingFile>> 22/06/2018 15:26 10.0.000 Datgel Lab and In Situ Tool - DGD | Lib: Tectonic 2.00.2 2016-10-13 Prj: Tectonic 2.00 2016-02-16
Not Encountered
AD/T
3 M
CH becoming high plasticity, pale brown to brown
VSt
GP Clayey GRAVEL, fine to medium sized,
angular, yellow red, with clay fines
4
CH Silty CLAY, medium to high plasticity, brown to
orange, trace of fine sized sub-angular gravel
5
CI becoming medium plasticity, brown, trace of
fine sized sub-angular gravel and fine grained
sand
H
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 No resistance Level (Date) U - Undisturbed Sample D - Dry VS - Very Soft
RR - Rock Roller ranging to D - Disturbed Sample M - Moist S - Soft
RD - Rotary Drilling refusal Inflow SPT - Standard Penetration Test W - Wet F - Firm
NMLC -Rock Core Partial Loss VSt - Very Stiff
HA - Hand Auger Complete Loss H - Hard
Plastic Limit VL - Very Loose
Graphic Log/Core Loss L - Loose
Classification Symbols < PL MD - Medium Dense
Core recovered (hatching and Soil Descriptions D - Dense
indicates material) = PL
Based on Unified Soil < PL VD - Very Dense
Core loss Classification System
Page 20
Borehole No.
BH3
Page 1 of 1
Engineering Log - Borehole Project No.: 18151
Client: Doonella Street Unit Trust Commenced: 05/06/2018
Project Name: Commercial & Residential Development Completed: 05/06/2018
Hole Location: 30-32 Doonella Street, Tewantin Logged By: BZ
Hole Position: 503787.0 m E 7080833.0 m N MGA94 Zone 56 Checked By: ACD
Drill Model and Mounting: 4WD Auger Inclination: -90° RL Surface: No survey
Hole Diameter: 100 mm Bearing: 360° Datum: AHD Operator: Ground Drill
Drilling Information Soil Description Observations
Relative Density
Classification DCP TEST
Penetration
Pocket
Consistency
Graphic Log
Samples Material Description (AS 1289.6.3.2-1997)
Penetrometer
Condition
Recovery
Tests soil type: plasticity or particle characteristics,
Moisture
UCS Blows per 100 mm
Symbol
Method
secondary and minor components, colour
Water
Remarks RL Depth (kPa)
(m) (m) 0 5 10 15 20 25
100
200
300
400
500
Silty SAND (TOPSOIL), fine to medium
grained, dark brown, organic, with clay fines
Gravelly SAND (FILL), fine to medium MD
grained, brown to grey, fine to medium sized
sub-angular gravel, with clay fines, trace of
organics
CH Gravelly CLAY, high plasticity, brown to
1 orange, fine to medium sized sub-angular
Not Encountered
CH gravel, trace of fine to medium grained sand
Silty CLAY, high plasticity, brown to red, trace
of fine to medium sized sub-angular gravel
and fine to medium grained sand
AD/T
M >20
U50 CI becoming medium plasticity, pale grey to red,
1.5-1.8m Refusal
trace of fine to medium sized sub-angular
recovered gravel
1.5-1.69m VSt
2
becoming brown to red, gravels cease
TECTONIC 2.00.2 LIB.GLB Log 1 TECTONIC BOREHOLE 18151.GPJ <<DrawingFile>> 22/06/2018 15:26 10.0.000 Datgel Lab and In Situ Tool - DGD | Lib: Tectonic 2.00.2 2016-10-13 Prj: Tectonic 2.00 2016-02-16
3
Hole Terminated at 3.00 m
Target depth
4
5
6
Method Penetration Water Samples and Tests Moisture Condition Consistency/Relative Density
AD/T-Auger Drilling TC Bit No resistance Level (Date) U - Undisturbed Sample D - Dry VS - Very Soft
RR - Rock Roller ranging to D - Disturbed Sample M - Moist S - Soft
RD - Rotary Drilling refusal Inflow SPT - Standard Penetration Test W - Wet F - Firm
NMLC -Rock Core Partial Loss VSt - Very Stiff
HA - Hand Auger Complete Loss H - Hard
Plastic Limit VL - Very Loose
Graphic Log/Core Loss L - Loose
Classification Symbols < PL MD - Medium Dense
Core recovered (hatching and Soil Descriptions D - Dense
indicates material) = PL
Based on Unified Soil < PL VD - Very Dense
Core loss Classification System
Page 21
Borehole No.
BH4
Page 1 of 1
Engineering Log - Borehole Project No.: 18151
Client: Doonella Street Unit Trust Commenced: 05/06/2018
Project Name: Commercial & Residential Development Completed: 05/06/2018
Hole Location: 30-32 Doonella Street, Tewantin Logged By: BZ
Hole Position: 503806.0 m E 7080868.0 m N MGA94 Zone 56 Checked By: ACD
Drill Model and Mounting: 4WD Auger Inclination: -90° RL Surface: No survey
Hole Diameter: 100 mm Bearing: 360° Datum: AHD Operator: Ground Drill
Drilling Information Soil Description Observations
Relative Density
Classification DCP TEST
Penetration
Pocket
Consistency
Graphic Log
Samples Material Description (AS 1289.6.3.2-1997)
Penetrometer
Condition
Recovery
Tests soil type: plasticity or particle characteristics,
Moisture
UCS Blows per 100 mm
Symbol
Method
secondary and minor components, colour
Water
Remarks RL Depth (kPa)
(m) (m) 0 5 10 15 20 25
100
200
300
400
500
SM Silty SAND (TOPSOIL), fine to medium L
grained, dark brown, trace of clay fines and
CH organics
Sandy CLAY, high plasticity, pale brown to
brown, fine to medium grained sand, trace of F to
fine to medium sized sub-angular gravel St
becoming yellow brown, gravel cease
1
Not Encountered
CI-CH Silty CLAY, medium to high plasticity, pale
grey to yellow red, trace of fine to medium
sized sub-angular gravel and fine grained
sand
AD/T
M
CI becoming medium plasticity, pale grey to
yellow red, gravel and sand cease
2 VSt
TECTONIC 2.00.2 LIB.GLB Log 1 TECTONIC BOREHOLE 18151.GPJ <<DrawingFile>> 22/06/2018 15:27 10.0.000 Datgel Lab and In Situ Tool - DGD | Lib: Tectonic 2.00.2 2016-10-13 Prj: Tectonic 2.00 2016-02-16
CH becoming yellow red to pale grey, trace of fine
grained sand
trace of fine to medium sized sub-angular >20
gravel Refusal
3
Hole Terminated at 3.00 m
Target depth
4
5
6
Method Penetration Water Samples and Tests Moisture Condition Consistency/Relative Density
AD/T-Auger Drilling TC Bit No resistance Level (Date) U - Undisturbed Sample D - Dry VS - Very Soft
RR - Rock Roller ranging to D - Disturbed Sample M - Moist S - Soft
RD - Rotary Drilling refusal Inflow SPT - Standard Penetration Test W - Wet F - Firm
NMLC -Rock Core Partial Loss VSt - Very Stiff
HA - Hand Auger Complete Loss H - Hard
Plastic Limit VL - Very Loose
Graphic Log/Core Loss L - Loose
Classification Symbols < PL MD - Medium Dense
Core recovered (hatching and Soil Descriptions D - Dense
indicates material) = PL
Based on Unified Soil < PL VD - Very Dense
Core loss Classification System
Page 22
Borehole No.
BH5
Page 1 of 1
Engineering Log - Borehole Project No.: 18151
Client: Doonella Street Unit Trust Commenced: 05/06/2018
Project Name: Commercial & Residential Development Completed: 05/06/2018
Hole Location: 30-32 Doonella Street, Tewantin Logged By: BZ
Hole Position: 503805.0 m E 7080837.0 m N MGA94 Zone 56 Checked By: ACD
Drill Model and Mounting: 4WD Auger Inclination: -90° RL Surface: No survey
Hole Diameter: 100 mm Bearing: 360° Datum: AHD Operator: Ground Drill
Drilling Information Soil Description Observations
Relative Density
Classification DCP TEST
Penetration
Pocket
Consistency
Graphic Log
Samples Material Description (AS 1289.6.3.2-1997)
Penetrometer
Condition
Recovery
Tests soil type: plasticity or particle characteristics,
Moisture
UCS Blows per 100 mm
Symbol
Method
secondary and minor components, colour
Water
Remarks RL Depth (kPa)
(m) (m) 0 5 10 15 20 25
100
200
300
400
500
Sandy GRAVEL (FILL), fine to medium sized,
pale brown, fine to medium grained sand,
cobble size building materials
MD
Silty SAND (FILL), fine to medium grained,
dark brown, organic, with clay fines
Clayey GRAVEL (FILL), fine to medium Augered to 0.75m
CI-CH grained, dark brown to brown, with fine to
1 medium grained sand, trace of organics
Not Encountered
CH Gravelly CLAY, medium to high plasticity,
brown, fine to medium sized sub-angular
CI-CH gravel, trace of fine to medium grained sand
AD/T
becoming high plasticity, red to brown, trace of M >20
fine to medium sized sub-angular gravel and Refusal
fine to medium grained sand
becoming medium to high plasticity, with sand VSt
2
CI Silty CLAY, medium plasticity, pale grey
TECTONIC 2.00.2 LIB.GLB Log 1 TECTONIC BOREHOLE 18151.GPJ <<DrawingFile>> 22/06/2018 15:27 10.0.000 Datgel Lab and In Situ Tool - DGD | Lib: Tectonic 2.00.2 2016-10-13 Prj: Tectonic 2.00 2016-02-16
CI-CH becoming medium to high plasticity, brown to
red, trace of fine to medium grained sand
with fine to medium grained sub-angular
3 gravel
Hole Terminated at 3.00 m
Target depth
4
5
6
Method Penetration Water Samples and Tests Moisture Condition Consistency/Relative Density
AD/T-Auger Drilling TC Bit No resistance Level (Date) U - Undisturbed Sample D - Dry VS - Very Soft
RR - Rock Roller ranging to D - Disturbed Sample M - Moist S - Soft
RD - Rotary Drilling refusal Inflow SPT - Standard Penetration Test W - Wet F - Firm
NMLC -Rock Core Partial Loss VSt - Very Stiff
HA - Hand Auger Complete Loss H - Hard
Plastic Limit VL - Very Loose
Graphic Log/Core Loss L - Loose
Classification Symbols < PL MD - Medium Dense
Core recovered (hatching and Soil Descriptions D - Dense
indicates material) = PL
Based on Unified Soil < PL VD - Very Dense
Core loss Classification System
Page 23
TERMS USED ON LOGS
DRILLING/EXCAVATION METHOD
AD* Auger Drilling RD Rotary Blade or Drag bit NQ Diamond Core - 47 mm
*V V-Bit RT Rotary Tri-cone bit NMLC Diamond Core - 52 mm
*T TC-Bit RA Rotary Air HQ Diamond Core - 63 mm
HA Hand Auger HMLC Diamond Core – 63mm
ADH Hollow Auger BH Tractor Mounted Backhoe
HA Hand Auger EX Tracked Hydraulic Excavator
WATER
GROUNDWATER NOT The observation of groundwater, whether present or not, was not possible due to drilling water,
OBSERVED surface seepage or cave in of the borehole/test pit.
GROUNDWATER NOT The borehole/test pit was dry soon after excavation. However, groundwater could be present in
ENCOUNTERED less permeable strata. Inflow may have been observed had the borehole/test pit been left open
for a longer period.
SAMPLING AND TESTING
SPT Standard Penetration Test to AS1289.6.3.1-2004
5,4,10 N=14 5,4,10 = Blows per 150mm. N = Blows per 300mm penetration following 150mm seating
30/65mm Where practical refusal occurs, the blows and penetration for that interval are reported
RW Penetration occurred under the rod weight only
HW Penetration occurred under the hammer and rod weight only
HB Hammer double bouncing on anvil
DS Disturbed sample
BDS Bulk disturbed sample
FV Field vane shear test expressed as uncorrected shear strength (sv = peak value, sr = residual value)
PP Pocket penetrometer test expressed as instrument reading in kPa
U50 Thin walled tube sample - number indicates nominal sample diameter in millimetres
DCP Dynamic cone penetration test
CPT Electronic cone penetration test
CPTu Electronic cone penetration test with pore pressure (u) measurement
Rev0
October 2013
Page 24
METHOD OF SOIL DESCRIPTION
USED ON LOGS
CLASSIFICATION AND INFERRED STRATIGRAPHY
Soil is classified and described in borehole and test pit logs using the preferred method given in AS1726 – 2017.
The material properties are assessed in the field by visual/tactile methods.
Particle Size Plasticity Properties
Major Sub Division Particle Size
Division
BOULDERS > 200 mm
COBBLES 63 to 200 mm
Coarse 19 to 63 mm
GRAVEL Medium 6.7 to 19 mm
Fine 2.36 to 6.7 mm
Coarse 0.6 to 2.36 mm
SAND Medium 0.21 to 0.6 mm
Fine 0.075 to 0.21
SILT 0.002 to 0.075
CLAY < 0.002 mm
NOTE: The U line is an approximate upper bound for most materials.
Data which plot above the U line may represent unusual/problem soil
behavior, or unreliable data and should be considered carefully.
MOISTURE CONDITION AS1726 - 2017
Symbol Term Description
D Dry Sands and gravels are free flowing. Clays & Silts may be brittle or friable and powdery.
M Moist Soils are darker than in the dry condition & may feel cool. Sands and gravels tend to cohere.
W Wet Soils exude free water. Sands and gravels tend to cohere.
CONSISTENCY AND DENSITY AS1726 - 2017
Symbol Term Undrained Shear Symbol Term Density Index % SPT “N” #
Strength
VS Very Soft 0 to 12 kPa VL Very Loose Less than 15 0 to 4
S Soft 12 to 25 kPa L Loose 15 to 35 4 to 10
F Firm 25 to 50 kPa MD Medium Dense 35 to 65 10 to 30
St Stiff 50 to 100 kPa D Dense 65 to 85 30 to 50
VSt Very Stiff 100 to 200 kPa VD Very Dense Above 85 Above 50
H Hard Above 200 kPa
In the absence of test results, consistency and density may be assessed from correlations with the observed behaviour of
the material.
# SPT correlations are not stated in AS1726 – 2017, and may be subject to corrections for overburden pressure and
equipment type.
Rev1
October 2017
Page 25
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA STREET, TEWANTIN
APPENDIX B
Geotechnical Laboratory Test Results
22 June 2018
Report No. 18151-001-Rev0
Page 26
Shrink Swell Index Report
Client: Tectonic Geotechnical Pty Ltd Report Number: G18001 - 171/1
Client Address: PO Box 899 Buderim QLD 4556 Page 1 of 1
Job Number: G18001 Report Date: 12/06/2018
Project: Laboratory Testing Samples Supplied Order Number:
Location Project No:18151 , Doonella Street,Tewantin Test Method : AS1289.7.1.1
Lab No: 112319 Sample Location
Date Sampled: 5/06/2018 Bore 1
Date Tested: 8/06/2018 Depth 3.5 - 3.8m
Sampled By: Client Supplied 07/06/18
Sample Method: N/A
Material Source: Site
For Use As: - Lot Number: -
Remarks: - Item Number : -
Page 1 of 1
Shrinkage Moisture Content (%) : 24.5 Swell MC Before(%): 25.1
Shrinkage (%) : 2.8 Swell MC After(%) : 26.6
Unit Weight (t/m³) : 1.97 PP Before (kPa):
Swell (%) : 0.3 PP After (kPa):
Shrink Swell Index (Iss %): 1.7
Visual Classification : Sandy Clay(CH)
Inert Material Estimate(%): 2
Cracking : No Cracking
Crumbling : No Crumbling
APPROVED SIGNATORY FORM NUMBER
Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025-Testing
REP ASS-1-4
Mel Burnett
NATA Accred No:1551
Page 27
Shrink Swell Index Report
Client: Tectonic Geotechnical Pty Ltd Report Number: G18001 - 172/1
Client Address: PO Box 899 Buderim QLD 4556 Page 1 of 1
Job Number: G18001 Report Date: 12/06/2018
Project: Laboratory Testing Samples Supplied Order Number:
Location Project No:18151 , Doonella Street,Tewantin Test Method : AS1289.7.1.1
Lab No: 112320 Sample Location
Date Sampled: 5/06/2018 Bore 3
Date Tested: 8/06/2018 Depth 1.5 - 1.8m
Sampled By: Client Supplied 07/06/18
Sample Method: N/A
Material Source: Site
For Use As: - Lot Number: -
Remarks: - Item Number : -
Page 1 of 1
Shrinkage Moisture Content (%) : 24.4 Swell MC Before(%): 24.5
Shrinkage (%) : 3.0 Swell MC After(%) : 28.0
Unit Weight (t/m³) : 1.93 PP Before (kPa):
Swell (%) : 1.7 PP After (kPa):
Shrink Swell Index (Iss %): 2.1
Visual Classification : Sandy Clay(CH)
Inert Material Estimate(%): 15
Cracking : Minor Lateral Cracking
Crumbling : No Crumbling
APPROVED SIGNATORY FORM NUMBER
Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025-Testing
REP ASS-1-4
Mel Burnett
NATA Accred No:1551
Page 28
California Bearing Ratio Report (1 Point)
Client: Tectonic Geotechnical Pty Ltd Report Number: G18001 - 173/1
Client address: PO Box 899 Buderim QLD 4556
Job Number: G18001 Report Date: 18/06/2018
Project: Laboratory Testing Samples Supplied Order Number:
Location Project No:18151 , Doonella Street,Tewantin Page 1 of 1
Lab No: 112321 Sample Location
Date Sampled: 5/06/2018 Bore 1
Date Tested: 18/06/2018 Depth 0.8 - 1.1m
Sampled By: Client Supplied 07/06/18
Sample Method: N/A
Material Source: Site Test Method : AS1289.6.1.1
For Use As: - MC Method AS1289.2.1.1
Remarks: Plasticity assessment by visual classification. Item Number : -
Maximum Dry Density - MDD (t/m³) : 1.69 Dry Density after Soak (t/m³) : 1.54
Optimum Moisture Content - OMC (%) : 19.5 Moisture Content after Soak (%) : 27.2
Compactive Effort : Standard Density Ratio after Soak (%) : 91.0
Nominated % Maximum Dry Density
Compaction : 95 Field Moisture Content (%) : 23.8
Nominated % Optimum Moisture Content Moisture Content (Top) after Penetration
Compaction : 100 (%) : -
Moisture Content (Total) after Penetration
Achieved Dry Density before Soak (t/m³) : 1.60 (%) : -
Achieved Percentage of Maximum Dry Density
(%) : 95.0 Sample Curing Time (Hrs) 122
Achieved Moisture Content (%) : 19.6
Achieved Percentage of Optimum Moisture
Content (%) : 101.0 Penetration CBR determined 5.0mm
Test Condition (Soaked/Unsoaked) / Soaking
CBR Value (%) :
Period (Days) : Soaked / 4 days 2.0
Swell (%) / Surcharge (kg): 3.9 / 4.5 kg
Soil Description : Silty Sandy Clay(CH)
Approved Signatory Form Number
Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025-Testing
REP ACBR_1_3-3
Mel Burnett
NATA Accred No:1551
Page 29
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
30-32 DOONELLA STREET, TEWANTIN
APPENDIX C
Limitations
22 June 2018
Report No. 18151-001-Rev0
Page 30
LIMITATIONS This document has been prepared for the purpose outlined in Tectonic’s proposal and no responsibility is accepted for the use of this document, in whole or in part, for any other purpose. The scope of Tectonic’s Services are as described in Tectonic’s proposal, and are subject to restrictions and limitations. Tectonic did not perform a complete assessment of all possible conditions or circumstances that may exist at the site referenced in the report. If a service is not expressly indicated, do not assume it has been provided. If a matter is not addressed, do not assume that any determination has been made by Tectonic in regards to it. Conditions may exist which were undetectable given that economic and time constraints limit the practical extent of geotechnical investigation. Variations in conditions may occur between investigation locations, and there may be special conditions pertaining to the site which have not been revealed by the investigation and which have not therefore been taken into account in the document. Where variations exist on site, additional studies and actions may be required. Tectonic’s opinions are based upon information that existed at the time that the work was performed. The passage of time, man-made or natural events, may alter the site conditions. It is understood that the Services undertaken allowed Tectonic to form an opinion of the actual conditions of the site at the time the site was visited and cannot be used to assess the effect of any subsequent changes in the quality of the site, or its surroundings, or any laws or regulations. Any assessments made in the preparation of this document are based on the conditions indicated from published sources and the findings of the investigation described. Actual subsurface conditions may differ from those indicated in the document (e.g. between boreholes or test pits). No warranty is included, either express or implied, that the actual conditions will conform exactly to the assessments contained in this document. Where data supplied by the client or other external sources, including previous site investigation data, have been used, it has been assumed that the information is correct unless otherwise stated. No responsibility is accepted by Tectonic for incomplete or inaccurate data supplied by others. This document is provided for the sole use by the Client and its professional advisers. No responsibility whatsoever for the contents of this document will be accepted to any person other than the Client. Any use which a third party makes of this document, or any reliance on or decisions to be made based on it, is the responsibility of such third parties. Tectonic accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions based on this document. Rev 1 (March 2016)