Geotechnical Investigation Report
Geotechnical Investigation Report
Geotechnical Investigation Report
Eliza GE7586-20
CLIENT: Taylors
i
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1
2. FIELD INVESTIGATION.................................................................................................................... 2
2.1 Methodology.................................................................................................................................... 2
3. FINDINGS............................................................................................................................................. 4
3.1 Site Conditions and Topography .................................................................................................. 4
3.2 Site Geology ..................................................................................................................................... 4
3.3 Generalised Soil Profile .................................................................................................................. 5
3.4 Laboratory Testing .......................................................................................................................... 7
3.5 Site Classification ............................................................................................................................ 9
4. POTENTIAL MODES OF LANDSLIP ............................................................................................ 10
4.1 Proposed Site Development ........................................................................................................ 10
4.2 Potential Modes of Instability ..................................................................................................... 10
4.3 Past Landslips ................................................................................................................................ 12
5. SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................... 13
5.1 Soil Parameters .............................................................................................................................. 13
5.2 Result of Slope Stability Analysis ............................................................................................... 14
6. LANDSLIP RISK ASSESSMENT FOR PROPERTY LOSS ............................................................ 15
6.1 Risk Assessment Methodology ................................................................................................... 15
6.2 Likelihood of Failure Event ......................................................................................................... 17
6.2.1 Shallow Slump Failure Mode ............................................................................................................. 18
6.2.2 Deep Seated Failure Mode .................................................................................................................. 19
7. ASSESSMENT OF RISK TO LIFE .................................................................................................... 20
7.1 Method of Assessment ................................................................................................................. 20
7.2 Risk to Life ..................................................................................................................................... 21
8. LANDSLIP RISK MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................ 22
8.1 Risk Mitigation .............................................................................................................................. 22
8.2 Risk Treatments ............................................................................................................................. 22
9. FOOTING RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................ 31
9.1 Strip/Pad Footing System ............................................................................................................ 31
9.2 Slab on Ground.............................................................................................................................. 33
9.3 Bored Piers ..................................................................................................................................... 35
10. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TRENCHING ................................................................................. 37
10.1 Excavation Influence Zone ........................................................................................................ 37
10.2 Trench Excavation....................................................................................................................... 38
10.2.1 Open Cut Trenching ........................................................................................................................... 38
10.2.2 Trench Shields ..................................................................................................................................... 38
10.2.3 Drainage Pipeline Embedment ......................................................................................................... 39
10.3 Trench Backfill ............................................................................................................................. 40
10.3.1 Trafficable Areas ................................................................................................................................. 40
10.3.2 Non-Trafficable Areas ........................................................................................................................ 42
10.4 Trenchless Excavation ................................................................................................................ 44
11. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EARTH WORKS............................................................................ 46
11.1 Site Stripping & Clearing ........................................................................................................... 46
11.2 Earthworks ................................................................................................................................... 46
11.3 Drainage of Retention Systems ................................................................................................. 46
11.4 Erosion and Sediment Control .................................................................................................. 46
i
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
ii
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
1. INTRODUCTION
A geotechnical investigation and landslip risk assessment were conducted by Geotesta
for the proposed development at 33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza. The geotechnical
investigation work was authorized by Taylors.
This report provides information on the sub-surface soil profile, site classification, insitu
test results, result of landslip risk assessment, recommendations on trenching, allowable
bearing pressures for proposed footings, soil parameters for retaining wall & bored pier
design and pavement design.
1
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
2. FIELD INVESTIGATION
2.1 Methodology
The site-specific geotechnical investigation was carried out between 1 June and 3 June
2020 and involved of drilling/excavating of six (6) boreholes, nine (9) test pits and seven
(7) footing probes. A site plan showing the approximate location of boreholes, test pits
and footing probes is presented on Figure 1.
TP1
BH6
TP2
BH2
FP6
TP9
FP1
TP3 FP7 TP5
TP4
FP5 BH1
FP3
FP2
TP6
FP4
BH3
BH4
TP8
TP7
BH5
2
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
The drilling work was undertaken by Urban Drill Pty Ltd under full time supervision by
a Geotesta Geotechnical Engineer. The boreholes were drilled using continuous flight
solid auger driven by a track mounted GEO105 drill rig. Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
was undertaken within the soil layer at 1.5m depth interval starting at 1.5m below the
existing ground level.
The test pits and footing probes were excavated by Ross Services Pty Ltd using a 5 tonne
backhoe excavator. Dynamic Cone Penetration (DCP) testing was also conducted at each
test pit and footing probe to determine the soil consistency or relative density.
Upon completion of the field work, all boreholes, test pits and footing probes were
backfilled with the excavated material. The soil profiles encountered were logged by
Geotesta Geotechnical Engineer in accordance with AS1726- 2017. The borehole, test pit
and footing probe logs are attached in Appendix B.
3
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
3. FINDINGS
This 3.4 hectare site was a complex of hospital buildings at the northwest end of Jacksons
Road overlooking Canadian Bay. The site has been modified into terraces for the hospital
buildings that have been demolished except the former administration building, a two-
storey treatment ward and the chapel. Along the northwest boundary of the site is Mt
Eliza Foreshore Reserve. The contour map provided by the client is shown in Figure 2.
The 1:63,360 scale Geological Survey Map of Victoria indicates that the site is underlain
by Tertiary Baxter Sandstone (Tb) comprising ferruginous sandstone, sand, sandy clay,
occasional gravel. The extract of the local geology map is shown in Figure 3.
4
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Subject Site
The soil type encountered in the boreholes and test pits and the associated consistency/
density are tabulated in Table 1. Water seepage was found in test pit TP6 at 1m depth
and footing probes FP1, FP3, FP5 and FP6 at 1.0m, 1.3m, 0.9m and 0.65m depths
respectively.
5
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
6
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Representative soil samples were sent to Geotesta laboratory (NATA Accreditation No.
19167) for the following laboratory testing:
7
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
The laboratory test results are summarised in Table 2. The test certificates are attached in
Appendix C.
8
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Note: MC – Natural Moisture Content, LL – Liquid Limit, PI – Plasticity Index, LS – Linear Shrinkage, MDD –
Maximum Dry Density; OMC – Optimum Moisture Content; CBR – California Bearing Ratio
After considering the area geology, the soil profile encountered in the boreholes, test pits,
footing probes and the climatic zone of the area (zone 2); the site is classified as CLASS
P, with respect to foundation construction (Australian Standard 2870-2011 Residential
Slabs and Footings) due to the removal of existing buildings and sloping site condition.
It has been estimated that the Characteristic Surface Movement (ys) of the underlying
natural soil material will be in the range of 40mm to 60mm provided the building site is
protected from “abnormal moisture conditions” and is drained as described in AS 2870.
It must be emphasized that the heave mentioned and recommendations referred to in this
report are based solely on the observed soil profile observed at the time of the
investigation for this report, without taking into account any abnormal moisture
conditions as defined in AS2870 – 2011, Clause 1.3.3 that might be created thereafter. With
abnormal moisture conditions, distresses will occur and may result in “nonacceptable
probabilities of serviceability and safety of the building during its design life”, as defined
in AS2870-2011, Clause 1.3.1. If these distresses are not acceptable to the builder, owner
or other relevant parties then further fieldwork and revised footing recommendations
must be carried out.
9
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
It is proposed to construct new dwellings with a single level basement and the associated
access roads at the site. The cross sections of the proposed ground profiles are shown in
Figure 4. Based on the provided master plans, some of the construction activities related
to the slope conditions are:
• Construction of the proposed development and the effect of live loading from
machinery and materials during construction activities;
• Cutting and filling of the existing slope to create construction pads for the
proposed buildings and roads;
• Construction of retaining walls and basements;
• Modifying the surface and subsurface drainage;
• Change of surface runoff regime and clearance of existing vegetation.
There are two main classes of potential failure hazards that may be caused by the
proposed development.
Mode 1: Shallow slump failure (earth slide or earth flow) involves retaining walls, cuts
and fill slopes with limited failure extent. It may also occur in the slopes and retaining
walls subject to poor maintenance or additional surcharge;
10
Figure 4 - Potential Modes of Failure (not to scale)
TITLE BOUNDARY
TITLE BOUNDARY
8M HEIGHT LIMIT
32.15 FL APT01-E-ROOF
31.00 FL APT01-W-ROOF
28.65 FL APT01-E-FIRST
BH1 TP4
ê
27.50 FL APT01-W-FIRST
ê
26.60 FL HB04-N-SECOND
NGL
25.15 FL APT01-E-GROUND
TP3
24.00 FL APT01-W-GROUND
23.10 FL HB04-N-FIRST HB02-N-ROOF FL 23.10
ê
21.75 FL APT01-E-BASEMENT 12480
20.80 FL APT01-W-BASEMENT
TP9
19.60 FL HB04-N-GROUND
TIRED GARDEN BED
HB02-N-FIRST FL 19.60 SETBACK
8M HEIGHT LIMIT
UO02-ROOF FL 17.50
ê
APT 01 EAST APT 01 WEST HB02-N-GROUND FL 16.10
ST-FIRST FL 16.40
BH6
BASEMENT UO02-FIRST FL 14.00
ê
HYBRID VILLA 04 HYBRID VILLA 02 SINGLE STOREY UNIT UO02-GROUND FL 10.50
UNDER OVER 02
NGL
8M HEIGHT LIMIT
BH5
BH3 8M HEIGHT LIMIT
ê
21.75 FL APT03-W-ROOF
TP9
19.60 FL APT05-FIRST
ê
18.25 FL APT03-W-FIRST
NGL
ê
POOL HOUSE GROUND FL 16.50
16.10 FL APT05-GROUND
14.75 FL APT03-W-GROUND
12.60 FL APT05-BASEMENT 12.59 FL EX. MULTI HOUSE GROUND EX. MULTI HOUSE GROUND FL 12.59
11.55 FL APT03-W-BASEMENT
NGL
11125
NORTH POINT
SETBACK
8M HEIGHT LIMIT
8M HEIGHT LIMIT
21.75 FL APT04-S-ROOF
2740 1780
JACKSONS ROAD
19.50 FL APT04-N-ROOF
TP6
18.25 FL APT04-S-FIRST
ê
U/O 01
16.00 FL APT04-N-FIRST HB 01 HB 03 HB 05
ê
3910
14.75 FL APT04-S-GROUND
12.50 FL APT04-N-GROUND
11.55 FL APT04-S-BASEMENT
NGL BH4 &TP8 U/O 02 HB 02 HB 04
APT 01
NGL
APT 04 NORTH EXISTING POOL HOUSE 1 1
MT.
2
APT 04 SOUTH
ELI
MT ELIZA
3 POOL 5
ZA
HOUSE T0
AP
FOR
HB 06
2
T0
AP
ESH
3 SECTION3 FOR GEOTECH T0
3
ORE
APT 04 AP
SK10-7 1 : 250 HB 0
7
RES
ERV
LEGENDS
2
PEL
3
ICA
N P
Shallow Failure
L
Deep Seated Failure
PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER DATE SCALE @A1 DRAWING TITLE DRAWING No. REV
viaarchitects.com.au / +61 3 8678 3300 BEACHLEIGH RETIREMENT 1910046 23/07/2020 As indicated SECTION FOR GEOTECH SK10-7
COMMUNITY
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
There are no available records of landslip in this site. The site does not exist in any Erosion
Management Overlay (EMO).
12
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
A A
Stability analysis on the selected cross section has been undertaken based on the
following:
• Slope profile based on the survey plan and master plans provided by the client
• Soil profile encountered in the test stations
• Interpretation of field test results and laboratory test results
• The groundwater table is estimated to be way below the potential failure line as
no groundwater was encountered in the boreholes and test pits along the section
The adopted geotechnical parameters for the stability analysis are listed in Table 3. 20kPa
surcharge is applied as the loading from the proposed double-storey building.
13
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
The assessed factor of safety against deep seated failure using Morgenstern-Price method
is in the order of 3.46. The result of the slope stability analysis is presented in Figure 6.
Sand Fill
14
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
The risk assessment process is a qualitative process designed to enable ranking of the
sites identified as hazardous. This ranking is important to allow prioritizing sites for
either nomination to a hazard monitoring program or for hazard treatment. In this
qualitative process, risk has been assessed as the product of likelihood and consequence
criteria, determined by a matrix method in line with accepted risk management
principles.
15
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
A qualitative risk rate is derived by using the standard form of risk analysis matrix as per
Table 6 below. This matrix assigns a four-fold risk level ranging from VH (very high), H
(high), M (moderate) to L (low).
Table 6: Qualitative Risk Analysis Matrix – Level of Risk to Property
Indicative Consequences to Property
Value of
Likelihood Approximate 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Annual Catastrophic Major Medium Minor Insignificant
Probability 200% 60% 20% 5% 0.5%
Almost
10-1 VH VH VH H M or L
Certain (A)
Possible
10-3 VH H M M VL
(C)
Unlikely
10-4 H M L L VL
(D)
16
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Barely
Credible 10-6 L VL VL VL VL
(F)
The implication of each risk level is listed in Table 7 below. These implications are only
given as a general guide as the implications for a particular site are often very site-
specific.
Table 7: Risk Level Implications
Risk Level Implications
Unacceptable without treatment. Extensive detailed investigation and
VH - Very research, planning and implementation of treatment options essential to
High reduce risk to Low; may be too expensive and not practical. Work likely
to cost more than value of the property
Unacceptable without treatment. Detailed investigation, planning and
implementation of treatment options required to reduce risk to Low.
H – High
Work would cost a substantial sum in relation to the value of the
property
May be tolerated in certain circumstances (subjected to regulator’s
approval) but requires investigation, planning and implementation of
M – Moderate
treatment options to reduce the risk to Low. Treatment options to reduce
to Low risk should be implemented as soon as practicable
Usually acceptable to regulators. Where treatment has been required to
L – Low
reduce the risk to this level, ongoing maintenance is required
VL – Very Low Acceptable. Manage by normal slope maintenance procedures
The risk assessment on property loss is carried out with reference to the guidelines set
out by the Australian Geomechanics Society (AGS) in “Practice Note Guidelines for
Landslide Risk Management 2007” as published in the Australian Geomechanics Journal,
Vol. 42 No. 1, March 2007c.
The probability of a slope failure event has been estimated based on inspection of the site
and any indications of current or past events.
17
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
These observations can enable an estimation of indicative annual probability for both
small volume shallow slumps and deep seated failure.
Likelihood
The major factors which govern the likelihood of a shallow slump are the presence of:
• Alteration of soil moisture condition due to the removal of vegetation covers and the
installation of new surface and subsurface drainage;
• Additional pressure on the slope from the proposed structures and construction
machinery.
A design that incorporated a good surface and subsurface drainage system, limited the
number and extent of fill, incorporated placement of engineered fill and engineer
designed earth retaining structures would reduce the likelihood of a shallow slump
failure occurring to “Unlikely”.
Although it is acknowledged that the client cannot control development beyond the
boundaries of their site, good maintenance of the drain in the adjacent properties will
also be important to prevent over saturation of the slope.
If drainage of the site is not managed well, it could lead to saturation of the soil profile
and reducing the soil shear strength. The likelihood of a shallow slump failure would
therefore increase if the above factors eventuate. They can, of course, be offset by ensuring
good drainage and placement of engineered fill. Some mitigation options against the
slope instability are presented in section 8 of this report.
Consequences
The elements at risk on this site are the buildings and the associated access roads. A small
slump failure may cause “Minor” damage to the structures.
18
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
A deep seated failure involving deeper soil profile is heavily dependent on the overall
slope angle and in the engineering properties of the soil mass. The common triggers that
initiate deep seated slope failure are excessive cutting or erosion and change in
groundwater conditions including saturation in the uppermost soil profile due to poor
surface drainage condition. A review of the geomorphology of this region indicates that
the likelihood of failure through the soil mass occurring at the site is “Rare”.
If the engineering recommendations suggested in this report are adopted and the works
do not involve excavation of any substantial cuttings or significant fill, as proposed, it is
considered that the impact of the proposed development with regards to this mode of
failure will be further reduced its likelihood of occurring.
Consequences
The deep seated failure occurring at the site may result in “Major” damage to the
buildings and the associated access roads. A construction strategy that improves the
surface and subsurface drainage conditions and minimises or prohibits deep excavation
undercutting slopes should be adopted.
The estimated risk levels are listed in Table 8 below. It should be noted that the risk level
has been estimated based on the assumption that all the risk mitigation recommendations
given in this report are adopted.
Table 8: Risk Levels after Implementing Risk Mitigation Measures
Likelihood of
Mode of Failure Element at Risk Consequence Risk
Occurrence
Adopting an Important Level 2 ((Buildings and facilities below the limits set for
Importance Level 3) (NCC Volume 1, 2015), the suggested acceptable qualitative risk to
property criteria is “Low (L)”.
19
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
The risk of loss of life has been estimated using the methodology outlined by the AGS,
2007, Section 7.
Where:
For shallow slump failure the assessed likelihood is unlikely, i.e. P(H)=10-4
For deep seated failure the assessed likelihood is rare, i.e. P(H)=10-5
• P(S:H) is the probability of spatial impact of the landslip impacting a building (location) taking
into account the travel distance and travel direction given the event.
The shallow slump failure may occur at any cut/fill and retaining walls that would be
required for the development. This failure is estimated to hit a part of the buildings
and roads in the lot. P(S:H) for shallow slump failure is estimated as 0.7. The deep
seated failure may also impact a part of the buildings and roads in the lot. Hence, the
P(S:H) for deep seated failure is estimated as 0.5.
• P(T:S) is the temporal spatial probability (e.g. of the building or location being occupied by the
individual) given the spatial impact and allowing for the possibility of evacuation given there
is warning of the landslip occurrence.
In this case it is assumed that the person most at risk stays on the roads on average 2
hours/day, 365 days per year, so P(S:T)=0.08. The person most at risk occupies the
buildings on average 20 hours/day, 365 days per year, so P(S:T) is 0.83.
• V(D:T) is the vulnerability of the individual (probability of loss of life of the individual given
the impact).
Vulnerability values of the person most at risk on the roads due to shallow slump
failure and deep seated failure are 0.3 and 0.7 respectively. Vulnerability value of the
person most at risk in the buildings due to shallow slump failure and deep seated
failure are 0.1 and 0.5. respectively.
20
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
unlikely to cause any significant effect on the structures due to spatial distance and/or
low impact energy, such as a shallow slump.
Based on the stated tolerable risks for loss of life of the AGS (2007) guidelines, a risk of
10-5 per annum for persons most at risk on new development is considered tolerable
provided that risk treatment options will be employed to maintain or reduce the level of
risk. Acceptable risks are usually considered to be one order of magnitude smaller than
tolerable risks (i.e. 10-6 per annum).
Table 9: Risk Estimate - Loss of Life
Probability of
Likelihood of
Vulnerability
Probability
Occurrence
Individual
Indicative
Temporal
Annual
Spatial
Impact
Factor
Risk
Mode of Failure
An evaluation of the estimated risk levels against the adopted criteria indicates that the
risk of shallow slump is “Tolerable” for the person most at risk in the buildings and on
the roads within the lot. The risk of deep seated failure is “Acceptable” for the person
most at risk on the roads within the lot while the risk of deep seated failure is “Tolerable”
for the person most at risk in the buildings.
21
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Based on the landslip risk assessment detailed in the preceding sections, the following
site-specific risk mitigation options have been considered in the preparation of this
document.
Additional control measures should be adopted to reduce the risk to an acceptable level.
The work may involve the following scope of work:
• Review the existing surface stormwater drain. The surface runoff should be regulated
to prevent flow onto the slope.
• Installation of engineer designed retaining walls for any cut or fill batter higher than
1m or create a minimum batter of 2H:1V in unretained cut or engineered fill. The
retaining walls can be designed adopting the soil parameters listed in Table 10.
Table 10: Earth Pressure Coefficients & Soil Strength Parameters
Borehole / Depth (m) Soil Type Consistency/ Su c’ ’
Test Pit No. Density (kPa) (kPa) (deg) (kN/m3)
22
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
23
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Note: Su= Undrained Shear Strength; c’= effective cohesion; ’=effective friction angle; = unit weight
24
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
For construction methods which minimise deflection and where restraint is applied via
struts, bracings or anchors, the temporary or short-term lateral earth pressure distribution
should be approximated as a trapezoidal distribution behind the retaining wall. A
maximum lateral earth pressure of 8H kPa is obtained at a depth of 0.25H, and where H
is the total depth of the excavation to be retained. For basement walls where wall
deflections are not critical, the maximum lateral earth pressure may be reduced to 6H kPa.
The above parameters assume that an effective drainage system exists over the full height
of the wall and that any adjacent surcharge loadings are superimposed using the “at rest”
earth pressure coefficient (K0) of 0.57 It must be emphasised that where adjoining footings
exist near the retaining walls, the “at rest” earth pressures must be maintained, and the
active design condition is not appropriate.
The use of anchored soldier piles in conjunction with reinforced shotcrete infill panels can
be adopted for this site. In considering such a retention system, the following aspects
should be taken into account in the design and construction of the proposed retaining
walls:
• The anchors should be considered with earth pressure “at rest” condition as the design
criteria.
• The soldier piles should be installed at maximum spacing of three times the pile
diameter prior to the commencement of the bulk excavation for the basement.
• Reinforced shotcrete should be applied to all the exposed faces of the basement
excavation prior to the commencement of the next level of excavation. Shotcrete should
be applied before the bulk excavation exceeds a depth of approximately 1.0 metre.
However, this may require review based on the encountered soil conditions and once
the levels of adjoining footings are known.
• Excavation for the basement level should not extend more than 0.5 metres below the
level of the ground anchors if they are used to maintain “at rest” earth pressures before
the anchors are installed and fully pre-stressed.
Ground Anchors
Ground anchors used in connection with the temporary support of any retention
structures should extend into the very stiff to hard clay, with the design being based on a
grout/ground bond strength of 25kPa (drilled using air flush or auger methods) above the
ground water table.
25
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
The free length of ground anchors should be sufficient to ensure that failure cannot occur
on a sliding wedge behind the retention wall structure. As a guide, it is therefore
recommended that the free length of the ground anchors should extend at least 1.5m
beyond the 45° line extending from the bottom of the basement excavation.
It is recommended that the proposed ground anchors be given sufficient capacity such
that additional stress can be applied throughout the construction sequence to limit wall
deflections, as required, based on regular monitoring of wall deflections. In addition, the
depth to the top row of anchors should not be greater than 1.5m below the ground surface
level.
The maximum wall deflection is estimated to lie in the range between 0.25% and 0.35% of
the excavation depth. Corresponding vertical settlements of between 0.20% and 0.25% of
the excavation depth can be anticipated directly behind the wall, with settlements
reducing to zero at a lateral distance approximately corresponding to the depth of the
basement excavation. When considering the influence of the anticipated settlements on
the existing adjoining structures, the founding depths of the existing footings should be
taken into account.
In addition to the inherent deformations which will take place within the proposed
basement excavation, there may be some minor delays between excavation and the
establishment of a suitable anchoring arrangement, during which time additional minor
lateral deflection may take place. A full dilapidation survey of any adjoining structures is
therefore recommended prior to the commencement of the basement excavation. This
should be followed by regular survey and monitoring during construction.
As seepage infiltration from perched water table is quite likely to be present in the zones
of influence during wet season, it is recommended that a suitable drainage system be
installed and maintained behind all retaining wall structures to ensure the dissipation of
any hydrostatic forces which may result from the accumulation of any seepage water
behind the wall structures. Such seepage water flows should readily be able to be
intercepted by the construction of a suitable sub-surface cut-off drain on the high side of
the subject site.
26
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Provided that the basement excavation does not intersect the groundwater table and no
hydrostatic pressures will be generated on the underside of the basement floor, the use of
a conventional concrete ground slab should perform satisfactorily in relation to the
proposed utilisation.
Based on the information derived from the borehole logs, the proposed basement floor
slab should be constructed on dense silty sand subgrade and may be designed using a
Modulus of Subgrade reaction of 40kPa/mm. In the unlikely event of rising ground water,
under-slab drainage should be provided to prevent hydrostatic build-up.
Preparation of the basement floor subgrade should consist of stripping to grade and proof
rolling the subgrade, ensuring that any localized soft spots are removed and made good
with clean granular filling compacted to a dry density not less than 98% of the maximum
dry density value determined by the Standard Compaction test in accordance with
Australian Standard AS1289 5.1.1 -2017.
8.2.2 Drainage
• It is important that drainage of the slope in the vicinity of the proposed development
is well managed. This may include ensuring that the surface stormwater drain is
regularly maintained and diverted away from the slope. If stormwater is collected
into a water storage tank, care must be taken to ensure that the overflow is discharged
into a legal point of discharge via a sealed pipe. No excess water should discharge
directly onto the slope.
• Surface water should be prevented from ponding anywhere on site. Install surface
spoon drains and subsurface drains as recommended and drain the collected water to
an appropriate legal point of discharge specified by the Council.
• The water from the swimming pool in the proposed pool house can be treated via a
solid settling tank or cartridge filter with the water recycled back into the pool.
Alternatively, the discharged water can be stored for re-use via sealed pipework.
27
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Any retaining wall structures should have adequate surface and subsurface drainage
installed behind the crest and at the toe of the wall to collect water and direct it to an
appropriate outlet point specified by Council. The subsurface drain aimed to prevent
surface soil saturation in the area behind the wall.
The following guidelines should be adopted for any earthwork that may be required at
the site:
• Any unrestrained fill on this site or during construction should be minimised to not
greater than 1.0m in height above the original ground surface level. Fill should be
placed in layers not exceeding 150mm loose thickness and compacted to achieve 95%
standard compaction dry density as per AS 3798 - 2007 “Guidelines on earthworks for
commercial and residential developments”. It is recommended that the backfill
material be tested to ensure it meets the required minimum compaction criteria;
• The existing material derived in-situ is considered suitable for fill material, except for
materials greater than 75mm, such as large cobbles or boulders;
• All topsoil and any unsuitable material must be removed to ensure subgrade is free
from material that may inhabit or prevent the satisfactory placement of subsequent
fill layers.
• Key any fill into the natural slope. The existing slope should be excavated to a
minimum depth of 0.3m prior to the placement of fill. All vegetation and topsoil
should be removed before placing fill;
• The unrestrained cut and fill slope should not be steeper than 2H:1V;
8.2.5 Vegetation
Revegetation of bare patches resulting from any construction works is essential for
limiting the effects of erosion. Revegetating reshaped batters is integral to maintain
surface stability and balance water in the soils.
28
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
• The property owner should engage a Geotechnical Engineer to inspect the site in the
first year after the construction of the development is completed. The inspection
should include visual observation of the slope condition in the vicinity of the
proposed development.
29
Figure 7: Proposed Landslip Risk Mitigation Measures
TITLE BOUNDARY
Drain and discharge the roof
water to the water tank or a
TITLE BOUNDARY
8M HEIGHT LIMIT
legal point of discharge.
32.15 FL APT01-E-ROOF
31.00 FL APT01-W-ROOF
28.65 FL APT01-E-FIRST
27.50 FL APT01-W-FIRST
26.60 FL HB04-N-SECOND
NGL
25.15 FL APT01-E-GROUND
24.00 FL APT01-W-GROUND
23.10 FL HB04-N-FIRST HB02-N-ROOF FL 23.10
19.60 FL HB04-N-GROUND
TIRED GARDEN BED
HB02-N-FIRST FL 19.60 SETBACK
8M HEIGHT LIMIT
UO02-ROOF FL 17.50
UNDER OVER 02
1 SECTION1 FOR GEOTECH with AGI drain behind the retaining wall
SK10-7 1 : 250
18.25 FL APT03-W-FIRST
NGL
POOL HOUSE GROUND FL 16.50
16.10 FL APT05-GROUND
14.75 FL APT03-W-GROUND
12.60 FL APT05-BASEMENT 12.59 FL EX. MULTI HOUSE GROUND EX. MULTI HOUSE GROUND FL 12.59
11.55 FL APT03-W-BASEMENT
NGL
11125
NORTH POINT
SETBACK
8M HEIGHT LIMIT
8M HEIGHT LIMIT
21.75 FL APT04-S-ROOF
2740 1780
JACKSONS ROAD
19.50 FL APT04-N-ROOF
18.25 FL APT04-S-FIRST
U/O 01
16.00 FL APT04-N-FIRST HB 01 HB 03 HB 05
3910
14.75 FL APT04-S-GROUND
MT.
2
APT 04 SOUTH
ELI
MT ELIZA
3 POOL 5
ZA
HOUSE T0
AP
FOR
HB 06
2
T0
AP
ESH
3 SECTION3 FOR GEOTECH T0
3
ORE
APT 04 AP
SK10-7 1 : 250 HB 0
7
RES
ERV
2
PEL
3
ICA
N P
L
PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER DATE SCALE @A1 DRAWING TITLE DRAWING No. REV
viaarchitects.com.au / +61 3 8678 3300 BEACHLEIGH RETIREMENT 1910046 23/07/2020 As indicated SECTION FOR GEOTECH SK10-7
COMMUNITY
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
9. FOOTING RECOMMENDATIONS
Any proposed buildings on this site can be founded on strip/pad footings or slab on
ground footings or bored piers.
Based on site observations, subsurface investigations and the size and type of the
proposed development, it is considered that the site should be assigned a Class P
classification (slope stability), in accordance with AS 2870 - 2011. We recommend that the
designing engineer refer to AS2870-2011 to ensure design compliance to this document.
The strip footings should be founded in the natural soil layer and penetrate through any
fill material, tree roots and founded at least 100mm into the recommended founding
material. As a guide with information obtained from the bores, the actual founding depth
for strip/pad footings at the test locations should be as follow:
31
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
It should be noted that the soil profile may vary across the site. The foundation depths
quoted in this report are measured from the surface during our testing and may vary
accordingly if any filling or excavation works are carried out. It is recommended that a
geotechnical engineer be engaged during footing excavation stage to confirm the
founding depth and founding material.
32
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
It is recommended that an engineer designed slab on ground footing system for a class
H1 site be used on this site. We recommend that the designing engineer refer to AS2870-
2011 to ensure design compliance to this document.
The edge and load bearing beams for the slab footings should be founded in the natural
soil layer and penetrate through any fill material, tree roots and founded at least 100 mm
into the recommended founding material. As a guide with information obtained from the
bores, the founding depth for edge and load bearing beams at the test locations should
be as follow:
Table 12: Geotechnical Parameters for Edge and Load Bearing Beams
Borehole Founding Depth (m) Founding Material Allowable Bearing
Location Capacity (kPa)
0.7 Sand with clay 150
1.0 Sand with clay 200
BH1
1.5 Sandy clay 250
3.0 Sandy clay 300
0.7 Sand trace clay/ Sand with 150
gravels and clay
1.0 Sand trace clay/ Sand with 200
BH2 gravels and clay
1.5 Sand trace clay/ Sand with 250
gravels and clay
3.0 Sand with gravel/ Sandy clay 300
0.7 Clayey sand 100
1.0 Sandy silt 115
BH3
1.5 Silty clay 150
3.0 Silty clay 250
0.7 Sand 150
1.0 Sand 200
BH4
1.5 Sand 250
3.0 Clayey sand/ Sandy clay 250
0.7 Clayey sand 150
1.0 Clayey sand 200
BH5
1.5 Clayey sand 250
3.0 Clayey sand/ Sandy clay 300
0.7 Sand 100
1.0 Sandy clay 120
BH6
1.5 Sandy clay 140
3.0 Sandy clay 300
0.7 Silty clay 150
TP1 1.0 Silty clay 200
1.5 Sandy clay with gravel 250
33
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
It should be noted that the soil profile may vary across the site. The foundation depths
quoted in this report are measured from the surface during our testing and may vary
accordingly if any filling or excavation works are carried out. It is recommended that a
geotechnical engineer be engaged during footing excavation stage to confirm the
founding depth and founding material.
Slab panels and internal beams can be founded in the natural soil profile or in compacted
surface filling and/or as required in the design by engineering principles. Compacted
filling used to raise levels beneath panels must be placed and compacted as per
specifications for controlled or rolled fill.
Controlled fill is material that has been placed and compacted in layers by compaction
equipment within a defined moisture range to a defined density requirement. Except as
provided below, controlled fill shall be placed in accordance with AS 3798.
If more than 400mm of CLAY FILL or 800mm of SAND FILL, imported or site derived,
including existing FILL material, is required, then the slab must be designed as a
34
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
suspended slab and supported by a grid of beams founded through any fill material in
accordance with the above edge beam recommendations.
Any proposed buildings can be supported on bored piers. Bored piers shall be founded
at minimum 2.0m depth below finish ground level. The carrying capacity of bored piers
can be estimated adopting the following parameters:
35
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Geotechnical Geotechnical
Depth Below
Bore Design Unit Design End
Existing Ground Soil Type
No. Skin Friction Bearing Capacity
Level (m)
(kPa) (kPa)
BH3 6.0-9.0 Silty clay 50 600
9.0-10.0 Sandy clay 50 750
BH4 0.0-0.2 Fill - -
0.2-1.6 Sand 5 -
1.6-2.0 Sandy clay 15 250
2.0-3.0 Clayey sand 20 300
3.0-4.5 Sandy clay 20 250
4.5-5.5 Sandy clay 15 210
5.5-6.0 Sandy clay 30 360
BH5 0.0-0.2 Sand trace clay 5 -
0.2-2.0 Clayey sand 10 250
2.0-3.2 Clayey sand/ Sandy clay 20 350
3.2-4.5 Sand with clay/ clayey sand 25 450
4.5-6.0 Sandy clay/ Silty clay 50 600
BH6 0.0-0.15 Fill - -
0.15-1.0 Sand trace clay 5 -
1.0-2.0 Sandy clay 15 200
2.0-3.0 Sandy clay 20 250
3.0-4.5 Sandy clay with silt 40 500
4.5-6.0 Silty clay/ Sandy clay 40 600
The geotechnical end bearing capacities above have been estimated based on the
geotechnical parameter at the bottom of each corresponding soil layer. A geotechnical
engineer should be engaged during bored pier excavation stage to confirm the founding
depth and founding material.
Groundwater was not encountered in all boreholes during investigation. However, water
was found flowing into test pit TP6 and footing probes FP1, FP3, FP5 and FP6. Installation
of bored piers below ground/perch water table may require casing to protect the soil from
collapsing.
36
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Any footings that are close to the proposed trench excavation and within the excavation
influence zone should be protected from potential collapse and undermining. The
excavation influence zone is measured from the base of the excavation at an angle of 45°
to the horizontal as shown in Figure 8 below.
For example, if a structure adjacent to the excavation is founded on 0.6m deep strip
footings and the extent of the pressure distribution below the footing is equal to 3B (B is
the width of the footing, assuming 0.6m), the influence zone below a footing should be
measured at a depth of 1.8m below the base of the footing. Assuming an influence zone
below a footing extends 45° to the horizontal and allowing for construction tolerances of
up to 0.2m, the clear horizontal distance between any structural footing and the proposed
trench excavation should be greater than 2.0m.
The above recommendations are subject to all unsupported temporary excavation work
being undertaken during dry weather conditions and excavations not left open for an
extended period of time. Timely excavation, pipe placement and backfilling are
important as the excavated natural silty clay tends to weaken over time.
Figure 8: Excavation Zones of Influence
45°
Excavation
Excavation
Zone of
Excavation Zone of
Influence
Influence
45° 45°
37
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Selection of the most appropriate installation technique at any location along the
proposed trenches should take into account as a minimum:
Temporary excavation into the compacted clay fill material can be undertaken in a similar
manner to that used for the natural soil. The temporary excavation batter in sandy or
gravelly soil or poorly compacted fill should be no steeper than 1H:1V.
The above recommendations are based on the assumption that there is no existing
structure adjacent to the excavation area. Even at the above cut batters it should be noted
that following rainy periods, some degree of fretting and minor slumping could be
anticipated.
Water seepage was found in test pit TP6 at 1.0m depth and in footing probes FP1, FP3,
FP5 and FP6 at 1.0m, 1.3m, 0.9m and 0.65m depths respectively. A suitable dewatering
system (spears or sump pump) may be required to pump groundwater in the event that
the groundwater is encountered above the pipe invert level.
38
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
4.75 100
2.36 50-100
0.600 10-50
0.150 0-20
0.075 0-5
To prevent concentrated point loading on the pipe from the embedment material and to
ensure uniform support around the pipeline; the maximum particle size shall not be
greater than that specified in Table 15 (adapted from AS/NZS 2566.1:1998, Table C1).
Table 15: Maximum Particle Size
Nominal pipe diameter size range (mm) Maximum particle size (mm)
<100 10
100-150 14
>150 20
Testing Requirements
It is recommended that a number of grading tests be carried out on the embedment
material before placing the pipeline. Suitability for use as an embedment material should
be based on the above tables. Tests for grading characteristics should be undertaken at a
minimum frequency of one test per 45 metres.
39
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Type F Locations- Those locations that receive occasional or rare traffic and those areas
that require additional support to protect existing assets, such as houses, pavement, etc.
These locations include:
• In the side easement of private property within 3m of a building or building envelope,
• The ground next to the back of kerb equal in width to the main’s cover to a maximum
of 1m,
• The ground next to driveways and car parks equal in width to the main’s cover to a
maximum of 1m,
• The full length of any constructed footpath (including, but not limited to concrete,
asphalt, crushed rock footpaths).
• The ground next to footpaths equal in width to the main’s cover to a maximum of 1m,
• The full width of any median strip,
• Within 1.5m of a sewer maintenance structure, shaft or riser (jump up) which is
located in a non-trafficable area,
• Within 400mm of a pressure main surface fitting (hydrant riser and cover, valve
spindle and cover) which is located in a non-trafficable area,
• Any other areas where controlled compaction is required to minimise the potential of
subsidence.
Where part of the trench’s width is located within the above mentioned zone(s), the full
width of the trench then needs to be backfilled to the higher specification. Typically, only
assets which have less 1.5m cover can be located in the nature strip while still using Non-
Trafficable backfill. It is usually not possible to wholly contain deeper trenches within the
narrow Non-Trafficable part of the nature strip.
Material Specification
All trafficable backfill material shall be as per Table 16:
40
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Material Specification
20mm Class 2 or 4 Fine Crushed Rock (FCR) VicRoads Standard 812
20mm Class 4 Crushed Scoria (not acceptable for CWW VicRoads Standard 818
water supply projects)
Type F Locations:
Water Agency approved 20mm Class 4 (or better).
Density Specification
The required densities for trench fill under all trafficable areas including footpaths are
summarised in Table 6. Using the Modified Compaction test (AS1289.5.2.1) the minimum
dry density ratio (AS1289.5.4.1) required shall be as per Table 17:
Table 17: Minimum Trafficable Density Requirements
Below 300mm;
If Crushed Rock: 95% SDDR
If Sand (Special dispensation from the road owner 80% (minimum density index) or 10
and/ or Water Agency would be required): blows/300mm (Perth Sand
Penetrometer)
Note: SDDR: standard dry density ratio
41
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Material Specification
Trench backfill for non-trafficable areas may comprise of suitable site derived or
imported material.
Where imported fill is used it should have the following properties; no organic material,
a plasticity index of greater than 7, maximum particle size of 75 mm and contain at least
12% fines (particles less than 0.075 mm).
If rock is encountered during excavations, care should be taken to remove oversized rock
material prior to backfilling. Ordinary or selected fill shall be limited to a depth of 4m or
not used (if the risk is deemed to be unacceptable). Backfill at depths deeper than this
shall utilise granular material.
Some ordinary fill may behave essentially as cohesive material, but may contain greater
than 20% of rock material which is coarser than 37.5 mm. Such material may be
acceptable as backfill but cannot be tested using the methods of AS1289. As compaction
testing is not possible, special dispensation will be required from the Water Agency to
use this material and more rigorous risk controls (eg: higher level of auditing) will need
to be adopted.
Cohesionless Soils
Backfill shall be compacted to achieve Minimum Density Index of 60% in terms of Density
Index (AS 1289.5.6.1) or Minimum PSP penetration resistance of 7 blows per 300 mm
using a Perth Sand Penetrometer (PSP) (AS 1289.6.3.3). The surface soils may be loosened
by the process with sands compacted using mechanical means. Testing of the penultimate
layer is often required to assess compliance. The final layers will then require additional
attention to achieve compliance, often with static rolling compaction.
Place the fill in layers with uniform thickness and mechanically compact it to achieve the
designated performance criteria. Backfill below a depth of 4m shall be granular.
42
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Cohesive Soil
In-situ silty clay or sandy clay material can be used as backfill material. The required
specification of cohesive backfill material and compaction control are summarized in the
Table 18.
Max time to stockpile (dry & temp >30 °C) 24 hours 24 hours
Non-trafficable cohesive soil backfill shall be placed to achieve the minimum compaction
levels described in Table 19.
Table 19: Non-Trafficable Density Ratio Requirements (modified)
Deeper than 600mm below the finished surface level 90% (minimum)
43
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Compaction Requirements
Compaction of both backfill and embedment material is required to ensure that excessive
surface settlement does not occur.
Site Derived Traffic Area 1 test per layer per 25m or 3 tests per
(Embedment Only) layer, or 3 tests per visit
Imported Traffic Area 1 test per layer per 25m or 3 tests per
layer, or 3 tests per visit whichever is
greater
Tested layers that do not satisfy the outlined criteria shall be stripped, replaced, re-
compacted and retested to achieve the minimum compaction requirement specified for
back fill.
Subject to the final detailed design of the proposed trenches, installation of the pipeline
can be undertaken by either trench or trenchless techniques.
44
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Auger Form of pipe jacking where spoil at Jacking/receiving pits required 2.5m to 6m in
boring/ leading edge of pipe is excavated and (will require dewatering); diameter.
directional removed using an auger. Up to 60m Jacking distance dependant on
drilling long. Typical pipe diameter from 200 pipe material and provisions
to 1500mm. to reduce jacking force (e.g.
bentonite, polymers)
Micro Form of pipe jacking where spoil is Jacking/receiving pits required Approx. 4m by
tunnelling excavated using miniature TBM; (will require dewatering) 2m for 450mm
from 100 to 200m long. Typical pipe φ installation
diameter from 300mm to 1500mm
The method of construction and temporary works designed for trenchless excavation
should be selected by an experienced specialist contractor and be provided to the design
engineer for review.
45
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Unless otherwise specified, grass, uncontrolled fill material and other unsuitable
materials shall be removed from the site. All trees and stumps are to be similarly
removed, such areas backfilled and compacted as per Australian Standards AS3798-2007,
Guideline earthworks for commercial and residential developments. As an indication
from site observation and boreholes, at least the uppermost 300mm thick topsoil should
be stripped off prior to placement of any fill.
11.2 Earthworks
Where it is necessary to raise the levels of all or part of the subdivision area, such filled
material should be free of organic and/or unsuitable material and shall be placed in layers
not exceeding 250mm loose thickness. Each layer will be suitably compacted prior to the
laying of the next layer, to a minimum 95% of maximum dry density of standard
compaction. The water content of the fill should be reduced by aeration or increased by
adding water as necessary to achieve this required compaction. Silty Sand or Sand fill
material should be used for earthworks if any fill placing is proposed over the existing
silty sand layer. Otherwise existing silty sand layer should be removed prior to use any
clay fill material.
Erosion and sediment control plan should be implemented before commencing any
earthworks for the proposed development. Below are some general guidelines to be taken
into considerations:
46
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Trafficability during wet season may be difficult due to presence of silty sand/ sandy silt
material at ground level. Temporary ground improvement together with improving
surface and subsurface drainage may be required on site to improve the site trafficability
during wet season.
Selected fill material should have little volume change with changes in moisture content.
Suitable material types of low reactivity, including sandy clay, silty clay, clayey sand,
silty sand and highly to moderately weathered siltstone and sandstone.
Imported structural fill may comprise one of the following imported materials:
47
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
• When compacted, the moisture content limit should be between -1% and +3% of the
Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) for standard compactive efforts (in accordance
with AS1289.5.1.1) with dry Density Ratio of at least 98% of the maximum dry density
achieved in the Standard Compaction Test or a Hilf density ratio of 98% in accordance
with AS1289. Exception to the above moisture content criteria should be applicable to
high plasticity clay.
Prior to filling the allotment with the selected fill material, we recommend the following:
• Remove all the vegetation, topsoil and fill. As an indication from site observation and
boreholes drilling, at least the uppermost 300mm thick topsoil should be removed.
• For the top 200mm of exposed clay layer, the recommended minimum compaction is
a dry density ratio of 98% of the Standard Compaction in accordance with
AS1289.5.1.1 and 5.4.1 or 5.7.1 at moisture content within 3% of the optimum moisture
content.
• Any weak or unstable areas identified during the above compaction process and
which do not improve with further rolling should be excavated and replaced with
compacted select fill. The fill should be placed in uniform horizontal layers not
exceeding 250mm loose thickness. The recommended minimum compaction for each
layer is a dry density ratio of 98% of the standard compaction in accordance with
AS1289.5.1.1 and 5.4.1 or 5.7.1 at moisture content within 3% of the optimum moisture
content.
It is recommended that subgrade preparation and the placement of fill and compaction
be undertaken under Level-1 supervision. Testing should be undertaken in accordance
with the test methods specified in the Australian Standards AS1289 (Method of Testing
Soils for Engineering Purposes) and AS3798 (Guidelines on Earthworks for Commercial
and Residential Developments).
Compaction of both backfill material and embedment material is required to ensure that
excessive surface settlement does not occur. The required backfill density and minimum
frequency of testing for compaction control as detailed in AS 3798-2007 are summarized
below:
48
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
- 1 test per 500 m3 distributed evenly throughout full depth and area.
- 3 tests per site.
Testing should be undertaken in accordance with AS 1289.5. Tested layers that do not
satisfy the outlined criteria shall be stripped, replaced, recompacted and retested to
achieve the minimum compaction requirement mentioned above.
49
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
The following design traffic loads have been considered in the pavement analysis
according to Austroad’s Pavement Structural Design (2008): Part 2 Pavement Structural
Design and Victorian Planning Authority (2019): Engineering Design and Construction
Manual for Subdivision in Growth Areas.
Field and laboratory CBR values indicate that the pavements can be designed based on
subgrade CBR of 5.0%.
In considering the design CBR value, the in-situ geology of the site has also been assessed.
Where encountered, soft silty clay material should be removed to reveal the underlying
stiff silty clay material prior to construction of the roads
50
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Access Lane
Type B: Flexible Asphalt Pavement
The following pavement composition is based on the GAA (2011) guideline and
AUSTROADS (2008) Guide to Pavement Technology Part 2: Pavement Structural Design
(2008).
51
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Without Shoulder
With Shoulder
A concrete shoulder should have at least the same strength as the concrete base and is
defined as:
• A keyed and tied shoulder with a minimum width of 1.5 m from the edge of the
trafficked lane; or
• A 600-mm integrally cast widening of a trafficked lane (this may include integral
channel or kerb and channel).
Note: extruded kerb and channel, even if well tied to the base, is not considered equivalent to a
shoulder for design purposes due to its lower strength. However, a compacted slip-formed kerb and
channel can be considered as a shoulder.
As an indication from site observation and borehole/test pit excavations, at least the
uppermost 300mm thick topsoil should be removed to reveal the proposed pavement
subgrade. It is anticipated that subgrade preparation may be difficult in wet season in
lower ground areas. Hence, it is recommended that construction should be carried out in
dry season with improved site drainage condition.
It is recommended that any unsuitable subgrade material such as clayey silt, uncontrolled
fill material or soft spots encountered in the proposed subgrade be removed to reveal
firm ground. The removed section of the subgrade shall be backfilled with site derived
clay material compacted at least 98% (characteristic) of maximum dry density of standard
compaction (AS 1289.5.1.1) with moisture condition at the equilibrium moisture content
52
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
or -1% to +3% of the optimum for clay subgrade. Proof rolling of the subgrade level
should then be undertaken to reveal any soft spots.
Subsurface drainage may also be complemented by the use of table or spoon drains on
both sides of the pavement, or just on the inside of the pavement if kerb and channel is
to be constructed on the lower side. Careful consideration should be given to minimize
the potential for the water in the table drain to infiltrate the pavement subgrade. It is
recommended that some form of erosion protection is provided to the table drains if these
are to be utilized on the outer side of the road shoulders. To improve the trafficability of
the site and to minimize any construction delays, adequate drainage of whole site during
construction should be provided. No pooling of water at the surface should be allowed.
The pavement should be constructed with a minimum of 3% cross fall subject to further
design consideration by the Design Engineers.
A prime and seal is recommended as a minimum treatment prior to the application of the
new asphalt over the fine crushed rock base. The main functions of the prime and seal
would be to cope with surface dust, strengthen pavement material near the surface, and
provide a better bond between the base layer and the asphalt.
When delays in the application of the asphalt occurs, significant construction savings
may be realised, especially during the winter months, where a primer seal can help to
prevent moisture ingress and potential damage to the pavement. Note that the primer
seal should not be trafficked for longer than six months, twelve months at the extreme.
It is recommended that Geotesta be engaged to provide a site inspection during the early
stage of construction to confirm that the ground conditions of the subgrade along the
proposed road construction are consistent with the assumptions or findings in this report.
DOCUMENT CONTROL
Date: Version: Report Prepared By: Report Reviewed By:
27 July 2020 GE7586-20 Ben Pang Shan Nirmalan
BSc (Hons) MSc(Eng) MIEAust BScEng MEng MIEAust CPEng
Senior Geotechnical Engineer Senior Geotechnical Engineer
53
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
REFERENCES
• Victorian Planning Authority (2019) Engineering Design and Construction Manual for
Subdivision in Growth Areas, previously known as Growth Area Authority (GAA)
• Vicroads (2018), Code of Practice for selection and design of pavements and surfacing;
RC 500.22
54
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
The report contains the results of a geotechnical investigation conducted for a specific purpose
and client. The results should not be used by other parties, or for other purposes, as they may
contain neither adequate nor appropriate information. In particular, the investigation does not
cover contamination issues unless specifically required to do so by the client.
The information on the test hole logs (boreholes, test pits, exposures etc.) is based on a visual and
tactile assessment, except at the discrete locations where test information is available (field and/or
laboratory results). The test hole logs include both factual data and inferred information.
Groundwater
Unless otherwise indicated, the water levels presented on the test hole logs are the levels of free
water or seepage in the test hole recorded at the given time of measuring. The actual groundwater
level may differ from this recorded level depending on material permeability (i.e. depending on
response time of the measuring instrument). Further, variations of this level could occur with
time due to such effects as seasonal, environmental and tidal fluctuations or construction
activities. Confirmation of groundwater levels, phreatic surfaces or piezometric pressures can
only be made by appropriate instrumentation techniques and monitoring programmes.
Interpretation of Results
The discussion or recommendations contained within this report normally are based on a site
evaluation from discrete test hole data. Generalized, idealized or inferred subsurface conditions
(including any geotechnical cross-sections) have been assumed or prepared by interpolation
and/or extrapolation of these data. As such these conditions are an interpretation and must be
considered as a guide only.
Change in Conditions
Local variations or anomalies in the generalized ground conditions do occur in the natural
environment, particularly between discrete test hole locations. Additionally, certain design or
construction procedures may have been assumed in assessing the soil-structure interaction
behaviour of the site. Furthermore, conditions may change at the site from those encountered at
the time of the geotechnical investigation through construction activities and constantly changing
natural forces.
55
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
Geotechnical Verification
Verification of the geotechnical assumptions and/or model is an integral part of the design
process - investigation, construction verification, and performance monitoring. Variability is a
feature of the natural environment and, in many instances, verification of soil or rock quality, or
foundation levels, is required. There may be a requirement to extend foundation depths, to
modify a foundation system or to conduct monitoring as a result of this natural variability.
Allowance for verification by geotechnical personnel accordingly should be recognized and
programmed during construction.
Reproduction of Reports
Where it is desired to reproduce the information contained in our geotechnical report, or other
technical information, for the inclusion in contract documents or engineering specification of the
subject development, such reproductions should include at least all of the relevant test hole and
test data, together with the appropriate standard description sheets and remarks made in the
written report of a factual or descriptive nature. Reports are the subject of copyright and shall not
be reproduced either totally or in part without the express permission of Geotesta.
56
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
APPENDIX A
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
57
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
58
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
59
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
60
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
61
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
62
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
63
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
64
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
65
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
66
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
67
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
68
33 Jacksons Road, Mt. Eliza GE7586-20
APPENDIX B
BOREHOLE, TEST PIT & FOOTING PROBE LOGS
69
BOREHOLE LOG BORE NO.: BH1 (1)
SHEET: 1 OF 4
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## FILL Sandy Gravel, Fine to Medium, Grey, Moist, Well Compacted M WC #DIV/0!
## 0.20 #DIV/0!
## SC SAND With Clay, Fine to Medium, Brown- Grey, Dry to Moist, D/M MD #DIV/0!
0.50 #DIV/0!
0.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
1.00 #DIV/0!
1.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
N=21
## #DIV/0!
PP>4.5kg/cm2
2.00 #DIV/0!
2.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
5.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 5.00
## CH Silty CLAY with Sand, Pale Grey, Dry to Moist, Very Stiff, D/M VST #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.50 #DIV/0!
5.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
7.00 #DIV/0!
7.00
## #DIV/0!
Continuous Flight Auger
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
8.50 #DIV/0!
8.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
9.50 #DIV/0!
9.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
NMLC
## 9.90 #DIV/0!
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
10.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 10.00
0.10 Cemented band of Ironstone, with Sand (fine), Low Strength D #DIV/0!
0.40 CH Silty CLAY, Pale Grey Mottled Pale Brown, Moist, Very Stiff M VST #DIV/0!
10.50 #DIV/0!
10.50
0.60 #DIV/0!
0.70 #DIV/0!
0.90 SC Clayey SAND, Medium to Coarse, Red - Orange Mottled Dark Grey M VD #DIV/0!
11.00 Moist, Very Dense, medium spaced bands of ferruginized Sand #DIV/0!
11.00
1.10 #DIV/0!
1.20 #DIV/0!
1.30 #DIV/0!
1.40 #DIV/0!
11.50 #DIV/0!
11.50
1.60 #DIV/0!
1.70 #DIV/0!
12.00 #DIV/0!
12.00
2.10 #DIV/0!
2.20 #DIV/0!
2.30 #DIV/0!
CORING NMLC
2.40 #DIV/0!
12.50 #DIV/0!
12.50
2.60 #DIV/0!
2.70 #DIV/0!
2.80 #DIV/0!
2.90 #DIV/0!
13.00 #DIV/0!
13.00
3.10 #DIV/0!
3.20 #DIV/0!
3.30 #DIV/0!
3.40 #DIV/0!
13.50 #DIV/0!
13.50
3.60 #DIV/0!
3.70 #DIV/0!
3.80 #DIV/0!
3.90 #DIV/0!
14.00 #DIV/0!
14.00
4.10 #DIV/0!
4.20 #DIV/0!
4.30 #DIV/0!
4.40 #DIV/0!
14.50 #DIV/0!
14.50
4.60 #DIV/0!
4.70 #DIV/0!
4.80 #DIV/0!
4.90 #DIV/0!
15.00 #DIV/0!
15.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
15.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 15.00
0.10 SC Clayey SAND, Medium to Coarse, Red - Orange Mottled Dark Grey, M VD #DIV/0! SPT at 15.0m
Moist, Very Dense, medium spaced bands of ferruginized Sand 10/32/ 8/15mm
SPT test
0.20 #DIV/0!
0.30 #DIV/0!
SPT refusal
0.40 #DIV/0!
15.50 #DIV/0!
15.50
0.60 END OF BOREHOLE AT 15.50m #DIV/0!
0.80 #DIV/0!
0.90 #DIV/0!
16.00 #DIV/0!
16.00
1.10 #DIV/0!
1.20 #DIV/0!
1.30 #DIV/0!
1.40 #DIV/0!
16.50 #DIV/0!
16.50
1.60 #DIV/0!
1.70 #DIV/0!
1.80 #DIV/0!
1.90 #DIV/0!
17.00 #DIV/0!
17.00
2.10 #DIV/0!
2.20 #DIV/0!
2.30 #DIV/0!
2.40 #DIV/0!
17.50 #DIV/0!
17.50
2.60 #DIV/0!
2.70 #DIV/0!
2.80 #DIV/0!
2.90 #DIV/0!
18.00 #DIV/0!
18.00
3.10 #DIV/0!
3.20 #DIV/0!
3.30 #DIV/0!
3.40 #DIV/0!
18.50 #DIV/0!
18.50
3.60 #DIV/0!
3.70 #DIV/0!
3.80 #DIV/0!
3.90 #DIV/0!
19.00 #DIV/0!
19.00
4.10 #DIV/0!
4.20 #DIV/0!
4.30 #DIV/0!
4.40 #DIV/0!
19.50 #DIV/0!
19.50
4.60 #DIV/0!
4.70 #DIV/0!
4.80 #DIV/0!
4.90 #DIV/0!
20.00 #DIV/0!
20.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## FILL Crushed Rock : Gravel with Sand, Fine , Grey, Moist, Well M WC #DIV/0!
## Compacted #DIV/0!
## 0.30 #DIV/0!
0.50 #DIV/0!
0.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
1.50 #DIV/0!
1.50
## 1.60 14 #DIV/0!
SPT at 1.5m
## SC SAND with gravels and clay, Brown- Grey, Mottled Red M MD #DIV/0!
2/6/8
Continuous Flight Auger
2.00 #DIV/0!
2.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.50 #DIV/0!
2.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.50 #DIV/0!
3.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
5.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 5.00
0.10 CI Silty CLAY with Sand, Pale Grey Mottled Pale Brown, D/M H #DIV/0!
0.30 #DIV/0!
0.40 #DIV/0!
5.50 #DIV/0!
5.50
0.60 #DIV/0!
0.70 #DIV/0!
0.80 #DIV/0!
1.40 #DIV/0!
6.50 #DIV/0!
6.50
1.60 #DIV/0!
1.70 #DIV/0!
1.80 #DIV/0!
1.90 #DIV/0!
7.00 #DIV/0!
7.00
2.10 #DIV/0!
2.20 #DIV/0!
Continuous Flight Auger
2.30 #DIV/0!
2.40 #DIV/0!
8.00 #DIV/0!
8.00
3.10 #DIV/0!
3.20 #DIV/0!
3.30 #DIV/0!
3.40 #DIV/0!
8.50 #DIV/0!
8.50
3.60 #DIV/0!
3.70 #DIV/0!
3.80 #DIV/0!
3.90 #DIV/0!
9.00 #DIV/0!
9.00
4.10 #DIV/0!
4.20 #DIV/0!
4.30 #DIV/0!
4.40 #DIV/0!
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## FILL SAND, Fine to Medium, trace Clay, Dark Brown, Moist, Well M WC #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
0.50 #DIV/0!
0.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## 0.80 #DIV/0!
## SM Sandy SILT - Silty SAND mixture, Dark Grey, Moist to Wet, M/W F #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## 1.40 #DIV/0!
1.50 CI Silty CLAY, Pale Brown Mottled Grey, with Sandy Clay lenses M ST #DIV/0!
1.50
## Moist, Stiff, occasionally with roots 12 #DIV/0!
SPT at 1.50m
## #DIV/0!
2/3/9
Continuous Flight Auger
## #DIV/0!
N=12
## #DIV/0!
PP = 4.0/4.5
2.00 #DIV/0!
kg/cm2 2.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.00 #DIV/0!
3.00
## #DIV/0!
SPT at 3.0m
## 19 #DIV/0! 3/8/11
## #DIV/0!
N=19
## #DIV/0!
3.50 #DIV/0!
PP> 4.5kg/cm2 3.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
PP> 4.5kg/cm2 5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
5.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 5.00
0.10 CH Silty CLAY, Pale Grey, Mottled Brown - Orange, Moist, Hard M H #DIV/0!
0.30 #DIV/0!
0.40 #DIV/0!
5.50 #DIV/0!
5.50
0.60 #DIV/0!
0.70 #DIV/0!
0.80 #DIV/0!
0.90 #DIV/0!
6.00 #DIV/0!
6.00
1.10 #DIV/0!
SPT at 6.0m
1.20 39 #DIV/0!
10/16/23
1.30 #DIV/0!
N=39
1.40 #DIV/0!
6.50 #DIV/0!
6.50
1.60 #DIV/0!
1.70 #DIV/0!
1.80 #DIV/0!
1.90 #DIV/0!
7.00 #DIV/0!
7.00
2.10 #DIV/0!
2.20 #DIV/0!
Continuous Flight Auger
2.30 #DIV/0!
2.40 #DIV/0!
7.50 #DIV/0!
7.50
2.60 #DIV/0!
SPT at 7.5m
2.70 #DIV/0!
12/22/ 13/45mm
2.80 #DIV/0!
SPT refusal
2.90 #DIV/0!
(H.B)
8.00 #DIV/0!
8.00
3.10 #DIV/0!
3.20 #DIV/0!
3.30 #DIV/0!
3.40 #DIV/0!
8.50 #DIV/0!
8.50
3.60 #DIV/0!
3.70 #DIV/0!
3.80 #DIV/0!
3.90 #DIV/0!
4.30 #DIV/0!
4.40 #DIV/0!
9.50 #DIV/0!
9.50
4.60 >50 #DIV/0!
SPT at 9.5m
4.70 #DIV/0!
15/24/ 21/110mm
4.80 #DIV/0!
SPT refusal
4.90 END OF BOREHOLE AT 10.0m #DIV/0!
(H.B)
10.00 NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED #DIV/0!
10.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## FILL Crushed Rock : Gravel with Sand, Fine , Grey, Moist, Well M WC #DIV/0!
## SP SAND, Fine to Medium, Grey-Brown, Dry to Moist, Medium Dense D/M MD #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
0.50 #DIV/0!
0.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
1.00 #DIV/0!
1.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
1.50 #DIV/0!
1.50
## 1.60 #DIV/0!
SPT at 1.50m
## CI Sandy CLAY, Pale Grey Mottled Orange Brown, Dry to Moist, D/M VST #DIV/0!
5/8/11
Continuous Flight Auger
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.50 #DIV/0!
2.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.50 #DIV/0!
PP> 4.5kg/cm2 3.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
PP= 3.5kg/cm2 5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
5.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 5.00
0.10 CL Sandy CLAY, Pale Grey, Brown, Moist, Stiff, M ST #DIV/0!
0.30 #DIV/0!
0.40 #DIV/0!
1.30 #DIV/0!
1.40 #DIV/0!
6.50 #DIV/0!
6.50
1.60 #DIV/0!
1.70 #DIV/0!
1.80 #DIV/0!
1.90 #DIV/0!
7.00 #DIV/0!
7.00
2.10 #DIV/0!
2.20 #DIV/0!
2.30 #DIV/0!
2.40 #DIV/0!
7.50 #DIV/0!
7.50
2.60 #DIV/0!
2.70 #DIV/0!
2.80 #DIV/0!
2.90 #DIV/0!
8.00 #DIV/0!
8.00
3.10 #DIV/0!
3.20 #DIV/0!
3.30 #DIV/0!
3.40 #DIV/0!
8.50 #DIV/0!
8.50
3.60 #DIV/0!
3.70 #DIV/0!
3.80 #DIV/0!
3.90 #DIV/0!
9.00 #DIV/0!
9.00
4.10 #DIV/0!
4.20 #DIV/0!
4.30 #DIV/0!
4.40 #DIV/0!
9.50 #DIV/0!
9.50
4.60 #DIV/0!
4.70 #DIV/0!
4.80 #DIV/0!
4.90 #DIV/0!
10.00 #DIV/0!
10.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## SP SAND, Fine to Medium, trace Clay, Dark Brown, Moist, M MD #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
0.50 #DIV/0!
0.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## 0.80 #DIV/0!
1.00 #DIV/0!
1.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
N=12
## #DIV/0!
PP = 1.5/1.25
2.00 #DIV/0!
kg/cm2 2.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.50 #DIV/0!
2.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## 2.80 #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
5.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 5.00
0.10 CI Sandy CLAY, White to Pale Grey, Moist, Hard with red M H #DIV/0!
0.30 #DIV/0!
0.40 #DIV/0!
1.30 #DIV/0!
1.40 #DIV/0!
6.50 #DIV/0!
6.50
1.60 #DIV/0!
1.70 #DIV/0!
1.80 #DIV/0!
1.90 #DIV/0!
7.00 #DIV/0!
7.00
2.10 #DIV/0!
2.20 #DIV/0!
2.30 #DIV/0!
2.40 #DIV/0!
7.50 #DIV/0!
7.50
2.60 #DIV/0!
2.70 #DIV/0!
2.80 #DIV/0!
2.90 #DIV/0!
8.00 #DIV/0!
8.00
3.10 #DIV/0!
3.20 #DIV/0!
3.30 #DIV/0!
3.40 #DIV/0!
8.50 #DIV/0!
8.50
3.60 #DIV/0!
3.70 #DIV/0!
3.80 #DIV/0!
3.90 #DIV/0!
9.00 #DIV/0!
9.00
4.10 #DIV/0!
4.20 #DIV/0!
4.30 #DIV/0!
4.40 #DIV/0!
9.50 #DIV/0!
9.50
4.60 #DIV/0!
4.70 #DIV/0!
4.80 #DIV/0!
4.90 #DIV/0!
10.00 #DIV/0!
10.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## FILL Gravel with Sand (Crushed Rock), Grey, Moist, Well Compacted M WC #DIV/0!
## 0.15 #DIV/0!
0.50 #DIV/0!
0.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
N=11
## #DIV/0!
2.00 #DIV/0!
2.00
## #DIV/0!
## 2.20 #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.50 #DIV/0!
2.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## 2.90 #DIV/0!
3.50 #DIV/0!
3.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## 3.80 #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
PP= 4.5kg/cm2 5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
5.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 5.00
0.10 CH Silty CLAY, Pale Grey, Moist, Hard, Red cementation bands M H #DIV/0!
0.30 #DIV/0!
0.40 #DIV/0!
1.30 #DIV/0!
1.40 #DIV/0!
6.50 #DIV/0!
6.50
1.60 #DIV/0!
1.70 #DIV/0!
1.80 #DIV/0!
1.90 #DIV/0!
7.00 #DIV/0!
7.00
2.10 #DIV/0!
2.20 #DIV/0!
2.30 #DIV/0!
2.40 #DIV/0!
7.50 #DIV/0!
7.50
2.60 #DIV/0!
2.70 #DIV/0!
2.80 #DIV/0!
2.90 #DIV/0!
8.00 #DIV/0!
8.00
3.10 #DIV/0!
3.20 #DIV/0!
3.30 #DIV/0!
3.40 #DIV/0!
8.50 #DIV/0!
8.50
3.60 #DIV/0!
3.70 #DIV/0!
3.80 #DIV/0!
3.90 #DIV/0!
9.00 #DIV/0!
9.00
4.10 #DIV/0!
4.20 #DIV/0!
4.30 #DIV/0!
4.40 #DIV/0!
9.50 #DIV/0!
9.50
4.60 #DIV/0!
4.70 #DIV/0!
4.80 #DIV/0!
4.90 #DIV/0!
10.00 #DIV/0!
10.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
CLIENT: TAYLORS DRILLING COM.: ROSS SERVICES PTY LTD NORTHING AS PER PLAN
PROJECT: 33 JACKSONS ROAD DRILL RIG: 5 TON EXCAVATOR EASTING AS PER PLAN
JOB NO.: GE7586-20 DRILLER: MB GRID REF.:
LOCATION: Mt ELIZA INCLINATION: Vertical LOGGED: BP DATE: 2-06-20
DATE DRILLED: 02-06-2020 HOLE DEPTH: 3m CHECKED: SN DATE: 30-06-20
MOISTURE CONDITION
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## FILL FILL: SAND with crushed rock, brown, well compacted, M WC 2 3.6
## CI Silty CLAY, yellow-brown, medium plasticity, very stiff, moist M VST 5 10.2
## 3 5.7
## 9 20.0
## CL Sandy CLAY with gravel, dark grey, low plasticity, very stiff, M VST 8 17.5 B
## moist 6 12.6
EXCAVATOR
## 6 12.6
## 1.70 #DIV/0!
## CI Silty CLAY, grey brown, medium plasticity, very stiff, moist M VST #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.00 #DIV/0!
2.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.50 #DIV/0!
2.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.50 #DIV/0!
3.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.50 #DIV/0!
4.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
CLIENT: TAYLORS DRILLING COM.: ROSS SERVICES PTY LTD NORTHING AS PER PLAN
PROJECT: 33 JACKSONS ROAD DRILL RIG: 5 TON EXCAVATOR EASTING AS PER PLAN
JOB NO.: GE7586-20 DRILLER: MB GRID REF.:
LOCATION: Mt ELIZA INCLINATION: Vertical LOGGED: BP DATE: 2-06-20
DATE DRILLED: 02-06-2020 HOLE DEPTH: 2.8m CHECKED: SN DATE: 30-06-20
MOISTURE CONDITION
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## FILL FILL: SAND with roots, brown, poorly compacted, moist M PC 1 1.6
## 3 5.7
## 4 7.9
## 1 1.6
0.50 2 3.6 0.50
## 2 3.6
## 1 1.6
## 1 1.6
## 2 3.6
1.00 1.00 2 3.6 1.00
## CI Silty CLAY, pale grey, medium plasticity, very stiff, moist M VST 7 15.0
## 8 17.5
EXCAVATOR
## 11 25.2
## 9 20.0
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.00 #DIV/0!
2.00
## 2.10 #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.50 #DIV/0!
2.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## 2.80 #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.50 #DIV/0!
3.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.50 #DIV/0!
4.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
CLIENT: TAYLORS DRILLING COM.: ROSS SERVICES PTY LTD NORTHING AS PER PLAN
PROJECT: 33 JACKSONS ROAD DRILL RIG: 5 TON EXCAVATOR EASTING AS PER PLAN
JOB NO.: GE7586-20 DRILLER: MB GRID REF.:
LOCATION: Mt ELIZA INCLINATION: Vertical LOGGED: BP DATE: 3-06-20
DATE DRILLED: 03-06-2020 HOLE DEPTH: 3m CHECKED: SN DATE: 30-06-20
MOISTURE CONDITION
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## FILL FILL: SAND with crushed rock, yellow brown, well compacted, M WC 22 55.0
## 16 38.6
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
1.00 #DIV/0!
1.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
EXCAVATOR
## #DIV/0!
1.50 #DIV/0!
1.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.00 #DIV/0!
2.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.50 #DIV/0!
2.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.50 #DIV/0!
3.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.50 #DIV/0!
4.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
CLIENT: TAYLORS DRILLING COM.: ROSS SERVICES PTY LTD NORTHING AS PER PLAN
PROJECT: 33 JACKSONS ROAD DRILL RIG: 5 TON EXCAVATOR EASTING AS PER PLAN
JOB NO.: GE7586-20 DRILLER: MB GRID REF.:
LOCATION: Mt ELIZA INCLINATION: Vertical LOGGED: BP DATE: 3-06-20
DATE DRILLED: 03-06-2020 HOLE DEPTH: 3m CHECKED: SN DATE: 30-06-20
MOISTURE CONDITION
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## FILL FILL: SAND with crushed rock, yellow brown, well compacted, M WC 8 17.5
## moist 20 49.9
## 20 49.9
## 13 30.5
## 0.70 3 5.7
## SP SAND, pale grey, loose to medium dense, moist M L-MD 3 5.7
## 2 3.6
1.00 3 5.7 1.00
## 2 3.6 B
## 2 3.6
## 3 5.7
EXCAVATOR
## 3 5.7
1.50 2 3.6 1.50
## 7 15.0
## 1.70 #DIV/0!
## CL Sandy CLAY, brown mottled pale grey, low plasticity, very stiff M VST #DIV/0!
## moist #DIV/0!
2.00 #DIV/0!
2.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.50 #DIV/0!
2.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.50 #DIV/0!
3.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.50 #DIV/0!
4.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
CLIENT: TAYLORS DRILLING COM.: ROSS SERVICES PTY LTD NORTHING AS PER PLAN
PROJECT: 33 JACKSONS ROAD DRILL RIG: 5 TON EXCAVATOR EASTING AS PER PLAN
JOB NO.: GE7586-20 DRILLER: MB GRID REF.:
LOCATION: Mt ELIZA INCLINATION: Vertical LOGGED: BP DATE: 2-06-20
DATE DRILLED: 02-06-2020 HOLE DEPTH: 3m CHECKED: SN DATE: 30-06-20
MOISTURE CONDITION
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## FILL FILL: SAND with crushed rock, yellow brown, well compacted, M WC 2 3.6
## moist 5 10.2
## 7 15.0
## 5 10.2
## 3 5.7
## 0.80 3 5.7
## CS SAND with clay, grey, loose, moist M L 1 1.6
1.00 1.00 1 1.6 1.00
## grades brown 2 3.6
## 1 1.6
## 1 1.6
EXCAVATOR
## 1.40 1 1.6
1.50 CI Silty CLAY, brown mottled grey, medium plasticity, stiff, M ST 4 7.9 1.50
## 1.60 moist 4 7.9
## grades very stiff VST 6 12.6
## 7 15.0
## 10 22.6
2.00 #DIV/0!
2.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.50 #DIV/0!
2.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.50 #DIV/0!
3.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.50 #DIV/0!
4.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
CLIENT: TAYLORS DRILLING COM.: ROSS SERVICES PTY LTD NORTHING AS PER PLAN
PROJECT: 33 JACKSONS ROAD DRILL RIG: 5 TON EXCAVATOR EASTING AS PER PLAN
JOB NO.: GE7586-20 DRILLER: MB GRID REF.:
LOCATION: Mt ELIZA INCLINATION: Vertical LOGGED: BP DATE: 2-06-20
DATE DRILLED: 02-06-2020 HOLE DEPTH: 3m CHECKED: SN DATE: 30-06-20
MOISTURE CONDITION
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## FILL FILL: SAND with crushed rock, yellow brown, well compacted, M WC 8 17.5
## moist 15 35.9
## 8 17.5
## 0.40 4 7.9
0.50 SP SAND, grey, medium dense, moist M MD 3 5.7 0.50
## 3 5.7
## 2 3.6
## 2 3.6
## 3 5.7
1.00 1.00 5 10.2 1.00
## CI Silty CLAY, brown mottled grey, medium plasticity, very stiff, M VST 8 17.5
## moist 10 22.6
## 11 25.2
EXCAVATOR
## #DIV/0!
1.50 #DIV/0!
1.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.00 #DIV/0!
2.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.50 #DIV/0!
2.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.50 #DIV/0!
3.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.50 #DIV/0!
4.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
CLIENT: TAYLORS DRILLING COM.: ROSS SERVICES PTY LTD NORTHING AS PER PLAN
PROJECT: 33 JACKSONS ROAD DRILL RIG: 5 TON EXCAVATOR EASTING AS PER PLAN
JOB NO.: GE7586-20 DRILLER: MB GRID REF.:
LOCATION: Mt ELIZA INCLINATION: Vertical LOGGED: BP DATE: 3-06-20
DATE DRILLED: 03-06-2020 HOLE DEPTH: 2m CHECKED: SN DATE: 30-06-20
MOISTURE CONDITION
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## SP SAND, dark grey, loose, moist M L 1 1.6
## 1 1.6
## 1 1.6
## 2 3.6
0.50 0.50 2 3.6 0.50
## grades pale grey, medium dense to dense MD 5 10.2
## D 12 27.8
## 15 35.9
EXCAVATOR
## #DIV/0!
## moist #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
1.50 #DIV/0!
1.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.50 #DIV/0!
2.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.00 #DIV/0!
3.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.50 #DIV/0!
3.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.50 #DIV/0!
4.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
CLIENT: TAYLORS DRILLING COM.: ROSS SERVICES PTY LTD NORTHING AS PER PLAN
PROJECT: 33 JACKSONS ROAD DRILL RIG: 5 TON EXCAVATOR EASTING AS PER PLAN
JOB NO.: GE7586-20 DRILLER: MB GRID REF.:
LOCATION: Mt ELIZA INCLINATION: Vertical LOGGED: BP DATE: 2-06-20
DATE DRILLED: 02-06-2020 HOLE DEPTH: 3m CHECKED: SN DATE: 30-06-20
MOISTURE CONDITION
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## FILL FILL: Clayey SAND, dark grey, well compacted, moist M WC 7 15.0
## 5 10.2
## 8 17.5
## 0.40 9 20.0
0.50 SC Clayey SAND, pale grey mottled orange, dense, moist M D 5 10.2 0.50
## 7 15.0
## 7 15.0
## 9 20.0
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
EXCAVATOR
## #DIV/0!
1.50 #DIV/0!
1.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.00 #DIV/0!
2.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.50 #DIV/0!
2.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.50 #DIV/0!
3.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.50 #DIV/0!
4.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
CLIENT: TAYLORS DRILLING COM.: ROSS SERVICES PTY LTD NORTHING AS PER PLAN
PROJECT: 33 JACKSONS ROAD DRILL RIG: 5 TON EXCAVATOR EASTING AS PER PLAN
JOB NO.: GE7586-20 DRILLER: MB GRID REF.:
LOCATION: Mt ELIZA INCLINATION: Vertical LOGGED: BP DATE: 2-06-20
DATE DRILLED: 02-06-2020 HOLE DEPTH: 3.3m CHECKED: SN DATE: 30-06-20
MOISTURE CONDITION
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## FILL FILL: SAND, brown, poorly compacted, moist M PC 1 1.6
## 1 1.6
## 0.30 1 1.6
## SP SAND trace clay, pale grey mottled orange, medium dense, M MD 3 5.7
0.50 moist 3 5.7 0.50
## 3 5.7 B
## 3 5.7
## 3 5.7
## 15 35.9
1.00 X #VALUE!
1.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
EXCAVATOR
## #DIV/0!
1.50 #DIV/0!
1.50
## #DIV/0!
## 1.70 #DIV/0!
## CI Silty CLAY,dark brown, medium plasticity, very stiff, moist M VST #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.00 #DIV/0!
2.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.50 #DIV/0!
2.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.00 #DIV/0!
3.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## 3.30 #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.50 #DIV/0!
4.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
CLIENT: TAYLORS DRILLING COM.: ROSS SERVICES PTY LTD NORTHING AS PER PLAN
PROJECT: 33 JACKSONS ROAD DRILL RIG: 5 TON EXCAVATOR EASTING AS PER PLAN
JOB NO.: GE7586-20 DRILLER: MB GRID REF.:
LOCATION: Mt ELIZA INCLINATION: Vertical LOGGED: MK DATE: 3-06-20
DATE DRILLED: 03-06-2020 HOLE DEPTH: 1.3m CHECKED: SN DATE: 30-06-20
MOISTURE CONDITION
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## 0.100 Concrete #DIV/0!
## FILL FILL: Clayey SAND with Gravel, Brown - Grey, Moist, Well M WC #DIV/0!
0.50 #DIV/0!
0.50
Excavator
## #DIV/0!
## 0.70 #DIV/0!
## CI Sandy CLAY, Brown to orange, Moist to Wet, Stiff to Very M/W ST/VST #DIV/0!
## Stiff #DIV/0!
Groundwater @
q 1.00 1.00 #DIV/0!
1m 1.00
## Grades: Groundwater encountered (Perched), Very Stiff M VST 4 7.9
## 3 5.7
## 1.30 4 7.9
## FOOTING PROBE FP1 ENDED AT 1.3m DEPTH 6 12.6
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.00 #DIV/0!
2.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.50 #DIV/0!
2.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.00 #DIV/0!
3.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.50 #DIV/0!
3.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.50 #DIV/0!
4.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
CLIENT: TAYLORS DRILLING COM.: ROSS SERVICES PTY LTD NORTHING AS PER PLAN
PROJECT: 33 JACKSONS ROAD DRILL RIG: 5 TON EXCAVATOR EASTING AS PER PLAN
JOB NO.: GE7586-20 DRILLER: MB GRID REF.:
LOCATION: Mt ELIZA INCLINATION: Vertical LOGGED: BP DATE: 3-06-20
DATE DRILLED: 03-06-2020 HOLE DEPTH: 1.00 m CHECKED: SN DATE: 30-06-20
MOISTURE CONDITION
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## FILL FILL: SAND with crushed rock, brown, well compacted, M WC #DIV/0!
## moist #DIV/0!
## 0.30 #DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## 7 15.0
## Existing 14 33.1
## Building #DIV/0!
2.00 #DIV/0!
2.00
0.2m
## 0.3m FILL #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
##
0.25m concrete
1m #DIV/0!
2.50 #DIV/0!
2.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.00 #DIV/0!
3.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.50 #DIV/0!
3.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.50 #DIV/0!
4.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
CLIENT: TAYLORS DRILLING COM.: ROSS SERVICES PTY LTD NORTHING AS PER PLAN
PROJECT: 33 JACKSONS ROAD DRILL RIG: 5 TON EXCAVATOR EASTING AS PER PLAN
JOB NO.: GE7586-20 DRILLER: MB GRID REF.:
LOCATION: Mt ELIZA INCLINATION: Vertical LOGGED: BP DATE: 2-06-20
DATE DRILLED: 02-06-2020 HOLE DEPTH: 1.5m CHECKED: SN DATE: 30-06-20
MOISTURE CONDITION
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## 0.100 Concrete, grey, dry #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
0.50 #DIV/0!
0.50
## #DIV/0!
Excavator
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
1.00 #DIV/0!
1.00
## 1.10 #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
Groundwater @
## #DIV/0!
1.3m
1.50 #DIV/0!
1.50
## FOOTING PROBE FP3 ENDED AT 1.5m DEPTH 15 35.9
## 11 25.2
## Existing 8 17.5
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
2.50 #DIV/0!
2.50
##
1m FILL 0.9m #DIV/0!
## 1.5m #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
##
0.15m #DIV/0!
3.00 #DIV/0!
3.00
## concrete
0.15m #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## SAND #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.50 #DIV/0!
4.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
CLIENT: TAYLORS DRILLING COM.: ROSS SERVICES PTY LTD NORTHING AS PER PLAN
PROJECT: 33 JACKSONS ROAD DRILL RIG: 5 TON EXCAVATOR EASTING AS PER PLAN
JOB NO.: GE7586-20 DRILLER: MB GRID REF.:
LOCATION: Mt ELIZA INCLINATION: Vertical LOGGED: BP DATE: 3-06-20
DATE DRILLED: 03-06-2020 HOLE DEPTH: 1.4m CHECKED: SN DATE: 30-06-20
MOISTURE CONDITION
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## FILL FILL: SAND with roots, dark grey, poorly compacted, moist M PC #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## moist #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
1.00 #DIV/0!
1.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## 1.40 #DIV/0!
## 11 25.2
## 13 30.5
## #DIV/0!
2.00 #DIV/0!
2.00
## concrete #DIV/0!
## wall #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
0.4m
2.50 0.5m #DIV/0!
2.50
## FILL 0.8m #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
##
0.5m concrete
1.4m #DIV/0!
3.00 #DIV/0!
3.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.50 #DIV/0!
3.50
## End of Footing Probe #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.50 #DIV/0!
4.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
CLIENT: TAYLORS DRILLING COM.: ROSS SERVICES PTY LTD NORTHING AS PER PLAN
PROJECT: 33 JACKSONS ROAD DRILL RIG: 5 TON EXCAVATOR EASTING AS PER PLAN
JOB NO.: GE7586-20 DRILLER: MB GRID REF.:
LOCATION: Mt ELIZA INCLINATION: Vertical LOGGED: BP DATE: 2-06-20
DATE DRILLED: 02-06-2020 HOLE DEPTH: 1m CHECKED: SN DATE: 30-06-20
MOISTURE CONDITION
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## FILL FILL: SAND with roots, dark grey, poorly compacted, moist M PC 1 1.6
## 1 1.6
## 1 1.6
## 1 1.6
Excavator
## 2 3.6
## 0.80 1 1.6 Groundwater @
## SP SAND, grey, wet, loose W L 1 1.6 0.9m
1.00 1.00 2 3.6 1.00
## FOOTING PROBE FP5 ENDED AT 1m DEPTH 3 5.7
## PERCHED WATER WAS ENCOUNTERED AT 0.9m DEPTH 8 17.5
## 9 20.0
## 8 17.5
1.50 #DIV/0!
1.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## concrete #DIV/0!
## retaining #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
0.65m
## FILL
1m 0.8m
#DIV/0!
2.50 2.50
0.1m #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
0.15m concrete
## #DIV/0!
## SAND #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.50 #DIV/0!
3.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.50 #DIV/0!
4.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
CLIENT: TAYLORS DRILLING COM.: ROSS SERVICES PTY LTD NORTHING AS PER PLAN
PROJECT: 33 JACKSONS ROAD DRILL RIG: 5 TON EXCAVATOR EASTING AS PER PLAN
JOB NO.: GE7586-20 DRILLER: MB GRID REF.:
LOCATION: Mt ELIZA INCLINATION: Vertical LOGGED: BP DATE: 2-06-20
DATE DRILLED: 02-06-2020 HOLE DEPTH: 0.7m CHECKED: SN DATE: 30-06-20
MOISTURE CONDITION
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## 0.100 FILL FILL: SAND with roots, dark grey, poorly compacted, moist M PC
## grades: concrete, grey
Excavator
## 0.30
## CI Silty CLAY, brown mottled grey, medium plasticity, stiff, M ST 5
0.50 moist 4 0.50
## 4
## 0.70 8 Groundwater @
## FOOTING PROBE FP6 ENDED AT 0.7m DEPTH 8 0.65m
## PERCHED WATER WAS ENCOUNTERED AT 0.65m DEPTH
1.00 1.00
##
##
##
##
##
##
## #DIV/0!
3.00 #DIV/0!
3.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.50 #DIV/0!
3.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.50 #DIV/0!
4.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
CLIENT: TAYLORS DRILLING COM.: ROSS SERVICES PTY LTD NORTHING AS PER PLAN
PROJECT: 33 JACKSONS ROAD DRILL RIG: 5 TON EXCAVATOR EASTING AS PER PLAN
JOB NO.: GE7586-20 DRILLER: MB GRID REF.:
LOCATION: Mt ELIZA INCLINATION: Vertical LOGGED: BP DATE: 3-06-20
DATE DRILLED: 03-06-2020 HOLE DEPTH: 1.3m CHECKED: SN DATE: 30-06-20
MOISTURE CONDITION
GROUP SYMBOL
CONSISTENCY
GRAPHIC LOG
SOIL DESCRIPTION FIELD TESTING AND ADDITIONAL NOTES
DEPTH (m)
SAMPLING
DEPTH (m)
DENSITY
WATER
CBR (%)
0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00
## FILL FILL: SAND with roots, dark grey, poorly compacted, moist M PC #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## moist #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
1.00 #DIV/0!
1.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## 1.30 #DIV/0!
## 8 17.5
## 8 17.5
## 11 25.2
## #DIV/0!
## 0.3m #DIV/0!
##
0.4m #DIV/0!
##
1.3m #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
3.00 #DIV/0!
3.00
## Silty CLAY #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.00 #DIV/0!
4.00
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
4.50 #DIV/0!
4.50
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
## #DIV/0!
5.00 #DIV/0!
5.00
STANDARD: AS 1289.6.3.2-1997 & AS 1726-2017
APPENDIX C
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
70
Geotesta Pty Ltd
SOAKED
MOISTURE CONTENTS:
At Compaction: 16.3 % - 100.5 % OMC
After Soaking: 17.5 % - 108 % OMC
After Penetration:
Top 30 mm 18.0 %
Remaining Depth: 16.4 %
DRY DENSITY:
At Compaction: 1.77 t/m³ - 100.5% MDD
After Soaking 1.77 t/m³ - 100.0% MDD
SOAKED
MOISTURE CONTENTS:
At Compaction: 2.8 % - 99.5 % OMC
After Soaking: 15.0 %
After Penetration:
Top 30 mm 15.1 %
Remaining Depth: 14.5 %
DRY DENSITY:
At Compaction: 1.80 t/m³ - 100.5% MDD
After Soaking 1.80 t/m³ - 100.0% MDD
SOAKED
MOISTURE CONTENTS:
At Compaction: 8.9 % - 99.5 % OMC
After Soaking: 11.5 % - 128 % OMC
After Penetration:
Top 30 mm 12.0 %
Remaining Depth: 11.1 %
DRY DENSITY:
At Compaction: 1.90 t/m³ - 100.0% MDD
After Soaking 1.91 t/m³ - 100.0% MDD
SOAKED
MOISTURE CONTENTS:
At Compaction: 7.3 % - 99.5 % OMC
After Soaking: 9.5 % - 130 % OMC
After Penetration:
Top 30 mm 9.2 %
Remaining Depth: 8.6 %
DRY DENSITY:
At Compaction: 2.01 t/m³ - 101.0% MDD
After Soaking 2.01 t/m³ - 101.0% MDD
1.79
1.77
1.75
Dry Density (t/m3)
Data
0 % Voids for PD = 2.7
1.73
0 % Voids for PD = 2.6
0 % Voids for PD = 2.5
1.71 0 % Voids for PD = 2.4
Curve
1.69
1.67
1.65
5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00
Moisture Content (w%)
Comments
1.79
Dry Density (t/m3)
Data
1.78
0 % Voids for PD = 2.2
0 % Voids for PD = 2.1
0 % Voids for PD = 2.0
1.77 0 % Voids for PD = 1.9
Curve
1.76
1.75
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00
Moisture Content (w%)
Comments
1.90
1.88
Dry Density (t/m3)
Data
0 % Voids for PD = 2.7
1.84 Curve
1.82
1.80
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00
Moisture Content (w%)
Comments
1.98
Dry Density (t/m3)
Data
1.96
0 % Voids for PD = 2.7
0 % Voids for PD = 2.6
0 % Voids for PD = 2.5
1.94 0 % Voids for PD = 2.4
Curve
1.92
1.90
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00
Moisture Content (w%)
Comments
Comments
Test method: AS 1289.2.1.1
The results of the tests included in Report issued by: Owen Timothy
this document are traceable to
Australian and national standards. Date issued: 26/06/2020
TEST ITEM: Silty CLAY, Reddish Brown REPORT No.: L1698 _Issue 1
NATURE OF SHRINKAGE
Sample Preparation:
DRY SEIVED
OVEN-DRIED ≤ 50 ⁰C
Notes:
TEST ITEM: Silty CLAY, Reddish Brown REPORT No.: L1698 _Issue 1
NATURE OF SHRINKAGE
Sample Preparation:
DRY SEIVED
OVEN-DRIED ≤ 50 ⁰C
Notes:
TEST ITEM: Silty CLAY, Light Brown REPORT No.: L1698 _Issue 1
NATURE OF SHRINKAGE
Sample Preparation:
DRY SEIVED
OVEN-DRIED ≤ 50 ⁰C
Notes:
TEST ITEM: Clayey SAND trace Gravels REPORT No.: L1698 _Issue 1
90
80
70
Percent Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
SIEVE SIZE (mm) PERCENT PASSING SIEVE SIZE (mm) PERCENT PASSING
1.18 90
0.600 73
0.425 64
9.5 100 0.300 57
4.75 100 0.150 32
2.36 97 0.075 27
Notes:
TEST ITEM: SAND with Gravels and Clay REPORT No.: L1698 _Issue 1
90
80
70
Percent Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
SIEVE SIZE (mm) PERCENT PASSING SIEVE SIZE (mm) PERCENT PASSING
1.18 70
0.600 63
19.0 100 0.425 47
9.5 92 0.300 35
4.75 78 0.150 17
2.36 72 0.075 9
Notes:
TEST ITEM: Clayey SAND trace Gravels, Light Grey REPORT No.: L1698 _Issue 1
90
80
70
Percent Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
SIEVE SIZE (mm) PERCENT PASSING SIEVE SIZE (mm) PERCENT PASSING
1.18 80
0.600 54
19.0 100 0.425 46
9.5 99 0.300 41
4.75 98 0.150 25
2.36 95 0.075 19
Notes:
TEST ITEM: Sandy CLAY, Light Grey REPORT No.: L1698 _Issue 1
90
80
70
Percent Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
SIEVE SIZE (mm) PERCENT PASSING SIEVE SIZE (mm) PERCENT PASSING
1.18 99
0.600 97
0.425 92
9.5 100 0.300 83
4.75 100 0.150 58
2.36 99 0.075 41
Notes:
TEST ITEM: Sandy CLAY trace Gravels REPORT No.: L1698 _Issue 1
90
80
70
Percent Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
SIEVE SIZE (mm) PERCENT PASSING SIEVE SIZE (mm) PERCENT PASSING
1.18 97
0.600 90
0.425 87
9.5 100 0.300 85
4.75 99 0.150 67
2.36 98 0.075 59
Notes:
TEST ITEM: Clayey SAND, brown red with grey REPORT No.: L1698 _Issue 1
90
80
70
Percent Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
SIEVE SIZE (mm) PERCENT PASSING SIEVE SIZE (mm) PERCENT PASSING
1.18 99
0.600 95
0.425 84
0.300 72
4.75 100 0.150 41
2.36 100 0.075 29
Notes:
TEST ITEM: Sandy CLAY trace Gravels, Light Grey REPORT No.: L1698 _Issue 1
90
80
70
Percent Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
SIEVE SIZE (mm) PERCENT PASSING SIEVE SIZE (mm) PERCENT PASSING
1.18 85
26.0 100 0.600 78
19.0 94 0.425 75
9.5 91 0.300 73
4.75 88 0.150 48
2.36 87 0.075 37
Notes:
TEST ITEM: Sandy CLAY, Light Grey REPORT No.: L1698 _Issue 1
90
80
70
Percent Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
SIEVE SIZE (mm) PERCENT PASSING SIEVE SIZE (mm) PERCENT PASSING
1.18 94
0.600 92
19.0 100 0.425 91
9.5 99 0.300 89
4.75 97 0.150 58
2.36 96 0.075 46
Notes: