Proposed Subdivision – Potters Lane, Stage 8 Site

GEOTECHNICAL I LABORATORY I EARTHWORKS I QUARRY I CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL TESTING

Proposed Subdivision – Potters Lane, Stage 8 Site Classification

Graziers Parade Off Rees James Road, Raymond Terrace

NEW17P-0061D-AB 23 March 2021

Qualtest Laboratory (NSW) Pty Ltd ABN: 98 153 268 89 8 Ironbark Close Warabrook NSW 2304 T: (02) 4968 4468 F: (02)4960 9775 W: www.qualtest.com.au NEW17P-0061D-AB

23 March 2021

McCloy Raymond Terrace Pty Ltd

Suite 2, Ground Floor, 317 Hunter Street

NEWCASTLE NSW 2300

Attention: Mr Rylan Gibson

Dear Rylan

RE: PROPOSED SUBDIVISION – POTTERS LANE, STAGE 8

GRAZIERS PARADE, OFF REES JAMES ROAD, RAYMOND TERRACE

SITE CLASSIFICATION (LOTS 801 TO 825)

Please find enclosed our geotechnical report for Stage 8 of the Potter’s Lane residential

subdivision, located at Graziers Parade, off Rees James Road, Raymond Terrace.

The report includes recommendations for Site Classification in accordance with AS2870-2011,

“Residential Slabs and Footings” following the completion of site regrading earthworks.

If you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact Shannon

Kelly, Ben Edwards, or the undersigned.

For and on behalf of Qualtest Laboratory (NSW) Pty Ltd

Jason Lee

Principal Geotechnical Engineer

PROPOSED SUBDIVISION – POTTERS LANE STAGE 8, RAYMOND TERRACE

23 March 2021 i NEW17P-0061D-AB

Table of Contents:

1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1

2.0 Desktop Study .............................................................................................................. 1

3.0 Field Work ...................................................................................................................... 1

4.0 Site Description ............................................................................................................ 2

4.1 Site Regrade Works ......................................................................................................2

4.2 Surface Conditions ......................................................................................................3

4.3 Subsurface Conditions ................................................................................................5

5.0 Laboratory Testing .................................................................................................... 10

6.0 Site Classification to AS2870-2011 ......................................................................... 11

7.0 Limitations .................................................................................................................... 13

Attachments:

Figure AB1: Site Plan and Approximate Test Locations

Appendix A: Results of Field Investigations

Appendix B: Results of Laboratory Testing

Appendix C: CSIRO Sheet BTF 18


23 March 2021 1 NEW17P-0061D-AB

1.0 Introduction

Qualtest Laboratory NSW Pty Ltd (Qualtest) is pleased to present this report to McCloy

Raymond Terrace Pty Ltd (McCloy), for Stage 8 of the “Potters Lane” residential subdivision,

located at Graziers Parade, off Rees James Road, Raymond Terrace.

Based on the brief and Engineering Plans (prepared by Fisher Consulting Engineers, Ref. Project

No. 19003, Dwg No. C02, Rev. 2, dated 23/07/2019), provided by McCloy, Stage 8 is

understood to include 25 residential allotments (Lots 801 to 825).

The scope of work for the geotechnical investigation included providing Site Classification in

accordance with AS2870-2011, “Residential Slabs and Footings”, following completion of site

regrade works.

This report presents the results of the field work investigations and laboratory testing and

provides recommendations for the scope outlined above.

The report also includes selected results from the previous geotechnical assessments carried

out for the “Potters Lane” residential subdivision by Qualtest and others (Refer to Section 2.0), to

supplement information collected during the current investigation where applicable.

2.0 Desktop Study

The scope of work has included a review of the following reports by Qualtest, unless stated

otherwise:

Qualtest – Level 1 Site Re-grade Assessment Report, ‘Proposed Subdivision of Potters Lane –

Stage 8, Raymond Terrace”, (Report Reference: NEW20P-0184-AA, 3 December 2020);

Site Classification, ‘Proposed Subdivision – Potters Lane, Stage 9, Dairyman Drive, Raymond

Terrace’ (Report Reference: NEW17P-0061-AG, 4 July 2019);

Site Classification, ‘Proposed Residential Subdivision – Potters Lane – Stage 7, Dairyman

Drive, Raymond Terrace’ (Report Reference: NEW17P-0061-AC, 8 June 2018); and,

Geotechnical Assessment, ‘Proposed Residential Subdivision – Potters Lane – Stage 7 to 10,

42 Rees James Road, Raymond Terrace’, (Report Reference: NEW17P-0061-AA, 7 June

2017);

This report includes selected results from the reports referenced above, to supplement

information collected during the current investigations where applicable. Reference should be

made to the reports outlined above for further details of site conditions, field work and

laboratory testing conducted, site supervision, and density testing carried out.

3.0 Field Work

The field work investigations were carried out on 2 March 2021, and comprised of:

DBYD search was undertaken to check proposed test locations for the presence of

underground services;

Site walkover to make observations of surface features at the property and in the

immediate surrounding area;

Excavation of 15 boreholes (BH801 to BH815) using a 2.7 tonne rubber tracked excavator

equipped with a 300mm diameter auger, to depths of between 0.30m and 2.00m;


23 March 2021 2 NEW17P-0061D-AB

Undisturbed samples (U50 tubes) were taken for subsequent laboratory testing; and,

Boreholes were backfilled with the excavation spoil and compacted using the excavator

auger and tracks.

Investigations were carried out by an experienced Geotechnical Engineer from Qualtest who

located the boreholes, carried out the testing and sampling, produced field logs of the

boreholes, and made observations of the site surface conditions.

Engineering logs of the boreholes are presented in Appendix A.

Approximate borehole locations are shown on the attached Figure AB1. Boreholes were

located in the field by handheld GPS and relative to existing site features including

topographic features, lot boundaries, and existing developments.

4.0 Site Description

4.1 Site Regrade Works

Following an initial site visit and stripping assessment performed on 9 November 2020, site re-

grading for Stage 8 bulk earthworks was conducted between 11 November 2020 and 24

November 2020.

Re-grading works consisted of the removal of unsuitable materials, blending colluvium

materials with site won Residual and stockpiled materials, along with cutting and filling activities

to bring proposed residential lots within Stage 8 and portions of Stage 10 to design finish levels.

Re-grade works performed during the current Stage 8 bulk earthworks included filling within all

or portions of Lots 807 to 810, 813 to 820, 825 and portions of Lots 1004 to 1009. Filling within

portions of Lots 1004 to1009 consisted predominantly of placement of supporting fill for current

and future services and proposed retaining wall structures.

Refer to attached Figure AB1 for the approximate extent of lot filling works for this stage of the

development.

Prior to filling, re-grade areas were stripped of all topsoil and unsuitable material to expose

either the suitable natural foundation profile, or previously placed controlled fill within Lots 807,

808, 1004 and 1005, which was placed during Stage 9 bulk earthworks (refer to Qualtest report

ref. NEW19P-0054-AA, dated 19 June 2019).

t is noted that re-grade works during previous Stage 9 bulk earthworks, included filling of the

rear portions of Lots 801 to 808 within Stage 8.

Re-grade works then consisted of filling with approved site fill to design finish levels.

Filling was performed using site stockpiled material won from excavations cut from around the

site. The fill material could generally be described as mixtures of Residual (CI-CH) Sandy CLAY

and Extremely Weathered (EW) Siltstone / Sandstone, medium to high plasticity, brown / yellow

in colour, with fine to coarse grained sand and gravel, which was blended with a pale to dark

brown Silty SAND (Colluvium).

The depth of fill placed ranged in the order of 0.1m to about 2.4m, with the following

approximate maximum depths within each lot area outlined below:

Lot 807 - 1.2m;

Lot 808 - 2.4m;

Lot 809 to Lot 810 - 1.2m;


23 March 2021 3 NEW17P-0061D-AB

Lot 813 to Lot 816 - 0.6m;

Lot 817 to Lot 820 - 0.3m;

Lot 825 - 1.2m;

Lot 1004 - 0.5m;

Lot 1005 - 2.4m; and

Lot 1006 to Lot 1009 - 1.2m.

The fill was compacted in maximum lifts of 0.3m thickness. Any unsuitable or deleterious

material within the fill was removed by hand or mechanical means prior to final compaction of

the material.

As the geotechnical testing authority engaged for the project, Qualtest state that the

re-grading works performed within Stage 8 of the development (as shown on Figure AB1 of the

Level 1 Site Re-grade Assessment Report) was carried out to Level 1 criteria as defined in

Clause 8.2 – Section 8, of AS3798-2007, “Guidelines on Earthworks for Commercial and

Residential Developments”.

4.2 Surface Conditions

The site is located about 250m north of Rees James Road, at Graziers Parade, Raymond

Terrace, as shown on Figure AB1. The site is bounded by existing wetlands to the northwest, by

future Stage 10 under construction to the northeast, and by existing Stages of the Potters Lane

subdivision to the southwest and southeast (Stages 7 and 9).

Photographs of the site taken on the day of the site investigations are shown below.

Photograph 1: From near BH808, facing east. Photograph 2: From near BH614, facing

southeast.

http://www.saiglobal.com/online/Script/Details.asp?DocN=AS0733780962AT

http://www.saiglobal.com/online/Script/Details.asp?DocN=AS0733780962AT


23 March 2021 4 NEW17P-0061D-AB

Photograph 3: From near BH807, facing

southwest.


northeast.

Photograph 5: From near BH813, facing south. Photograph 6: From near BH813, facing

southwest.


northeast.

Photograph 8: From near BH809, facing east.


23 March 2021 5 NEW17P-0061D-AB


southwest.

Photograph 10: From near BH804, facing west.

4.3 Subsurface Conditions

Reference to the 1:100,000 Newcastle-Hunter Area Coastal Quaternary Geology Series Sheet

indicates the site to be underlain by the Dalwood Group, comprising sandstone, lithic

sandstone, conglomerate, siltstone, and basalt rock types.

Table 1 presents a summary of the typical soil types encountered at borehole locations during

the field investigation, divided into representative geotechnical units.

Table 2 contains a summary of the distribution of the geotechnical units at the borehole

locations.

Table 2 also contains a summary of the distribution of the geotechnical units at selected

borehole and test pit locations from the previous investigations. The near surface soil profile at

many of those locations is likely to have changed as a result of the subsequent earthworks.

No groundwater levels or inflows were encountered in the boreholes during the limited time

that they remained open on the day of the field investigations.

It should be noted that groundwater conditions can vary due to rainfall and other influences

including regional groundwater flow, temperature, permeability, recharge areas, surface

condition, and subsoil drainage.


23 March 2021 6 NEW17P-0061D-AB

TABLE 1 – SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICAL UNITS AND SOIL TYPES

Unit Soil Type Description

1A FILL – TOPSOIL

Sandy CLAY – low to medium and in places high plasticity, dark grey,

grey-brown, and dark brown, fine to coarse grained sand, with some

fine to medium grained angular gravel, root affected.

1B FILL -

CONTROLLED

Sandy CLAY – medium to high plasticity, grey to dark grey, dark

brown, and trace orange, fine to coarse grained sand, trace fine to

medium grained angular gravel.

CLAY – medium to high plasticity, brown and grey-brown, grey, trace

orange and pale grey, trace fine to coarse grained sand, trace fine to

medium grained angular gravel. With some Gravelly CLAY bands.

2 TOPSOIL

Silty SAND – fine to coarse grained, grey, fines of low plasticity, trace

fine to medium grained sub-rounded to sub-angular gravel, root

affected.

3 COLLUVIUM

CLAY / Sandy CLAY – medium to high plasticity, brown, dark grey to

dark grey-brown, fine to medium grained sand, fine to medium

grained angular to sub-angular gravel.

4 RESIDUAL SOIL

Sandy CLAY – low to high plasticity, grey, pale grey, orange to dark

brown, and pale brown to brown, fine to coarse grained sand, trace

fine to medium grained angular to sub-rounded gravel.

CLAY – medium to high plasticity, grey to brown trace orange to red-

brown, trace fine to medium grained angular gravel.

Clayey GRAVEL / Gravelly CLAY – low to medium plasticity, pale grey

to grey trace brown, fine to medium grained angular gravel.

5

EXTREMELY

WEATHERED

(XW) ROCK with

soil properties

Sandstone; breaks down into Sandy CLAY – medium plasticity, grey to

pale grey and orange to brown, fine to coarse grained sand, trace

fine to medium grained angular to sub-angular gravel.

6

HIGHLY

WEATHERED

(HW) ROCK

SANDSTONE – fine to medium grained, grey, pale brown, pale grey

and orange, estimated very low to medium strength.

Sandy SILTSTONE / Silty SANDSTONE – fine to medium grained, pale

grey and red-brown, pale orange to orange, brown, and dark grey to

grey, estimated low to medium strength.


23 March 2021 7 NEW17P-0061D-AB

TABLE 2 – SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICAL UNITS ENCOUNTERED AT EACH TEST LOCATION

Location Unit 1A

FILL - Topsoil

Unit 1B

Controlled Fill

Unit 2

Topsoil

Unit 3

Colluvium

Unit 4

Residual Soil

Unit 5

Extremely

Weathered

Rock

Unit 6

Highly

Weathered

Rock

Depth (m)

BH801 - - 0.00 – 0.20 - 0.20 – 0.90 - 0.90 – 1.20*

BH802 - - 0.00 – 0.20 - 0.20 – 0.90 - 0.90 – 1.00*

BH803 - - 0.00 – 0.20 - 0.20 – 0.60 - 0.60 – 0.65*

BH804 0.00 – 0.15 0.15 – 0.80 - - 0.80 – 2.00 - -

BH805 0.00 – 0.20 0.20 – 0.45 - - 0.45 – 2.00 - -

BH806

0.00 – 0.20

- - -

0.20 – 0.60

0.70 – 0.80

0.90 – 1.40

0.80 – 0.90

0.60 – 0.70

1.40 – 1.42*

BH807 - - 0.00 – 0.20 - 0.20 – 1.00 - 1.00 – 1.05*

BH808 - - 0.00 – 0.10 0.10 – 0.25 0.25 – 0.75 - 0.75 – 0.80^

BH809 0.00 – 0.20 0.20 – 0.40 - - 0.40 – 0.90 - 0.90 – 0.92*

BH810 0.00 – 0.10 0.10 – 0.30 - - 0.30 – 1.80 - 1.80 – 1.90*

BH811 - - - 0.00 – 0.20 - - 0.20 – 0.30*

BH812 0.00 – 0.05 - - - 0.05 – 0.15

0.30 – 1.10

0.15 – 0.30

1.10 – 1.20*

BH813 - - 0.00 – 0.05 - 0.05 – 0.25 0.25 – 0.60 0.60 -0.62*


23 March 2021 8 NEW17P-0061D-AB

Location Unit 1A

FILL - Topsoil

Unit 1B

Controlled Fill

Unit 2

Topsoil

Unit 3

Colluvium

Unit 4

Residual Soil

Unit 5

Extremely

Weathered

Rock

Unit 6

Highly

Weathered

Rock

Depth (m)

BH814 0.00 – 0.10 - - - 0.10 – 0.30 0.30 – 1.10 1.10 – 1.15*

BH815 0.00 – 0.15 0.15 – 2.00 - - - - -

Previous Qualtest Investigation (Ref: NEW17P-0061-AG, dated 4 July 2019)

TP906 - 0.25 - 2.05 0.00 - 0.25 - - - -

TP907 - 0.00 - 0.60 - - 0.60 - 0.85 0.85 - 1.55 1.55 - 1.65^

TP908 - - 0.00 - 0.20 - 0.20 - 0.70 0.70 - 0.80 0.80 - 0.95^

TP909 - 0.00 - 1.05 - - - 1.05 - 1.30 1.30 - 1.45^

TP910 - - 0.00 - 0.25 0.25 - 0.35 0.35 - 0.65 0.65 - 0.90 0.90 - 1.00^

Previous Geotechnical Assessment (Ref: NEW17P-0061-AC, 8 June 2018)

TP710 - - - 0.00 - 0.20 0.20 - 0.70 - 0.70 - 1.00*

TP714 0.00 - 0.30 0.15 - 0.30 - 0.30 - 0.70 0.70 - 1.50 1.50 - 1.90^ -

TP715 0.00 - 0.15 0.15 - 0.40 - - 0.40 - 1.35 1.35 - 1.70^ -

Previous Geotechnical Assessment (Ref: NEW17P-0061-AA, 7 June 2017)

TP08 - - 0.00 - 0.40 0.40 - 0.70 0.70 - 0.80 - 0.80 - 1.40*

TP09 - - 0.00 - 0.30 0.30 - 0.70 0.70 - 0.90 - 0.90 - 1.90*


23 March 2021 9 NEW17P-0061D-AB

Location Unit 1A

FILL - Topsoil

Unit 1B

Controlled Fill

Unit 2

Topsoil

Unit 3

Colluvium

Unit 4

Residual Soil

Unit 5

Extremely

Weathered

Rock

Unit 6

Highly

Weathered

Rock

Depth (m)

TP10 - - 0.00 - 0.30 0.30 - 0.70 0.70 - 1.10 - 1.10 - 1.80*

TP11 - - 0.00 - 0.40 0.40 - 0.90 0.90 - 1.50 1.50 - 2.20 -

TP12 - - 0.00 - 0.30 - 0.30 - 0.80 - 0.80 - 1.40*

TP16 - - 0.00 - 0.40 0.40 - 0.60 0.60 - 1.40 - 1.40 - 1.70*

TP17 - - 0.00 - 0.40 0.40 - 0.70 0.70 - 1.70 - 1.70 - 2.00

TP21 - - 0.00 - 0.20 0.20 - 0.40 0.40 - 0.69 - 0.69 - 0.70*

Notes: * = Refusal or Practical refusal of 2.5 / 2.7 / 5.5 tonne excavator / backhoe.

^ = Slow to very slow progress, close to practical refusal of excavator / backhoe.


23 March 2021 10 NEW17P-0061D-AB

5.0 Laboratory Testing

Samples collected during the current field investigations were returned to our NATA accredited

Warabrook Laboratory for testing which comprised of:

(14 no.) Shrink / Swell tests; and,

(1 no.) Atterberg Limits test.

Results of the laboratory testing are presented in Appendix B, with a summary of the

Shrink/Swell tests, and Atterberg Limits test results presented in Table 3 and Table 4, respectively.

TABLE 3 – SUMMARY OF SHRINK / SWELL TESTING RESULTS

Location Depth (m) Material Description Iss (%)

Current Investigation (March 2021)

BH801 0.50 – 0.68 (CI) Sandy CLAY 3.3

BH802 0.30 – 0.44 (CI) Sandy CLAY 0.8

BH803 0.30 – 0.48 (CI) Sandy CLAY 1.0

BH804 0.40 – 0.53 FILL: (CH) Sandy CLAY 1.5

BH805 0.50 – 0.68 (CH) Sandy CLAY 3.8

BH806 0.40 – 0.55 (CH) CLAY 0.9

BH807 0.40 – 0.60 (CI) Sandy CLAY 2.9

BH808 0.25 – 0.40 (CL) Sandy CLAY 1.1

BH809 0.20 – 0.35 FILL: (CH) Gravelly CLAY 2.1

BH810 0.15 – 0.30 FILL: (CH) Sandy CLAY 1.9

BH810 0.90 – 1.05 (CH) Sandy CLAY 2.5

BH813 0.05 – 0.20 (CI) Sandy CLAY 1.3

BH814 0.15 – 0.30 (CH) Sandy CLAY 0.9

BH815 0.50 – 0.65 FILL: (CI) Sandy CLAY 2.0

Previous Qualtest Investigation (Job No. NEW17P-0061-AG, dated 4 July 2019)

TP906 0.90 - 1.10 FILL: (CI) Sandy CLAY 2.7

TP907 0.60 - 0.75 (CH) Sandy CLAY 3.0

TP908 0.30 - 0.75 (CH) Sandy CLAY 3.3

TP909 0.25 - 0.45 FILL: (CI) Sandy CLAY 1.9

TP910 0.40 - 0.55 (CH) Sandy CLAY 2.3

Previous Geotechnical Assessment (Ref: NEW17P-0061-AC, dated 8 June 2018)

TP703 0.60 - 0.70 (CH) Sandy CLAY 2.9

TP707 0.40 - 0.60 (CH) Sandy CLAY 3.6


23 March 2021 11 NEW17P-0061D-AB

Previous Geotechnical Assessment (Ref: NEW17P-0061-AA, dated 7 June 2017)

TP08 0.5 – 0.9 (CH) Sandy CLAY 3.7

TP10 0.5 – 0.9 (CH) Sandy CLAY 3.5

TP12 0.5 – 0.8 (CH) Sandy CLAY 2.7

TP16 0.5 – 0.9 (CH) Sandy CLAY / Clayey SAND 3.7

TP17 0.5 – 0.9 (CH) Sandy CLAY / Clayey SAND 3.3

TABLE 4 – SUMMARY OF ATTERBERG LIMITS TESTING RESULTS

Location Sample

Depth (m)

Material Description Liquid

Limit (%)

Plasticity

Index (%)

Linear

Shrinkage

(%)

Current Investigation (March 2021)

BH812 0.50 – 0.80 (CI) Sandy CLAY 35 14 6.5

Previous Qualtest Investigation (Job No. NEW17P-0061-AG, dated 4 July 2019)

TP906 0.35 - 0.60 FILL: (CI) Sandy CLAY 35 16 9.0

TP909 0.90 - 1.10 FILL: (CI) Sandy CLAY 37 22 8.5

Previous Geotechnical Assessment (Ref: NEW17P-0061-AC, dated 8 June 2018)

TP710 0.40 - 0.60 (CH) Sandy CLAY 60 43 13.5

TP714 0.70 - 0.90 (CH) Sandy CLAY 72 54 16.0

TP715 0.60 - 0.90 (CH) Sandy CLAY 75 55 16.0

Previous Geotechnical Assessment (Ref: NEW17P-0061-AA, dated 7 June 2017)

TP21 0.2 – 0.5 (CH) Sandy CLAY 86 62 16

6.0 Site Classification to AS2870-2011

Based on the results of the field work, laboratory testing, and site regrade works carried out,

residential lots located within Potters Lane – Stage 8, Braziers Parade, Raymond Terrace as

shown on Figure AB1, are classified in their current condition in accordance with AS2870-2011

’Residential Slabs and Footings’, as shown in Table 5.

TABLE 5 – SITE CLASSIFICATION TO AS2870-2011

Stage Lot Numbers Site Classification

8

811, 812, 817 to 824 M

801 to 810, 813 to 816, and 825 H1


23 March 2021 12 NEW17P-0061D-AB

A characteristic free surface movement in the range of 20mm to 40mm is estimated for the lots

classified as Class ‘M’ in their existing condition.

A characteristic free surface movement in the range of 40mm to 60mm is estimated for the lots

classified as Class ‘H1’ in their existing condition.

The effects of changes to the soil profile by additional cutting and filling and the effects of past

and future trees should be considered in selection of the design value for differential

movement.

If site re-grading works involving cutting or filling are performed after the date of this assessment

the classification may change and further advice should be sought.

Final site classification will be dependent on the type of fill and level of supervision carried out.

Re-classification of lots should be confirmed by the geotechnical authority at the time of

construction following any site re-grade works.

Footings for the proposed development should be designed and constructed in accordance

with the requirements of AS2870-2011.

The classification presented above assumes that:

All footings are founded in controlled fill (if applicable) or in the residual clayey soils or rock

below all non-controlled fill, topsoil material and root zones, and fill under slab panels meets

the requirements of AS2870-2011, in particular, the root zone must be removed prior to the

placement of fill materials beneath slabs;

The performance expectations set out in Appendix B of AS2870-2011 are acceptable, and

that site foundation maintenance is undertaken to avoid extremes of wetting and drying.

Footings are to be founded outside of or below all zones of influence resulting from existing

or future service trenches;

The constructional and architectural requirements for reactive clay sites set out in

AS2870-2011 are followed;

Adherence to the detailing requirement outlined in Section 5 of AS2870-2011 ‘Residential

Slabs and Footings’ is essential, in particular Section 5.6, ‘Additional requirements for Classes

M, H1, H2 and E sites’ including architectural restrictions, plumbing and drainage

requirements; and,

Site maintenance complies with the provisions of CSIRO Sheet BTF 18, “Foundation

Maintenance and Footing Performance: A Homeowner’s Guide”, a copy of which is

attached in Appendix C.

All structural elements on all lots should be supported on footings founded beneath all

uncontrolled fill, layers of inadequate bearing capacity, soft/loose, wet or other potentially

deleterious material.

If any localised areas of uncontrolled fill of depths greater than 0.4m are encountered during

construction, footings should be designed in accordance with engineering principles for

Class ‘P’ sites.


23 March 2021 13 NEW17P-0061D-AB

7.0 Limitations

The findings presented in the report and used as the basis for recommendations presented

herein were obtained using normal, industry accepted geotechnical design practices and

standards. To our knowledge, they represent a reasonable interpretation of the general

conditions of the site.

The extent of testing associated with this assessment is limited to discrete borehole locations. It

should be noted that subsurface conditions between and away from the borehole locations

may be different to those observed during the field work and used as the basis of the

recommendations contained in this report.

If subsurface conditions encountered during construction differ from those given in this report,

further advice should be sought without delay.

Data and opinions contained within the report may not be used in other contexts or for any

other purposes without prior review and agreement by Qualtest. If this report is reproduced, it

must be in full.

If you have any further questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact Ben

Edwards, Shannon Kelly, or the undersigned.

For and on behalf of Qualtest Laboratory (NSW) Pty Ltd.

Jason Lee

Principal Geotechnical Engineer

FIGURE AB1

Site Plan and Approximate Test Locations

Client:

Project:

Location:

Title:

N.T.S.

23/03/2021

MCCLOY RAYMOND TERRACE PTY LTD

POTTERS LANE - STAGE 8

GRAZIERS PARADE, RAYMOND TERRACE

SITE PLAN AND APPROXIMATE TEST LOCATIONS

Drawing No:

Project No:

Scale:

Date:

FIGURE AB1

NEW17P-0061D

N

Based on site plan prepared by Fisher Consulting Engineers(Ref: Project No. 19003, Dwg No. C02, Rev. 2, dated 23.07.2019)

LEGEND:

Approximate borehole test location (Stage 8, Qualtest, 2021).

Approximate test pit location (Qualtest 2017 to 2019).

Approximate extent of re-grade works (fill).

BH801 BH802 BH803

BH804

BH815

BH805BH806BH807BH808

BH809

BH810

BH811

BH814

BH812 BH813

TP09

TP710 TP12

TP910

TP909

TP908

TP907

TP906

TP17

TP16

TP714

TP716

TP715 TP08 TP10 TP21

TP11

APPENDIX A:

Results of Field Investigations

VSt

H

0.20m

0.90m

1.20m

TOPSOIL

RESIDUAL SOIL

HIGHLY WEATHEREDROCK

AD

/T

SM

CI

M >

wP

M <

wP

M

D

U50

0.68m

0.50m

TOPSOIL: Silty SAND - fine to coarse grained, grey,fines of low plasticity, trace fine to medium grainedsub-rounded to sub-angular gravel, root affected.

Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, grey, with pale greyand orange, fine to medium grained sand, trace fineto medium grained angular gravel.

Silty SANDSTONE - fine to medium grained, palegrey and red-brown, estimated low to mediumstrength.

Hole Terminated at 1.20 mRefusal

HP 380

HP 350

HP 500

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test

PID Photoionisation detector reading (ppm)DCP(x-y) Dynamic penetrometer test (test depth interval shown)

HP Hand Penetrometer test (UCS kPa)

Material description and profile information

UCS (kPa)D DryM MoistW WetWp Plastic LimitWL Liquid Limit

Field Tests

Notes, Samples and Tests

Structure and additionalobservations

ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R

Gradational ortransitional strataDefinitive or distictstrata change

Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

SAMPLES

Water Level

(Date and time shown)

Water Inflow

Water Outflow

VS Very SoftS SoftF FirmSt Stiff

VSt Very StiffH HardFb Friable

U50 50mm Diameter tube sampleCBR Bulk sample for CBR testing

E Environmental sample(Glass jar, sealed and chilled on site)

ASS Acid Sulfate Soil Sample(Plastic bag, air expelled, chilled)

B Bulk Sample

Consistency Moisture Condition

V Very Loose Density Index <15%L Loose Density Index 15 - 35%MD Medium Dense Density Index 35 - 65%D Dense Density Index 65 - 85%VD Very Dense Density Index 85 - 100%

Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: Soil type, plasticity/particlecharacteristics,colour,minor components

Drilling and Sampling

<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

NE

W17

P-0

061D

LO

GS

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

3/03

/202

1 12

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool

CLIENT: McCLOY RAYMOND TERRACE PTY LTD

PROJECT: PROPOSED SUBDIVISION

LOCATION: POTTERS LANE - STAGE 8

ENGINEERING LOG - BOREHOLE

DRILL TYPE: 2.7 TONNE EXCAVATOR WITH AUGER

BOREHOLE DIAMETER: 300 mm

BOREHOLE NO: BH801PAGE: 1 OF 1

JOB NO: NEW17P-0061D

LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 2/3/21

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

VSt -H

H

0.20m

0.90m

1.02m

TOPSOIL

RESIDUAL SOIL


AD

/T

SM

CI

M >

wP

M <

wP

M

D

U500.44m

0.30m



Silty SANDSTONE - fine to medium grained, palegrey and red-brown, estimated low to mediumstrength.


HP 200

HP 480

HP >600

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

NE

W17

P-0

061D

LO

GS

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

3/03

/202

1 12

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 2/3/21

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

VSt -H

0.20m

0.60m

0.65m

TOPSOIL

RESIDUAL SOIL


AD

/T

SM

CI

M <

wP

D

D

U50

0.48m

0.30m



Silty SANDSTONE - fine to medium grained, palegrey to grey and pale orange, estimated low tomedium strength.


HP >600

HP >600Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

NE

W17

P-0

061D

LO

GS

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

3/03

/202

1 12

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 2/3/21

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

St

VSt

VSt -H

VSt

0.15m

0.30m

0.80m

1.80m

2.00m

FILL - TOPSOIL

FILL - CONTROLLED

RESIDUAL SOIL /POSSIBLY CONTROLLEDFILL

RESIDUAL SOIL

AD

/T

CL

CH

CH

CI

M >

wP

M <

wP

M >

wP

U500.53m

0.40m

FILL-TOPSOIL: Sandy CLAY - low to mediumplasticity, dark grey and grey-brown, fine to coarsegrained sand, with some fine to medium grainedangular gravel, root affected.

FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, greyto dark grey, trace orange, fine to coarse (mostlyfine) grained sand, trace fine to medium grainedangular gravel.

FILL: CLAY - medium to high plasticity, brown andgrey-brown trace orange and pale grey, trace fine tocoarse grained sand, trace fine to medium grainedangular gravel.

Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, pale grey andorange to dark brown, fine to coarse grained sand,trace fine grained sub-rounded to sub-angulargravel.

Brown, trace pale grey to grey, with some finegrained sub-rounded to sub-angular gravel.

Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, pale greyand pale orange to grey, fine to medium grainedsand.

Hole Terminated at 2.00 m

HP 170

HP 250

HP 200

HP 500

HP 530

HP 500

HP 280

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

NE

W17

P-0

061D

LO

GS

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

3/03

/202

1 12

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 2/3/21

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

VSt -H

H

0.20m

0.45m

2.00m

FILL - TOPSOIL

FILL - CONTROLLED

RESIDUAL SOIL

AD

/T

CL

CH

CH

M >

wP

M <

wP

U50

0.68m

0.50m


FILL: CLAY - medium to high plasticity, grey tobrown, trace orange to red-brown, trace fine tomedium grained angular gravel.

CLAY - medium to high plasticity, grey to brown,trace orange to red-brown, trace fine to mediumgrained angular gravel.


HP 480

HP 450

HP 480

HP 550

HP 500

HP 500

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

NE

W17

P-0

061D

LO

GS

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

3/03

/202

1 12

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 2/3/21

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

St

VSt

VSt -H

0.20m

0.60m

0.70m

0.80m

0.90m

1.40m1.42m

FILL - TOPSOIL

RESIDUAL SOIL


RESIDUAL SOIL

EXTREMELY WEATHEREDROCK

RESIDUAL SOIL


AD

/T

CL

CH

CI

CI

CI

M >

wP

M <

wP

D

D

U500.55m

0.40m


CLAY - medium to high plasticity, grey to brown,trace orange to red-brown, trace fine to mediumgrained angular gravel.

Sandy SILTSTONE - fine grained, grey, with someorange and pale grey, estimated low to mediumstrength, fractured.

Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, grey, trace palebrown, fine to coarse grained sand, trace fine tomedium grained angular gravel.

Extremely Weathered Sandstone with soil properties;breaks down into Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity,grey, trace pale brown, fine to coarse grained sand,trace fine to medium grained angular gravel.


SANDSTONE - fine to medium grained, grey, tracepale brown, estimated low to medium strength.


HP 120

HP 380

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

NE

W17

P-0

061D

LO

GS

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

3/03

/202

1 12

:16

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 2/3/21

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

St

VSt

VSt -H

0.20m

1.00m

1.05m

FILL - TOPSOIL

RESIDUAL SOIL


AD

/T

CL

CI

M ~

wP

M >

wP

M <

wP

D

U50

0.60m

0.40m

FILL-TOPSOIL: Sandy CLAY - low to mediumplasticity, grey-brown and dark brown, fine to coarsegrained (mostly fine grained) sand, trace fine tomedium grained angular gravel, trace rootlets.


SANDSTONE - fine to medium grained, grey, tracepale brown, estimated low to medium strength.


HP 350

HP 180

HP 300

HP 350

HP 420

HP 500

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

NE

W17

P-0

061D

LO

GS

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

3/03

/202

1 12

:16

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 2/3/21

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

VSt -H

0.10m

0.25m

0.75m

0.80m

TOPSOIL

COLLUVIUM / POSSIBLYCONTROLLED FILL

RESIDUAL SOIL


AD

/T

SM

CH

CL

M <

wP

D - M

D

U500.40m

0.25m

TOPSOIL: Silty SAND - fine to coarse grained, grey,fines of low plasticity.

CLAY - medium to high plasticity, grey and darkbrown.

Sandy CLAY - low to medium plasticity, brown, fineto medium grained sand.

SANDSTONE - fine to medium grained, pale brown,estimated very low to low strength.

Hole Terminated at 0.80 mSlow progress

HP 450

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

NE

W17

P-0

061D

LO

GS

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

3/03

/202

1 12

:16

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 2/3/21

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

VSt -H

0.20m

0.40m

0.90m0.92m

FILL - TOPSOIL

FILL - CONTROLLED

RESIDUAL SOIL /EXTREMELY WEATHEREDROCK


AD

/T

CL

CH

CL

M >

wP

M <

wP

D

U500.35m

0.20m

FILL-TOPSOIL: Sandy CLAY - low to mediumplasticity, dark brown, trace grey-brown and orange,fine to coarse grained (mostly fine grained) sand,trace fine to medium grained angular gravel, rootaffected.

FILL: Gravelly CLAY - medium to high plasticity, palegrey to grey, trace pale orange to orange, fine tomedium grained angular to sub-rounded gravel, withsome fine to coarse grained sand.

Clayey GRAVEL / Gravelly CLAY - low to mediumplasticity, pale grey to grey, trace brown, fine tomedium grained angular gravel.

SANDSTONE - fine to medium grained, pale grey togrey, estimated medium strength.


HP 350

HP 410

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

NE

W17

P-0

061D

LO

GS

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

3/03

/202

1 12

:16

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 2/3/21

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

VSt

VSt -H

0.10m

0.30m

1.80m

1.90m

FILL - TOPSOIL

FILL - CONTROLLED

RESIDUAL SOIL


AD

/T

CH

CH

CHM

> w

PM

< w

P

D

U500.30m

U501.02m

0.15m

0.90m

FILL-TOPSOIL: Sandy CLAY - medium to highplasticity, dark grey to grey-brown, fine to mediumgrained sand, trace fine to medium grained angularto sub-angular gravel.

FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, darkbrown with dark grey, trace orange to pale orange,fine to coarse grained (mostly fine grained) sand,trace fine to medium grained angular to sub-angulargravel.

Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, pale brownto pale grey, with pale orange, fine grained sand.

SANDSTONE - fine to medium grained, pale grey togrey, estimated low to medium strength.


HP 300

HP 420

HP 350

HP 380

HP 210

HP 450

HP 500

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

NE

W17

P-0

061D

LO

GS

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

3/03

/202

1 12

:16

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 2/3/21

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

F - St

0.20m

0.30m

COLLUVIUM


AD

/T

CH

M >

wP

D - M

Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, dark grey todark grey-brown, fine to coarse (mostly fine) grainedsand, trace fine to medium grained angular tosub-angular gravel.

Silty SANDSTONE - fine to medium grained, paleorange to orange and dark grey to grey, estimatedlow to medium strength, with extremely weatheredpockets.


HP 80 -110

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

NE

W17

P-0

061D

LO

GS

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

3/03

/202

1 12

:16

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 2/3/21

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

VSt

H

0.05m

0.15m

0.30m

1.10m

1.20m

FILL - TOPSOIL

RESIDUAL SOIL




AD

/T

CL

CI

CI

M >

wP

M <

wP

D - M

D

D

0.80m

0.50m

FILL-TOPSOIL: Sandy CLAY - low to mediumplasticity, dark grey to grey-brown, fine to coarsegrained (mostly fine grained) sand, trace rootlets.

Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, pale orange toorange and pale brown to pale grey, fine to coarsegrained (mostly fine grained) sand, trace fine tomedium grained angular to sub-angular gravel.

Silty SANDSTONE - fine to medium grained, orangeto brown and dark grey to pale grey, estimated low tomedium strength, fractured.

Extremely Weathered Sandstone with soil properties;breaks down into Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity,pale grey to grey and orange to brown, with somepockets of Highly Weathered SANDSTONE.

SANDSTONE - fine grained, pale orange-brown andpale grey, estimated medium strength.


HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

NE

W17

P-0

061D

LO

GS

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

3/03

/202

1 12

:16

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 2/3/21

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

VSt

H

0.05m

0.25m

0.60m0.62m

TOPSOIL

RESIDUAL SOIL



AD

/T

SM

CI

CI

M >

wP

M <

wP

M

D

U500.20m

0.05m TOPSOIL: Silty SAND - fine to coarse grained, grey,fines of low plasticity, trace fine to medium grainedsub-rounded to sub-angular gravel, root affected.

Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, pale orange toorange and pale brown to pale grey, fine to coarsegrained (mostly fine grained) sand, trace fine tomedium grained angular to sub-angular gravel.

Extremely Weathered Sandstone with soil properties;breaks down into Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity,pale orange to orange and pale brown to pale grey,fine to coarse grained (mostly fine grained) sand,trace fine to medium grained angular to sub-angulargravel.

SANDSTONE - fine to medium grained, pale orangeand pale grey, estimated low to medium strength.


HP 300

HP 400

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

NE

W17

P-0

061D

LO

GS

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

3/03

/202

1 12

:16

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 2/3/21

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

St

H

0.10m

0.30m

1.10m

1.15m

FILL - TOPSOIL

RESIDUAL SOIL



AD

/T

CH

CH

CI

M >

wP

M <

wP

D

FILL-TOPSOIL: Sandy CLAY - medium to highplasticity, dark grey to grey-brown, fine to coarse(mostly fine to medium) grained, trace fine tomedium grained angular to sub-angular gravel.

Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, grey andpale orange to pale brown, fine to medium grainedsand.

Extremely Weathered Sandstone with soil properties;breaks down into Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity,grey and pale orange to pale brown, fine to mediumgrained sand.

SANDSTONE - fine to medium grained, grey andpale orange to pale brown, estimated low to mediumstrength.


Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

NE

W17

P-0

061D

LO

GS

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

3/03

/202

1 12

:16

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 2/3/21

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

VSt

0.15m

2.00m

FILL - TOPSOIL

FILL - CONTROLLED

AD

/T

CL

CI

M >

wP

U500.65m

0.50m


FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, brown togrey-brown, fine to coarse grained sand, trace fine tomedium grained angular gravel.

Pale grey to grey with some pale orange to orange.


HP 300

HP 400

HP 350

HP 380

HP 390

HP 350

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

NE

W17

P-0

061D

LO

GS

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

3/03

/202

1 12

:16

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 2/3/21

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

APPENDIX B:

Results of Laboratory Testing

accred:2

lab:BF588973-B93C-41F6-9EF8-A8C000776CCD

sig:33F1A2AA-93EB-4355-9940-A28200C3471E

Sample DetailsSample ID: NEW21W-0756-S01Sampling Method: The results outlined below apply to the sample as receivedMaterial: Sandy Clay Date Sampled: 2/03/2021Source: On-Site Insitu Date Submitted: 5/03/2021Specification: No SpecificationProject Location: Rees James Road, Raymond TerraceSample Location: BH801 - (0.5 - 0.68m)Date Tested: 8/03/2021

Shrink Test AS 1289.7.1.1Shrink on drying (%): 4.9Shrinkage Moisture Content (%): 24.1Est. inert material (%): 1%Crumbling during shrinkage: NilCracking during shrinkage: Nil

Swell Test AS 1289.7.1.1Swell on Saturation (%): 2.0Moisture Content before (%): 22.4Moisture Content after (%): 30.1Est. Unc. Comp. Strength before (kPa): 320Est. Unc. Comp. Strength after (kPa): 100Shrink Swell

Shrink Swell Index - Iss (%): 3.3

Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025-Testing.

The results of the tests, calibrations and/or measurements

included in this document are traceable to Australian/national

standards.

Results provided relate only to the items tested or sampled.

15/03/2021

Shrink Swell Index ReportReport No: SSI:NEW21W-0756-S01

Issue No: 1

Client:

Date of Issue:NATA Accredited Laboratory Number: 18686Approved Signatory: Brent Cullen(Senior Geotechnician)Project Name: Proposed Subdivision - Potters Lane Stage 8

F: 02 4960 9775

QUALTEST Laboratory (NSW) Pty Ltd (20708) T: 02 4968 4468E: [email protected]: www.qualtest.com.auABN: 98 153 268 896

8 Ironbark Close Warabrook NSW 2304

Project No.: NEW17P-0061D

Suite 2, Ground Floor, 317 Hunter StreetNewcastle NSW 2300McCloy Raymond Terrace Pty Ltd

Page 1 of 1Form No: 18932, Report No: SSI:NEW21W-0756-S01 © 2000-2021 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.com

Comments

accred:2


sig:33F1A2AA-93EB-4355-9940-A28200C3471E


Shrink Test AS 1289.7.1.1Shrink on drying (%): 1.4Shrinkage Moisture Content (%): 17.8Est. inert material (%): 7%Crumbling during shrinkage: NilCracking during shrinkage: Major

Swell Test AS 1289.7.1.1Swell on Saturation (%): -3.0Moisture Content before (%): 17.3Moisture Content after (%): 28.2Est. Unc. Comp. Strength before (kPa): 300Est. Unc. Comp. Strength after (kPa): 50Shrink Swell





standards.


15/03/2021


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments

accred:2


sig:33F1A2AA-93EB-4355-9940-A28200C3471E



Swell Test AS 1289.7.1.1Swell on Saturation (%): -0.2Moisture Content before (%): 16.1Moisture Content after (%): 22.6Est. Unc. Comp. Strength before (kPa): >600Est. Unc. Comp. Strength after (kPa): 400Shrink Swell





standards.


15/03/2021


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments

accred:2


sig:33F1A2AA-93EB-4355-9940-A28200C3471E








standards.


15/03/2021


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments

accred:2


sig:33F1A2AA-93EB-4355-9940-A28200C3471E

Sample DetailsSample ID: NEW21W-0756-S05Sampling Method: The results outlined below apply to the sample as receivedMaterial: Clay Date Sampled: 2/03/2021Source: On-Site Insitu Date Submitted: 5/03/2021Specification: No SpecificationProject Location: Rees James Road, Raymond TerraceSample Location: BH805 - (0.5 - 0.68m)Date Tested: 8/03/2021







standards.


15/03/2021


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments

accred:2


sig:33F1A2AA-93EB-4355-9940-A28200C3471E

Sample DetailsSample ID: NEW21W-0756-S06Sampling Method: The results outlined below apply to the sample as receivedMaterial: Clay Date Sampled: 2/03/2021Source: On-Site Insitu Date Submitted: 5/03/2021Specification: No SpecificationProject Location: Rees James Road, Raymond TerraceSample Location: BH806 - (0.4 - 0.55m)Date Tested: 8/03/2021







standards.


15/03/2021


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments

accred:2


sig:33F1A2AA-93EB-4355-9940-A28200C3471E








standards.


15/03/2021


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments

accred:2


sig:33F1A2AA-93EB-4355-9940-A28200C3471E








standards.


15/03/2021


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments

accred:2


sig:33F1A2AA-93EB-4355-9940-A28200C3471E

Sample DetailsSample ID: NEW21W-0756-S09Sampling Method: The results outlined below apply to the sample as receivedMaterial: Gravelly Clay Date Sampled: 2/03/2021Source: On-Site Insitu Date Submitted: 5/03/2021Specification: No SpecificationProject Location: Rees James Road, Raymond TerraceSample Location: BH809 - (0.2 - 0.35m)Date Tested: 8/03/2021







standards.


15/03/2021


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments

accred:2


sig:33F1A2AA-93EB-4355-9940-A28200C3471E








standards.


15/03/2021


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments

accred:2


sig:33F1A2AA-93EB-4355-9940-A28200C3471E








standards.


15/03/2021


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments

accred:2


sig:E98AA701-82EE-4B23-B125-A28200B9ECF7

On-Site InsituSource:Sandy ClayMaterial:

Sample DetailsNEW21W-0756-S12Sample ID:02/03/2021Date Sampled:

No SpecificationSpecification:Rees James Road, Raymond TerraceProject Location:BH812 - (0.5 - 0.8m)Sample Location:

The results outlined below apply to the sample as received

Test Results

1421

Four Point35NoNoNo

2506.5

Dry SievedOven-dried

ResultSample History AS 1289.1.1

MethodDescription LimitsPreparation AS 1289.1.1 Linear Shrinkage (%) AS 1289.3.4.1Mould Length (mm)CrumblingCurlingCrackingLiquid Limit (%) AS 1289.3.1.1MethodPlastic Limit (%) AS 1289.3.2.1Plasticity Index (%) AS 1289.3.3.1

10/03/2021Date Tested




standards.


12/03/2021

Material Test ReportReport No: MAT:NEW21W-0756-S12

Issue No: 1

Client:

Date of Issue:NATA Accredited Laboratory Number: 18686Approved Signatory: Dane Cullen(Senior Geotechnician)Project Name: Proposed Subdivision - Potters Lane Stage 8

F: 02 4960 9775





Page 1 of 1© 2000-2021 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.comForm No: 18909, Report No: MAT:NEW21W-0756-S12

N/AComments

accred:2


sig:33F1A2AA-93EB-4355-9940-A28200C3471E








standards.


15/03/2021


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments

accred:2


sig:33F1A2AA-93EB-4355-9940-A28200C3471E


Shrink Test AS 1289.7.1.1Shrink on drying (%): 1.7Shrinkage Moisture Content (%): 24.4Est. inert material (%): 6%Crumbling during shrinkage: NilCracking during shrinkage: Minor






standards.


15/03/2021


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments

accred:2


sig:33F1A2AA-93EB-4355-9940-A28200C3471E


Shrink Test AS 1289.7.1.1Shrink on drying (%): 3.7Shrinkage Moisture Content (%): 20.3Est. inert material (%): 6%Crumbling during shrinkage: NilCracking during shrinkage: Minor






standards.


15/03/2021


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments

APPENDIX C:

CSIRO Sheet BTF 18

Foundation Maintenance and Footing

Performance: A Homeowner’s Guide

Soil Types

The types of soils usually present under the topsoil in land zoned forresidential buildings can be split into two approximate groups –granular and clay. Quite often, foundation soil is a mixture of bothtypes. The general problems associated with soils having granularcontent are usually caused by erosion. Clay soils are subject tosaturation and swell/shrink problems.

Classifications for a given area can generally be obtained byapplication to the local authority, but these are sometimes unreliableand if there is doubt, a geotechnical report should be commissioned.As most buildings suffering movement problems are founded on claysoils, there is an emphasis on classification of soils according to theamount of swell and shrinkage they experience with variations ofwater content. The table below is Table 2.1 from AS 2870, theResidential Slab and Footing Code.

Causes of Movement

Settlement due to constructionThere are two types of settlement that occur as a result ofconstruction:• Immediate settlement occurs when a building is first placed on its

foundation soil, as a result of compaction of the soil under theweight of the structure. The cohesive quality of clay soil mitigatesagainst this, but granular (particularly sandy) soil is susceptible.

• Consolidation settlement is a feature of clay soil and may takeplace because of the expulsion of moisture from the soil or becauseof the soil’s lack of resistance to local compressive or shear stresses.This will usually take place during the first few months afterconstruction, but has been known to take many years inexceptional cases.

These problems are the province of the builder and should be takeninto consideration as part of the preparation of the site for construc-tion. Building Technology File 19 (BTF 19) deals with theseproblems.

ErosionAll soils are prone to erosion, but sandy soil is particularly susceptibleto being washed away. Even clay with a sand component of say 10%or more can suffer from erosion.

SaturationThis is particularly a problem in clay soils. Saturation creates a bog-like suspension of the soil that causes it to lose virtually all of itsbearing capacity. To a lesser degree, sand is affected by saturationbecause saturated sand may undergo a reduction in volume –particularly imported sand fill for bedding and blinding layers.However, this usually occurs as immediate settlement and shouldnormally be the province of the builder.

Seasonal swelling and shrinkage of soilAll clays react to the presence of water by slowly absorbing it, makingthe soil increase in volume (see table below). The degree of increasevaries considerably between different clays, as does the degree ofdecrease during the subsequent drying out caused by fair weatherperiods. Because of the low absorption and expulsion rate, thisphenomenon will not usually be noticeable unless there areprolonged rainy or dry periods, usually of weeks or months,depending on the land and soil characteristics.

The swelling of soil creates an upward force on the footings of thebuilding, and shrinkage creates subsidence that takes away thesupport needed by the footing to retain equilibrium.

Shear failureThis phenomenon occurs when the foundation soil does not havesufficient strength to support the weight of the footing. There aretwo major post-construction causes:• Significant load increase.• Reduction of lateral support of the soil under the footing due to

erosion or excavation.• In clay soil, shear failure can be caused by saturation of the soil

adjacent to or under the footing.

Buildings can and often do move. This movement can be up, down, lateral or rotational. The fundamental causeof movement in buildings can usually be related to one or more problems in the foundation soil. It is important forthe homeowner to identify the soil type in order to ascertain the measures that should be put in place in order toensure that problems in the foundation soil can be prevented, thus protecting against building movement.

This Building Technology File is designed to identify causes of soil-related building movement, and to suggestmethods of prevention of resultant cracking in buildings.

Foundation Maintenanceand Footing Performance:A Homeowner’s Guide

GENERAL DEFINITIONS OF SITE CLASSES

Class Foundation

A Most sand and rock sites with little or no ground movement from moisture changes

S Slightly reactive clay sites with only slight ground movement from moisture changes

M Moderately reactive clay or silt sites, which can experience moderate ground movement from moisture changes

H Highly reactive clay sites, which can experience high ground movement from moisture changes

E Extremely reactive sites, which can experience extreme ground movement from moisture changes

A to P Filled sites

P Sites which include soft soils, such as soft clay or silt or loose sands; landslip; mine subsidence; collapsing soils; soils subject to erosion; reactive sites subject to abnormal moisture conditions or sites which cannot be classified otherwise

BTF 18replaces

InformationSheet 10/91

Tree root growthTrees and shrubs that are allowed to grow in the vicinity of footingscan cause foundation soil movement in two ways:

• Roots that grow under footings may increase in cross-sectionalsize, exerting upward pressure on footings.

• Roots in the vicinity of footings will absorb much of the moisturein the foundation soil, causing shrinkage or subsidence.

Unevenness of Movement

The types of ground movement described above usually occurunevenly throughout the building’s foundation soil. Settlement dueto construction tends to be uneven because of:

• Differing compaction of foundation soil prior to construction.• Differing moisture content of foundation soil prior to construction.

Movement due to non-construction causes is usually more unevenstill. Erosion can undermine a footing that traverses the flow or cancreate the conditions for shear failure by eroding soil adjacent to afooting that runs in the same direction as the flow.

Saturation of clay foundation soil may occur where subfloor wallscreate a dam that makes water pond. It can also occur wherever thereis a source of water near footings in clay soil. This leads to a severereduction in the strength of the soil which may create local shearfailure.

Seasonal swelling and shrinkage of clay soil affects the perimeter ofthe building first, then gradually spreads to the interior. The swellingprocess will usually begin at the uphill extreme of the building, or onthe weather side where the land is flat. Swelling gradually reaches theinterior soil as absorption continues. Shrinkage usually begins wherethe sun’s heat is greatest.

Effects of Uneven Soil Movement on Structures

Erosion and saturationErosion removes the support from under footings, tending to createsubsidence of the part of the structure under which it occurs.Brickwork walls will resist the stress created by this removal ofsupport by bridging the gap or cantilevering until the bricks or themortar bedding fail. Older masonry has little resistance. Evidence offailure varies according to circumstances and symptoms may include:

• Step cracking in the mortar beds in the body of the wall orabove/below openings such as doors or windows.

• Vertical cracking in the bricks (usually but not necessarily in linewith the vertical beds or perpends).

Isolated piers affected by erosion or saturation of foundations willeventually lose contact with the bearers they support and may tilt orfall over. The floors that have lost this support will become bouncy,sometimes rattling ornaments etc.

Seasonal swelling/shrinkage in claySwelling foundation soil due to rainy periods first lifts the mostexposed extremities of the footing system, then the remainder of theperimeter footings while gradually permeating inside the buildingfootprint to lift internal footings. This swelling first tends to create adish effect, because the external footings are pushed higher than theinternal ones.

The first noticeable symptom may be that the floor appears slightlydished. This is often accompanied by some doors binding on thefloor or the door head, together with some cracking of cornicemitres. In buildings with timber flooring supported by bearers andjoists, the floor can be bouncy. Externally there may be visibledishing of the hip or ridge lines.

As the moisture absorption process completes its journey to theinnermost areas of the building, the internal footings will rise. If thespread of moisture is roughly even, it may be that the symptoms willtemporarily disappear, but it is more likely that swelling will beuneven, creating a difference rather than a disappearance insymptoms. In buildings with timber flooring supported by bearersand joists, the isolated piers will rise more easily than the stripfootings or piers under walls, creating noticeable doming of flooring.

As the weather pattern changes and the soil begins to dry out, theexternal footings will be first affected, beginning with the locationswhere the sun’s effect is strongest. This has the effect of lowering theexternal footings. The doming is accentuated and cracking reducesor disappears where it occurred because of dishing, but other cracksopen up. The roof lines may become convex.

Doming and dishing are also affected by weather in other ways. Inareas where warm, wet summers and cooler dry winters prevail,water migration tends to be toward the interior and doming will beaccentuated, whereas where summers are dry and winters are coldand wet, migration tends to be toward the exterior and theunderlying propensity is toward dishing.

Movement caused by tree rootsIn general, growing roots will exert an upward pressure on footings,whereas soil subject to drying because of tree or shrub roots will tendto remove support from under footings by inducing shrinkage.

Complications caused by the structure itselfMost forces that the soil causes to be exerted on structures arevertical – i.e. either up or down. However, because these forces areseldom spread evenly around the footings, and because the buildingresists uneven movement because of its rigidity, forces are exertedfrom one part of the building to another. The net result of all theseforces is usually rotational. This resultant force often complicates thediagnosis because the visible symptoms do not simply reflect theoriginal cause. A common symptom is binding of doors on thevertical member of the frame.

Effects on full masonry structuresBrickwork will resist cracking where it can. It will attempt to spanareas that lose support because of subsided foundations or raisedpoints. It is therefore usual to see cracking at weak points, such asopenings for windows or doors.

In the event of construction settlement, cracking will usually remainunchanged after the process of settlement has ceased.

With local shear or erosion, cracking will usually continue to developuntil the original cause has been remedied, or until the subsidencehas completely neutralised the affected portion of footing and thestructure has stabilised on other footings that remain effective.

In the case of swell/shrink effects, the brickwork will in some casesreturn to its original position after completion of a cycle, however itis more likely that the rotational effect will not be exactly reversed,and it is also usual that brickwork will settle in its new position andwill resist the forces trying to return it to its original position. Thismeans that in a case where swelling takes place after constructionand cracking occurs, the cracking is likely to at least partly remainafter the shrink segment of the cycle is complete. Thus, each timethe cycle is repeated, the likelihood is that the cracking will becomewider until the sections of brickwork become virtually independent.

With repeated cycles, once the cracking is established, if there is noother complication, it is normal for the incidence of cracking tostabilise, as the building has the articulation it needs to cope withthe problem. This is by no means always the case, however, andmonitoring of cracks in walls and floors should always be treatedseriously.

Upheaval caused by growth of tree roots under footings is not asimple vertical shear stress. There is a tendency for the root to alsoexert lateral forces that attempt to separate sections of brickworkafter initial cracking has occurred.

Trees can cause shrinkage and damage

The normal structural arrangement is that the inner leaf of brick-work in the external walls and at least some of the internal walls(depending on the roof type) comprise the load-bearing structure onwhich any upper floors, ceilings and the roof are supported. In thesecases, it is internally visible cracking that should be the main focusof attention, however there are a few examples of dwellings whoseexternal leaf of masonry plays some supporting role, so this shouldbe checked if there is any doubt. In any case, externally visiblecracking is important as a guide to stresses on the structure generally,and it should also be remembered that the external walls must becapable of supporting themselves.

Effects on framed structuresTimber or steel framed buildings are less likely to exhibit crackingdue to swell/shrink than masonry buildings because of theirflexibility. Also, the doming/dishing effects tend to be lower becauseof the lighter weight of walls. The main risks to framed buildings areencountered because of the isolated pier footings used under walls.Where erosion or saturation cause a footing to fall away, this candouble the span which a wall must bridge. This additional stress cancreate cracking in wall linings, particularly where there is a weakpoint in the structure caused by a door or window opening. It is,however, unlikely that framed structures will be so stressed as to sufferserious damage without first exhibiting some or all of the abovesymptoms for a considerable period. The same warning period shouldapply in the case of upheaval. It should be noted, however, that whereframed buildings are supported by strip footings there is only one leafof brickwork and therefore the externally visible walls are thesupporting structure for the building. In this case, the subfloormasonry walls can be expected to behave as full brickwork walls.

Effects on brick veneer structuresBecause the load-bearing structure of a brick veneer building is theframe that makes up the interior leaf of the external walls plusperhaps the internal walls, depending on the type of roof, thebuilding can be expected to behave as a framed structure, except thatthe external masonry will behave in a similar way to the external leafof a full masonry structure.

Water Service and Drainage

Where a water service pipe, a sewer or stormwater drainage pipe is inthe vicinity of a building, a water leak can cause erosion, swelling orsaturation of susceptible soil. Even a minuscule leak can be enoughto saturate a clay foundation. A leaking tap near a building can havethe same effect. In addition, trenches containing pipes can becomewatercourses even though backfilled, particularly where brokenrubble is used as fill. Water that runs along these trenches can beresponsible for serious erosion, interstrata seepage into subfloor areasand saturation.

Pipe leakage and trench water flows also encourage tree and shrubroots to the source of water, complicating and exacerbating theproblem.Poor roof plumbing can result in large volumes of rainwater beingconcentrated in a small area of soil:

• Incorrect falls in roof guttering may result in overflows, as maygutters blocked with leaves etc.

• Corroded guttering or downpipes can spill water to ground.• Downpipes not positively connected to a proper stormwater

collection system will direct a concentration of water to soil that isdirectly adjacent to footings, sometimes causing large-scaleproblems such as erosion, saturation and migration of water underthe building.

Seriousness of Cracking

In general, most cracking found in masonry walls is a cosmeticnuisance only and can be kept in repair or even ignored. The tablebelow is a reproduction of Table C1 of AS 2870.

AS 2870 also publishes figures relating to cracking in concrete floors,however because wall cracking will usually reach the critical pointsignificantly earlier than cracking in slabs, this table is notreproduced here.

Prevention/Cure

PlumbingWhere building movement is caused by water service, roof plumbing,sewer or stormwater failure, the remedy is to repair the problem. It is prudent, however, to consider also rerouting pipes away fromthe building where possible, and relocating taps to positions whereany leakage will not direct water to the building vicinity. Even wheregully traps are present, there is sometimes sufficient spill to createerosion or saturation, particularly in modern installations usingsmaller diameter PVC fixtures. Indeed, some gully traps are notsituated directly under the taps that are installed to charge them,with the result that water from the tap may enter the backfilledtrench that houses the sewer piping. If the trench has been poorlybackfilled, the water will either pond or flow along the bottom ofthe trench. As these trenches usually run alongside the footings andcan be at a similar depth, it is not hard to see how any water that isthus directed into a trench can easily affect the foundation’s ability tosupport footings or even gain entry to the subfloor area.

Ground drainageIn all soils there is the capacity for water to travel on the surface andbelow it. Surface water flows can be established by inspection duringand after heavy or prolonged rain. If necessary, a grated drain systemconnected to the stormwater collection system is usually an easysolution.

It is, however, sometimes necessary when attempting to preventwater migration that testing be carried out to establish watertableheight and subsoil water flows. This subject is referred to in BTF 19and may properly be regarded as an area for an expert consultant.

Protection of the building perimeterIt is essential to remember that the soil that affects footings extendswell beyond the actual building line. Watering of garden plants,shrubs and trees causes some of the most serious water problems.

For this reason, particularly where problems exist or are likely tooccur, it is recommended that an apron of paving be installedaround as much of the building perimeter as necessary. This paving

CLASSIFICATION OF DAMAGE WITH REFERENCE TO WALLS

Description of typical damage and required repair Approximate crack width Damagelimit (see Note 3) category

Hairline cracks <0.1 mm 0

Fine cracks which do not need repair <1 mm 1

Cracks noticeable but easily filled. Doors and windows stick slightly <5 mm 2

Cracks can be repaired and possibly a small amount of wall will need 5–15 mm (or a number of cracks 3to be replaced. Doors and windows stick. Service pipes can fracture. 3 mm or more in one group)Weathertightness often impaired

Extensive repair work involving breaking-out and replacing sections of walls, 15–25 mm but also depend 4especially over doors and windows. Window and door frames distort. Walls lean on number of cracksor bulge noticeably, some loss of bearing in beams. Service pipes disrupted

should extend outwards a minimum of 900 mm (more in highlyreactive soil) and should have a minimum fall away from thebuilding of 1:60. The finished paving should be no less than 100mm below brick vent bases.

It is prudent to relocate drainage pipes away from this paving, ifpossible, to avoid complications from future leakage. If this is notpractical, earthenware pipes should be replaced by PVC andbackfilling should be of the same soil type as the surrounding soiland compacted to the same density.

Except in areas where freezing of water is an issue, it is wise toremove taps in the building area and relocate them well away fromthe building – preferably not uphill from it (see BTF 19).

It may be desirable to install a grated drain at the outside edge of thepaving on the uphill side of the building. If subsoil drainage isneeded this can be installed under the surface drain.

CondensationIn buildings with a subfloor void such as where bearers and joistssupport flooring, insufficient ventilation creates ideal conditions forcondensation, particularly where there is little clearance between thefloor and the ground. Condensation adds to the moisture alreadypresent in the subfloor and significantly slows the process of dryingout. Installation of an adequate subfloor ventilation system, eithernatural or mechanical, is desirable.

Warning: Although this Building Technology File deals withcracking in buildings, it should be said that subfloor moisture canresult in the development of other problems, notably:

• Water that is transmitted into masonry, metal or timber buildingelements causes damage and/or decay to those elements.

• High subfloor humidity and moisture content create an idealenvironment for various pests, including termites and spiders.

• Where high moisture levels are transmitted to the flooring andwalls, an increase in the dust mite count can ensue within theliving areas. Dust mites, as well as dampness in general, can be ahealth hazard to inhabitants, particularly those who areabnormally susceptible to respiratory ailments.

The gardenThe ideal vegetation layout is to have lawn or plants that requireonly light watering immediately adjacent to the drainage or pavingedge, then more demanding plants, shrubs and trees spread out inthat order.

Overwatering due to misuse of automatic watering systems is acommon cause of saturation and water migration under footings. Ifit is necessary to use these systems, it is important to remove gardenbeds to a completely safe distance from buildings.

Existing treesWhere a tree is causing a problem of soil drying or there is theexistence or threat of upheaval of footings, if the offending roots aresubsidiary and their removal will not significantly damage the tree,they should be severed and a concrete or metal barrier placedvertically in the soil to prevent future root growth in the direction ofthe building. If it is not possible to remove the relevant rootswithout damage to the tree, an application to remove the tree shouldbe made to the local authority. A prudent plan is to transplant likelyoffenders before they become a problem.

Information on trees, plants and shrubsState departments overseeing agriculture can give informationregarding root patterns, volume of water needed and safe distancefrom buildings of most species. Botanic gardens are also sources ofinformation. For information on plant roots and drains, see BuildingTechnology File 17.

ExcavationExcavation around footings must be properly engineered. Soilsupporting footings can only be safely excavated at an angle thatallows the soil under the footing to remain stable. This angle iscalled the angle of repose (or friction) and varies significantlybetween soil types and conditions. Removal of soil within the angleof repose will cause subsidence.

Remediation

Where erosion has occurred that has washed away soil adjacent tofootings, soil of the same classification should be introduced andcompacted to the same density. Where footings have beenundermined, augmentation or other specialist work may be required.Remediation of footings and foundations is generally the realm of aspecialist consultant.

Where isolated footings rise and fall because of swell/shrink effect,the homeowner may be tempted to alleviate floor bounce by fillingthe gap that has appeared between the bearer and the pier withblocking. The danger here is that when the next swell segment of thecycle occurs, the extra blocking will push the floor up into anaccentuated dome and may also cause local shear failure in the soil.If it is necessary to use blocking, it should be by a pair of finewedges and monitoring should be carried out fortnightly.

This BTF was prepared by John Lewer FAIB, MIAMA, Partner,Construction Diagnosis.

The information in this and other issues in the series was derived from various sources and was believed to be correct when published.

The information is advisory. It is provided in good faith and not claimed to be an exhaustive treatment of the relevant subject.

Further professional advice needs to be obtained before taking any action based on the information provided.

Distributed by

CSIRO PUBL ISHING PO Box 1139, Collingwood 3066, AustraliaFreecall 1800 645 051 Tel (03) 9662 7666 Fax (03) 9662 7555 www.publish.csiro.au

Email: [email protected]

© CSIRO 2003. Unauthorised copying of this Building Technology file is prohibited

Gardens for a reactive site

Documents

Proposed Subdivision – Potters Lane, Stage 8 Site