07/1586 - Response to Information Request [As Published] · 132007.1586

Page 2

a

The building presents a combination of traditional eave and eye lid eave detailing combined with
some parapet walling to provide architectural detailing and variation interest in height and depth of
the various wall and glass elements, resulting in a non-bulk design. Large lengths of conventional
eave detailing have been incorporated on all four elevations with even greater emphasis to both
the adjoining neighbouring properties.

Should you have any queries regarding the above, wish to discuss the application further or require
further submission to allow approval of our application, please do not hesitate to contact me.

 

zirkas

cc, Andrew Stewart (Caloundra Buildings Approvals P/L)
Adam Graham (De Nova Group P/L)

Page 3

Page 4

Page 5

Page 6

Page 7

Page 8

Page 9

JL,

aw

SOIL SURVEYS

 

ACID SULFATE SOIL
INVESTIGATION & MANAGEMENT

PROJECT NO. 307 - 2624
AUGUST 2007
DENOVA GROUP

PROPOSED RESIDENCE

6 THE PROMONTORY
NOOSA WATERS

 

OFFICES IN BRISBANE, GOLD COAST AND SUNSHINE COAST

 

Page 10

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

5.1 Preliminary Screening Tests

5.2 Quantitative Tests

6.0 ACID SULFATE SOIL ASSESSMENT & MANAGEMENT

6.1 Acid Neutralisation

§.2 Site Monitoring ee ee
7.0 LIMITATIONS
APPENDICES
A Borehole Records
B Laboratory Test Results

c Borehole Layout Plan

Page 11

* Project No. 307-2624 Page 1
August, 2007

 

1.0

2.0

INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of an acid sulfate soil (ASS) investigation, and makes
recommendations for the management of ASS for the proposed residence at 6 The
Promontory, Noosa Waters. The fieldwork for the investigation was conducted by Soil
Surveys Engineering, and with laboratory testing carried out by Soil & Water
Laboratories (also part of the Soil Surveys Group).

The proposed development is to consist of a new 2 storey residential building, which is
understood to be of masonry and suspended concrete slab construction. The
development is to also include a boatshed and storage room accommodated in a
semi-basement with the basement floor level set approximately 2.2m below the existing
ground surface.

Soil Surveys Engineering Pty Limited have been commissioned to among other things,
assess the results of the acid sulfate soil investigation and laboratory testing and to
provide recommendations for the management of acid sulfate soils for this project. This
report presents the first phase of site investigation for this project, and we note that a
second phase of investigation will be carried out at a later time, which will address the

geotechnica! design requirements for this project.

SCOPE OF GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES

The scope of geotechnical services provided by Soil Surveys Engineering Pty. Limited is
to include the following items, as detailed in our proposal 307-2634 dated 2nd August
2007.

« Assessment of data which includes borehole logs, pHr/pHrox screening tests, and
quantitative laboratory test results.
¢ Identification of acid sulfate soils (ASS) present.

*« Recommendation of suitable management strategy for the acid sulfate soils.

 

F SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 12

“ Project No. 307-2624 Page 2
August, 2007

 

3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

The site for the proposed residence is located on the southern side of The Promontory in
Noosa Waters estate, Noosaville and is described as being generally level but with a
sloping section falling towards the Noosa Waters cana! at the rear of the block. At the
time of the investigation fieldwork, the site was occupied by an existing double storey
residence of masonry construction, and the surrounding garden included grass and
small to medium size shrubs, and some ornamental trees. It is understood that the
building is to be demolished.

4.0 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
4.1 Field Investigation

Subsurface conditions at the site were investigated by drilling 2 No. boreholes to depths
of 6.0m to 7.5m. Both boreholes were carried out near the front of the property, due to
the restricted access conditions, and a plan showing these locations is included in
Appendix C.

Disturbed samples were taken at 0.25m intervals down to a depth of 3.0m in both
boreholes, for the purposes of acid sulfate soil testing.

The soil classification descriptions and field testing were carried out by Soil Surveys
Engineering, and these were in general accordance with the following:-

° AS.1726 - 1993 Geotechnical Site Investigations
. AS.1289 Methods of Testing Soils for Engineering Purposes

The laboratory testing was carried out by Soil & Water Laboratories, who have NATA
Registration for the acid sulfate soil testing procedures. in addition, this report makes
reference to, and our recommendations are generally in accordance with the following

acid sulfate soils regulatory and guidance documentation:

° Queensland Acid Sulfate Soils Investigation Team (QASSIT) “Guidelines for

Sampling and Analysis of Lowland Acid Sulfate Soils (ASS) in Queensland”
October 1980.

° Queenstand Acid Sulfate Soil Technical Manuat - Soil Management Guidelines

 

ZZ SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 13

* Project No. 307-2624 Page 3
August, 2007

 

. State Planning Policy 2/02 Guideline Planning and Managing Development

Involving Acid Sulfate Soils

The detailed borehole record sheets are included in the Appendix A.

4.2. Subsurface Conditions

5.0

The subsurface profile encounted by the boreholes consisted of a surface layer of
gravelly sand or silty sand fill overlying natural silty sand.

The surface layer of silty sand fill is described in the borehole logs as fine to coarse
grained, mostly grey or grey brown, and with little or no fines and a trace of organics in
some parts. The layer of silty sand fill extended from the surface to 0.6 - 0.7m depth in
the boreholes.

The natural sand encountered below the surface fill, is inferred to be alluvial and is
described in the logs as fine to medium grained, and mostly pale grey with some bands
of dark grey.

LABORATORY TESTING

Two stages of laboratory testing were undertaken for this project.

5.1 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, and this was
carried out by Soil & Water Laboratories (SWL), on each of the disturbed samples. This
is a quick, qualitative assessment of the potential acidity of the soil. The results of these
screening tests were used to select which of the soil samples should be further
assessed by quantitative laboratory testing.

Laboratory test results for the pH- / pHrox screening are presented in Appendix B, and
the measured values in the this screening (23 No. sets in total) were seen to vary within

the following ranges.

¢  pHr 5.8 to 6.6 (mean value = 6.2)
© pHeox 3.3 to 5.0 (mean value = 4.1)
¢  pHr-pHrox 1.4 to 3.3 (mean value = 2.1)

 

F SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 14

* Project No. 307-2624
August, 2007

Page 4

 

_5.2 Quantitative Tests

The second stage of laboratory testing was carried out by SWL on 4 No. samples, which

were selected on the basis of the screening tests showing the possible presence of acid

sulphate soil, i.e. those showing low pH and large change between the pHr and the

PHrox readings. This second stage testing consisted of Chromium Reducible Sulfur
(SCr) tests, and Total Actual Acid (TAA) tests. The SCr test provides data on sulfuric
acids, without influence from organic acids, and is generally indicated for low acidic

sandy soils and/or soils with some organic material.

Full results of the testing are summarised below in Table 1, and the SWL test report

sheets are included in Appendix B

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 1 QUANTITATIVE TEST RESULTS SUMMARY
Borehole ID Sample Depth Description Sa TAA
(m) (%S) (mol H+/t)

BH1 2.0 - 2.25 Silty Sand 0.01 4
(light grey)

BH2 1.0- 1.25 Silty Sand 0.00 2
(light grey)

BH2 1.75 -2.0 Silty Sand 0.02 13
(dark grey)

BH2 2.75 - 3.0 " 0.07 42

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ZZ SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 15

* Project No. 307-2624 Page 5
August, 2007

 

6.0 ACID SULFATE SOIL ASSESSMENT & MANAGEMENT

The ASS regulatory and guidance documentation (refer Section 4.1) for management of
acid sulfate soils has defined action levels for the quantitative test results, and these are
used to assess the need for an ASSMP. The following action criteria apply:-

* TAA - 18 mol H*/tonne
* Scr (%) - 0.03%

It is noted that the above action levels apply to the combined Scr and TAA results, which
should be added together (in like units).

It is seen that only one sample returned a combined value exceeding the action level of
0.03 %S by weight, or 18 mol H+/tonne. This sample was taken from borehole BH2 at
2.75 - 3.0m depth, was described as dark grey silty sand, and it was shown to contain

potential acid suifate soil only, with no actual acid.

Given the action level is exceeded by this sample, under the regulatory framework set
down in the referenced documentation, it is necessary that an acid sulfate soil
management plan (ASSMP) be established. This management plan would be executed
to ensure that the excavation operations are carried out in such a way as to limit or avoid
any adverse environmental or infrastructure impacts. However, we note that its
implementation can be viewed as precautionary, since the sample exceeding the action

level for ASS was taken from below the expected maximum excavation depth.
6.1 Acid Neutralisation

It is anticipated that the excavated material removed during the construction would be
disposed possibly by one or both of two methods. The excavated material could be used
for landscaping purposes on site, or as fill material to be used on other earthworks and

construction sites in the region.

Current experience indicates that the most effective method for limiting or preventing the
adverse consequences of acid release from the excavated actual or potential ASS
material, is by the controlled application of a suitable neutralising agent to the excavated
soil.

 

Z SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 16

* Project No. 307-2624 Page 6
August, 2007

 

Various neutralising agents are available, however agricultural lime or “aglime" (CaCOs)
is considered to be the most suitable, being the most widely available and least

hazardous product for acid sulfate soil treatment.

The application of aglime to the soil requires thorough mixing and incorporation into the
soil. As a general approach it is recommended that careful supervision and control of the
excavations are carried out. Further, that sampling and testing of the materials should
be carried out during excavation, to confirm the effectiveness of the acid neutralisation.

The appropriate application rate for the aglime is calculated using the formula presented
in ASS Tip 13 in the Queensland Acid Sulfate Soi! Technical Manual - Soil Management
Guidelines, where the rate of CaCQs; in kg/tonne is calculated as 46.8 x %S (Scr) or
0.075 x mol H*/tonne (TAA). This rate incorporates a 1.5 factor of safety on the quantity
of aglime.

It is calculated that neutralisation of the excavated silty sand at this site should be
carried out with aglime applied at a rate of 3.5kg/tonne, which is equivalent to
5kg/m*(with a dry density of soil = 1.5tonne/m*).

It is recommended that the acid neutralisation procedure incorporate the following
measures to ensure an effective result is achieved:-

* Only aglime (CaCOs) should be used, as quick lime (CaO) or slaked lime (Ca(OH)2)
are not considered viable or safe long-term neutralising agents of acidic soil.

« The recommended lime dosing rates refer to a 100% pure lime product. The actual
liming rates would need to be factored according to the product's quoted
neutralising value in order to reach the ideal neutralising capacity.

* The aglime should be fine grained to ensure better mixing and decreased chance of
acid leachate runoff occurring.

* The aglime should be thoroughly mixed with the acidic soil prior to disposal or

re-use.

The recommended design liming rate is calculated to neutralise the recorded worst case
acid sulfate soil as revealed by the sampling and testing. As noted above, treating the
excavated soil from this site with aglime at the above rate can be considered a
precautionary procedure; since the worst (and only) case acid sulfate soil sample was

retrieved from below the expected maximum depth of excavation.

 

ZF SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 17

* Project No. 307-2624 Page 7
August, 2007

 

Given the limited extent of the proposed excavation works, it is recommended that the
application of aglime be carried out using the simple surface treatment method. This
method involves applying the aglime to the ground surface in the area of the excavation,
prior to its commencement. The amount of lime applied on the surface in this manner
should be appropriate for the depth of the excavation. That is, if excavation to 1.5m
depth was required and using the rate of 5kg/m®, then a surface layer of 1.5m x 5kg/m? =
7.5 kg/m? should be applied. The mixing of lime with the excavated soil would then be
achieved during the excavation, handling and transport processes. It is also noted that if
the excavation is to be staged, then the amount of lime spread over the surface may
need to be adjusted accordingly, or be reapplied over a lower benched level.

By adopting the recommended surface treatment of aglime, the management of the acid
sulfate sulfate soil occurring at this site can be effectively finalised within the single
activity. Other ASS management issues such as site runoff, catchponds, groundwater
monitoring, staging of excavation works and ASS treatment, stockpiles of untreated
ASS, and the sampling and monitoring of treated ASS, are all either inapplicable or are
simplified to the extent where they are resolved and finalised within the single ASS
treatment/verification site activity.

6.2 Site Monitoring

A simple monitoring program should be conducted to verify the effectiveness of the
management strategy.

Considering the relatively low required application rate of lime, and the limited extent of
the affected soil, it is recommended that the ASS monitoring simply consist of
verification testing using the acid neutralising capacity (ANC) test procedure, of the
treated soil at the rate of 1 test per 500m°.

It is also recommended that in the event that extraction of groundwater is required
during the basement construction, the acidity and turbidity of the groundwater should be
checked, and these water quality criteria must be at acceptable levels prior to discharge.
We note that the results of a pre-construction groundwater monitoring program should
also be considered when establishing water quality criteria in relation to discharge of
extracted groundwater.

 

ZB SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 18

Project No. 307-2624 Page 8
August, 2007

 

7.0 LIMITATIONS

We have prepared this report for use by DeNova Group for acid sulfate management
purposes in accordance with currently accepted environmental and gectechnical
guidelines. 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 DeNova Group or their associated clients or consultants. It may not contain
sufficient information for the purposes of other parties or for other uses.

STEPHEN GAMBLE (RPEQ 6644)

for and on behaif of

SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING PTY LIMITED

 

ZSOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 19

Project No. 307-2624
* August, 2007

APPENDICES

ZF SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 20

 

 

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. Not all notes are necessarily

relevant to all reports.

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
to place and can change with time. Geotechnical
engineering involves gathering and assimilating limited
facts about these characteristics and properties in
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, strength or and

structure, density,

inclusions. Identification and classification of soil and
tock 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.

AS1726-1993 Table A4.

The strength terms are defined in

Non-cohesive soils are classified on the basis of
relative density usually based on insitu testing or
engineering examination (see AS1726-1993 Table AS5).
Rocks - Rock types are classified by their geological
(AS1726-1993 Table Aé6), with

names together

Table 1 Estimated strength descriptions given to rock

based on engineering examination

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

| Strength Term Approximate Qu (MPa)
Extremely Weak <1.0
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 AQ), strength (refer Table 1

below), defects (AS1726-1993 Table A10), etc. Where
strength testing (ie Point Loads)
AS1726-1993 Table A8&
further

is carried out,
is used. Where relevant,

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 soil 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
Such

samples yield information on structure and strength,

contained in a relatively undisturbed state.

and are necessary for laboratory determination of

shear strength, volume change potential and

compressibility. _ Undisturbed sampling is generally
effective only in cohesive soils.
Details of the type and method of sampling used are

given on the attached logs.

 

NOTEREP.SAM

SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 21

-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.

A borehole of 50 to 100mm

advanced by manually

Hand Auger Drilling -
diameter is 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 returned 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

 

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
“feel” and rate of penetration. More accurate
information on soil strata is gained by regular testing
and sampling using the Standard Penetration Test
(SPT) and undisturbed thin walled 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. The term
"mud" encompasses a range of products ranging from
bentonite to polymers such as Revert or Biogel. The
tends to mask reliable

mud the cuttings and

identification is only possible from regular intact
sampling (eg. from SPT and U50 samples) or from
rock coring, etc.

Continuous Core Drilling - A continuous core sample
is obtained using a diamond or tungsten carbide
tipped core barrel. Provided fuil core recovery is
achieved (which is not always possible in very weak
rocks and granular soils), this technique provides a
In rocks, NMLC

coring (nominal 52 mm diameter) is usually used with

very reliable method of investigation.

water flush. The length of core recovered is compared
to 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 tog.

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

 

NOTEREP.SAM

SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 22

-3-

 

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
tesults 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
The

penetration is recorded in terms of pressure on the end

second by hydraulic force. resistance to
area of the cone (cone resistance, q., in MPa) and
friction on the side of the 135 mm long sleeve
immediately above the top of the cone (friction
resistance, f,, 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) = re rasistanse'asPaT
The friction ratio, FR, is generally low in sands (less
than 1% of 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
100 MPa_ for

investigations, while a range of 0 to 10 MPa can be

ranging up to general purpose
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 Campinalli
(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 depths of strata
changes, although greater accuracy is obtained with
the static cone compared with conventional drilling. Jn
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 23

-4-

 

The DCP comprises a Cone of 20 mm diameter with
30 degree taper attached to steel rods of smaller
section.

The cone end is driven with a 9 kg hammer falling 510
mm (AS. 1289 Test 6.3.2).

initially for pavement subgrade investigations, and

The test was developed

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 test 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
smalt 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 soils, 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.

 

+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
ranging 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.

FILL

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.

also depend on investigation methods and frequency.

Identification of the extent of fill materials will

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
lf

the volume and quality of fill is important to a project,

adverse engineering characteristics or behaviour.

then frequent test pit excavations are preferable to

boreholes.
LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory testing is normally carried out in

accordance with Australian Standard 1289 "Methods of
Testing Soi! 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
Engineering reports are prepared by qualified

personnel and are based on the information obtained
and on current engineering standards of interpretation
and analysis. Where the report has been prepared for
the

interpretation may not be relevant if the design

a specific design proposal information and

proposal is changed. If this happens, the Company will

 

NOTEREP.SAM

SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 24

-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 recommendations

aspects 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 in 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
Most

problems are more readily resolved when conditions

requests that it immediately be notified.
are exposed than at some later stage, well after the
event.

REPRODUCTION OF INFORMATION FOR
CONTRACTUAL PURPOSES

Attention is drawn to the document "Guidelines for the
Provision of Geotechnical Information in Tender
Documents", published by the Institution of Engineers,
Where

investigation is provided for tendering purposes, it is

Australia. information obtained from this
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 or 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 review which involves a senior
geotechnical engineer. We would be happy to assist in
this regard as an extension of our investigation
commission.

SITE INSPECTION

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

i) Site visits during construction to confirm reported
ground conditions

ii)
personnel in identifying various soil/rock types such as

Site visits to assist the contractor or other site

appropriate footing or pier founding depths, the stability
of a filled or excavated slope; or

iii) Fulltime 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 25

Soil Surveys Engineering Pty. Limited LEGEND SHEET

ing Goon RECO No 195
AGN 054 049 631
‘eral briebere® sokeurveya com au
Lovol 2 19 Firchey Street Unt 930 Lawrence Rr 11 Production Ave
‘Oana Norang 4211 Kawene Walora G 4578
PO Sex 2011 PO Box 2
Qaat Budde 0 4573.
Prt 7 5509 1528 Phen 7 5489 1733
Fex 8 7 5009 6560 Fex 81 7 5678 9616 Fax 61 7 5050 2037

Information

ORILLING TYPES

¥ - open hole drilling using augers and a steel "V" bit

TG - open hole drilling using augers and a Tungsten Carbide bit
WEB - wash boring using a drag or blade bit CH - CLAY of high plasticity
RR - wash boring using a rock roller bit
NMLC - coring using a NMLC core barrel
Casing - steel casing in hole

Graphic Legend

CI - CLAY of intermediate plasticity

DEPTH wei
Expressed in metres below 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 s

WEATHERING GRADES MI - SILT of intermediate plasticity

XW - Extremety Weathered

OW - Distinctly Weathered ML - SILT of low plasticity

SW - Slightly Weathered

FR - Fresh Pt- PEAT

STRENGTH cs

estimate of UCS) OH - Organic SILTS and CLAYS of high
W- extremely weak <1.0 MPa plasticity ove em one

Wy en eek peta MPa OL - Organic STLTS and CLAYS of low

MS - medium strong 25 to 50 MPa SY Plasticity

S - strong 50 to 100 MPa SAKA SC - Clayey SAND.

VS - very strong 100 to 250 MPa SS?

ES - extremely strong >250 MPa GS LY $M - Silty SAND

CORING DETAILS ~ "
Rec - core recovery in each run expressed as a % x : SP - poorly graded SAND
RQD - Rock Quality Description expressed as a %

Defect Description : SW - Well graded SAND

3.00m:;J45;p,s,0,z GC - Clayey GRAVEL

Depth in mstres; Detect Type and angle with the core axis;planarity,roughness, aperture, infill |
Defect Type Pianarity Roughness Aperture — Infill GM - Silty GRAVEL
uJ - Joint p- Planar s-Smooth o- Gpen z-Clean é
F - Follation s-Sub-planar_r- Rough ¢-Closed c- Clay GP - poorly graded GRAVEL
8 - Bedding c- Gurvilinear v-very Rough Q - Quara 4 ;
~ Vein u-Undutating |- Slickensides - ite
§ - Shear Zone 9 w - Weathered Rock GW -well graded GRAVEL
T - Fault t- Limonite
C- Clay Seam Fill
Z- Contorted Zone
Ru - Relict Joint Core loss

Testing

[ SPT SPT testing Meta-Sittstone

Phyllite

10.15.15 Blows! 150mm or as noted
~— Meta-Sandstone

Greywacke

USO (50) USO Tube Samples (% Recovery}
[ PP = 500 kPa Pocket penetrometer reading

Tuff

vs Vane Shear Testing
g 1.30.5: 25 ‘Seating, peak and residual : Corrected vatue Sandstone

DIST Disturbad Samples Siltstone
Mudstone

Conglomerate

Water Intersections

aor Water steady level
por ‘Water first noted
Basalt

Testing Results La VOLCANIC ASH

Corrected Point Load Test Result
_— Is50=4 (A) A- Ade, D - Diametral 3 VOLCANIC AGGOLMERATE

Breccia

Granite

MARINE DEPOSITS

 

I ISSUE No. 1.1 08/10/97 RSOO5

Page 26

Project No. 307-2624
* August, 2007

APPENDIX A
BOREHOLE RECORDS

 

ZB SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 27

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Soil Surveys Engineering Pty. Limited BOREHOLE RECORD SHEET
ee RPECQ No. 193
saetarerecy Soe MER 8 28 aren OF [ipoain ae Borehole Number : 1
i Beau = Renee, = SSE are .
Ree ORs, Project Number: = 307-2624
Project Name : Proposed House
Easting: Northing : RL: Location : 6 The Promontory, Noosa Waters
Logger: RH Driller: RH DrilingRig: Evini7s0 ‘Client: De Nova Group Pty. Ltd.
Date : 10/08/2007 Page : 1
Drilling Method 2 , DCP Test $
= i amples and
~ela]s|a]a]  Deeth & Description & rows/100mm) Remarks
i - 0.12 FILL L Silty SAND (SM) Loose, fine to medium grained, Tp 5 =
- 0.30 grey. with oreanics, mo Pobot: > 4
= 0.60 ; : >
LE g nd dark brown, nist i D 4
1.0 NATURAL sat SAND (SM) Loose to medium dense, fing : —
- to medium grained, light grey, moist. : o 3
_ 1.40 ‘ ~ pb 7
— Silty SAND (SM) Med! di to dense, fine t ; - ~~
~ Leo ; median aie moist. sey line v0 ' Yo ° 3
r 2.0 , LL) Sitty SAND (SM) Dense to very dense, fine to medium ! » 4
— grained, light grey, moist, : fib ~y
F ire ;
rw 270 ! ° 7
= Silty SAND (SM) Medium dense, fine to medium ‘ op +
grained, light grey, wet. ' 1 —
1 - 3.40 ! 7
— {A Silty SAND (SM) Medium dense, fine to medium : —
— ‘A4/\ grained, dark grey and brown, wet, ‘ q
F 40 Uj 4
| E50 J
- 60 iy
—_ :
| - 6.70 KZ fot
m C/ 7) Silty SAND (SM) Dense to medium dense, fine to tot
- 7.0 /, medium grained, dark grey and brown, wet. tog
- 250. ‘hd : :
- Borehole 7.50m i |
{ a Terminated io
F 80 i
F_20 PE 4
C pbb od 4
FE 16.0 i i
COMMENTS
1) Groundwater noted at 2.7m. 2) DCP Refusal at 1.9m, SZ
Approved = +f
; Date : o aT
‘w Water First Noted ~7 Water Steady Level
ISSUE No. 1.1 080/97 RSOO7A

 

 

 

Page 28

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Surveys Engineering Pty. Limited BOREHOLE RECORD SHEET
Gastectnioa engineers «= RPECG No, 195
MO taewa > sNPrgacin tee Borehole Number: 2
PO Box 2011
Pe, | Rare Project Number: 307-2624
Project Name : Proposed House
Easting : Northing RL: Location : 6 The Promontory, Noosa Waters
Logger: RH Diller: RH’ DrilingRig: EVe7so Client: De Nova Group Pty. Ltd.
Date : 10/08/2007 Page : 1
Drilling Method DCP Test
qi] Deeth Description (blows/100mm) Samples and
> iets) e § 10 15 20 25 Remarks = §
i SN Pavers, pos pot o -
- FILL SAND (SP) Loose, fine to coarse grained, light Peabo; bod > 7
— FILL Sandy GRAVEL (GP) Medium dense, fine to coarse hopobot D 4
- size, dark brown, fine to coarse grained sand, robo bt 4
C Oist : Pb D 4
P10 FILL Silty SAND (SM) Medium dense, fine to medium : bob 7
D /7\\erained, dark grey and brown, with low plasticity ' hore 5 q
a ° UW. NATURAL Silty SAND (SM) Loose to medium dense, Anam ==: > 4
E Ai//A Silty SAND (SM) Medium dense, fine to medium it > 4
- 20 ZA grained, dark grey, trace of organics, moist. ‘ D o
a GY D I
FE Mh i ° 3
- Ww 270 e y
- = Vi, ‘J Silty SAND (SM) Medium dense, fine to medium : D 4
3.0 “A grained, dark grey, trace of organics, wet. , 4 —
E30 meds
Zz Silty SAND (SM) Loose to medium dense, fine to pore gt
- 3.60 Z medium grained, dark grey, with low to medium rr
E 40 / Silty SAND (SM) Loose to medium dense, fine to Porogo oto
-—" 4.10 i, medium grained, light grey, wet. pobobo gt
E ZZ Silty SAND (SM) Medium dense, fine to medium Popo or
i - VW grained, dark grey and brown, wet. fog obo
F 50 VY on
r toy
E 6.0 600 Doig
é Borehole 6.00m Poboroi
t- Terminated iit a
E70 -
F fot
| E80 ii
p90 i
E 100 Pb if
COMMENTS
1) Groundwater noted at 2.7m. 2) DCP Refusal at 1.9m.
Approved + e S
Date : gO 1 F 1 O77
-w Water First Noted \ Water Steady Level
om: ISSUE No. 1.4 0810/97 RSCO7A

 
 
    

 

Page 29

Project No. 307-2624
* August, 2007

APPENDIX B

LABORATORY TEST
RESULTS

 

#% SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 30

 

 

Soil & Water Laboratories P/L
16/39 Corperation Circuit, Tweed Heads, NSW. 2466.
Phone: (02) 5823 4422: Fax: (07) 3603 9063

Reference Number:

Certificate Number:

Date Received:

1.

 

Signed:

Trevor

Screening Test

For Soll Surveys Engineering Pty Ltd, Unit 1, 25 Premier Circuit, Warana. Qld. 4575,

Noosaville
307-2624
14 2624
200214
16/08/2007 Date Tested: 17/08/2007 Date Issued: 17/08/2007

pH (1:5susp.)
Sample Number | Borehole/Location H20

for and on behalf of Soil and Water Laboratories P/

Nelson - Laboratory Manger - Acid Sulphate Soils and Waters
Page:

‘Samples suppied by others
2. Samples tested in ‘as received’ condition

1of4

Page 31

pa Soil & Water Laboratories P/L

16/39 Corporation Circuit, Tweed Heads South, NSW. 2486

—~ Phone: (02) 5623 4422; Fax (07) 3603 9063

NATA

ct Reducible Sut ali A Acidity Test R
For Soil Surveys Engineering Pty Ltd, Unit 1, 25 Premier Circuit, Warana. Old. 4875, WORLO RECOGNISED
ACCREDITATION

 

Page: 10f1
This Document is issued in
accordance with NATA'S
accreditation requirements
Certificate Number:200220 Ref.Number, 14 ~- 2624
Nossaville Accredited for compliance with 1SO/

IEC 17025
Date: 27-Aug-07 Project Number, 307*-2624

 

Tests Completed: 21-Aug-07 Samples Received:

Signed: eh 09: Po

Trevor Nelson - Chemical Laboratory Manger:

17-Aug-07

for and on behalf of Soil and Water Laboratories P/L.

Determinations have been derived by the adoption of published test methods recommended by National Committea for Acid Sulphate Sails {NatCASS); Queensland Acid

1 Sulphate Soils Management Advisory Committee (QASSMAC); Queenstand Add Sulphate Soils Investigation Team (QASSIT) & Queensland Department of Natural
Resources, Mines and Energy; as described in the 'Acid Sulphate Soils Laboratory Methads Guidelines 2004".

2 Samples supptied by others

‘3 Samples tested in ‘as received’ condition

4 The resutts of the tests, calibrations and/or measurements incided in this doounent are traceable to Australiar/national standards

S NATA\Is a signatory to the APLAC mutual recognition arrangement for the mutual recognition of the equivatence of testing, calibration and inspection reports.

6 Denotation: n/a - not appiicable; n/r - nol required

Page 32

Soil & Water Laboratories P/L

16730 Corporation Carcut, Tweed Heads South, NSW. 2486
Phone: (02) 5623 4422; Fax: (07) 3503 9083

   
 

Calculated Factored Liming Rates

Basad on Certificate Number: 200220

Page: 1d

Reteronce Number, 4 + 2824

Date: 27-Aug-07 Client Order Project Number, 307°-2624

 

ay
ah oF
‘Siro. ‘or and on behalf of Soll ard Waler Labaratoriaa PAL

Trevor Nelson - Chemical Laboratory Manager

1 Determinations Assocatad wih the above quoted carficata cumber, hava bean dered by ihe adoption of published test methods recommentied Dy: Nations! Comrise for Aci! Sulphate Sos (NatCASS}: Quecnitand Acid Sulphate Sols Management Advisory Commitee (GASSMAC} Queensland Acid Suiphate Soila
Investigason Team {QASSIT) & Queansland Departmen of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy, 23 described wn the ‘Aca! Suiphala Soils Laboratory Mathods Guidelines 2004.

‘Samples supplied by others
‘Sampies lasted in ‘as recowed condition

The resuts of he tests, calbvations andi messurements associaled wth the above quoted certiicate number, aro tracaable to Auslralaninational standards
Lime dosing rates inchida a tacts of safely of 15.

100% punty (neuirakeng value) for aglme has been assumed; vanaton tom 100% in the product actually uted rust be lactored accontngly

‘Ady dansily of 45 tonnesim3 has been adopled for cakulalon of factored lang rates.

In determining ANC valves, pantcies mckdng shell greater Inen 2mm are exckided by sieving and vaible ford shel is removed by heed.

In datenining laring rales, the ANC values hava bean factored by 80%

10. The supemsing Scents Engineer shout! make thew own assessments regarding imng 6s, taking ta consiteraton ASSMP and Autnosty requrements
11 Tho Superwsing Scionts/Engneer should make their own essessmenis regaxiing lhe faclor of safety and dry densty valuss adopted for cakuistons

12 nt derolae ‘not requested’ 1va ‘not applcabis’

eereneaan

Page 33

Project No. 307-2624

* August, 2007

APPENDIX C

BOREHOLE LAYOUT PLAN

 

BY SOIL SURVEYS ENGINEERING

Page 34

earirinaary,

Borehole Layout Plan
6 The Promontory, Noosa Waters

Soil Surveys Engineering Pty Limited Project 307-2624
for
DeNova Group Pty Lid Date August 2007