report lot 269, 1 cogla street, malaga wa

REPORT

Lot 269, 1 Cogla Street, Malaga WA Geotechnical Investigation Report

Submitted to:

City of Swan PO Box 196

MIDLAND WA 6936

Submitted by:

Golder Associates Pty Ltd

Level 3, 1 Havelock Street, West Perth, Western Australia 6005, Australia

+61 8 9213 7600

18113391-001-R-Rev0

February 2019

February 2019 18113391-001-R-Rev0

i

Distribution List Electronic Copy – City of Swan

Electronic Copy – Golder Associates Pty Ltd

February 2019 18113391-001-R-Rev0

ii

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 OBJECTIVES .............................................................................................................................................. 1

3.0 GEOTECHNICAL FIELDWORK ................................................................................................................. 1

4.0 SITE CONDITIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 2

4.1 Surface Conditions ............................................................................................................................ 2

4.2 Regional Geology .............................................................................................................................. 3

4.3 Subsurface Conditions ...................................................................................................................... 3

4.4 Groundwater...................................................................................................................................... 3

5.0 LABORATORY TESTING .......................................................................................................................... 3

5.1 Geotechnical Results ........................................................................................................................ 3

6.0 GEOTECHNICAL DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................ 4

6.1 Preliminary Site Classification ........................................................................................................... 4

6.2 Site Preparation ................................................................................................................................ 4

6.3 Compaction ....................................................................................................................................... 4

6.4 Shallow Footings ............................................................................................................................... 5

6.5 Excavations ....................................................................................................................................... 6

6.6 Earthquake Design ............................................................................................................................ 6

6.6.1 Earthquake Site Subsoil Classification ......................................................................................... 6

6.7 Drainage ............................................................................................................................................ 6

6.7.1 Stormwater Disposal ..................................................................................................................... 6

6.8 Potential Geotechnical Risks ............................................................................................................ 7

6.8.1 Uncontrolled Fill ............................................................................................................................ 7

6.8.2 Excavation Stability and Proximity to Adjacent Buildings or Services .......................................... 7

6.8.3 Settlement ..................................................................................................................................... 7

6.8.4 Reduced Effectiveness of Soakwells ............................................................................................ 7

6.8.5 Acid Sulfate Soil ............................................................................................................................ 7

7.0 IMPORTANT INFOMATION ....................................................................................................................... 8

February 2019 18113391-001-R-Rev0

iii

TABLES

Table 1: Test Location Summary .......................................................................................................................... 2

Table 2: Summary of Geotechnical Laboratory Testing ....................................................................................... 3

Table 3: Allowable Bearing Pressure and Settlement Estimate Under Static Load ............................................. 5

FIGURES

Figure 1: Location Plan

Figure 2: Site Plan

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A Cone Penetration Test Reports

APPENDIX B Hand Auger Borehole Reports

APPENDIX C Geotechnical Laboratory Certificates

APPENDIX D Important Information

February 2019 18113391-001-R-Rev0

1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation conducted by Golder Associates Pty Ltd

(Golder) for the City of Swan at the site of a proposed industrial development located at Lot 269, 1 Cogla

Street, Malaga. The location of the site is shown on Figure 1. The investigation was conducted at the request

of Kris Amos of the City of Swan and was authorised in Purchase Order PU106388 dated 19 December 2018.

Based on the information provided, we understand that the proposed development is anticipated to comprise

the construction of a waste transfer station, consisting of large warehouse structures and external storage

areas.

Golder were also engaged to perform a contamination investigation which was undertaken concurrently with

the geotechnical investigation. The results of this investigation are detailed in Golder report reference

18113391-002-R-Rev0, dated February 2019.

2.0 OBJECTIVES

The objectives of the geotechnical investigation were to:

Assess the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions across the proposed development area (within

the limits of the investigation).

Identify potential geohazards or risks to the development, including uncontrolled fill, compressible layers,

potential for liquefaction and presence of aggressive soils (as related to durability) and provide details of

strategies to address these risks where relevant.

Provide an earthquake site classification in accordance with AS1170.4.

Provide advice regarding suitable shallow foundation systems for the proposed development.

Provide allowable bearing pressures for shallow footings and estimated settlements.

Provide advice on excavatability and on safe and temporary batter slopes for in situ soils.

Assess the range of materials likely to be encountered in excavations at footing level.

Recommend appropriate site preparation procedures and compaction requirements including any works

needed to improve the site classification if required.

Provide comment in relation to the suitability of soakwells for the purpose of stormwater disposal.

Provide recommendations for further investigation, if required.

3.0 GEOTECHNICAL FIELDWORK

The fieldwork for the geotechnical investigation was conducted on 22 January 2019 and comprised:

Cone Penetration Testing (CPT) at six locations, CPT01 to CPT06, extending to depths of 12 m below

ground level (bgl) or shallower refusal.

Hand Auger (HA) boreholes at six locations, HA01 to HA06, extending to depths of between 1.75 m bgl

and 2.30 m bgl.

In situ permeability testing within four of the hand auger locations, HA01, HA02, HA05 and HA06, using

the inverse hand auger method, at a depth of between 0.5 m and 1 m bgl.

Collection of soil samples for laboratory testing.

February 2019 18113391-001-R-Rev0

2

The test locations are shown on Figure 2. The coordinates of test locations were obtained using a handheld

GPS typically accurate to within about ± 5 m horizontally and are provided in Table 1.

Table 1: Test Location Summary

Location

Approximate Coordinates

(MGA94) Termination

Depth (m)

Termination

Reason Easting Northing

CPT01 396214 6474465 3.00 Refusal

CPT02 396236 6474505 12.0 Target Depth

CPT03 396168 6474501 12.0 Target Depth

CPT04 396174 6474448 12.0 Target Depth

CPT05 396164 6474411 12.0 Target Depth

CPT06 396226 6474409 12.0 Target Depth

HA01 396214 6474465 2.30 Refusal

HA02 396236 6474505 2.00 Refusal

HA03 396168 6474501 1.75 Refusal

HA04 396174 6474448 1.70 Refusal

HA05 396164 6474411 2.00 Refusal

HA06 396226 6474409 1.80 Refusal

The CPT was performed using a 22-tonne truck (Merc) supplied and operated by Probedrill Geotechnical

Survey Ltd. Testing was performed in accordance with AS 1289.6.5.1-1999. Results of the testing are

presented as plots of cone resistance (qc) and friction ratio (FR = fs/qc) × 100%) versus depth and are

presented in Appendix A. A method of soil classification by Roberts et al (1986) based on the values of qc and

FR is also included in Appendix A. Groundwater measurements were recorded in the hole remaining after the

removal of the CPT rods and are shown on the CPT reports.

The hand auger boreholes reports are included in Appendix B, along with a list of notes, abbreviations and the

method of soil description used in the report.

An Engineering Geologist from Golder positioned the test locations, drilled the hand auger boreholes and

logged the materials encountered, performed the falling head permeability testing and obtained soil samples

for laboratory testing. All soil materials were logged in accordance with AS 1726 (2017).

4.0 SITE CONDITIONS

4.1 Surface Conditions

The site is bound by Cogla Street to the east and Victoria Road to the south. Industrial warehouses are

located to the north and west of the site. At the time of the investigation, the site was undeveloped, and was

vegetated with grass, trees and shrubs. An unsealed, sand track follows the boundary of the site, and two

tracks cross the through centre of the site, parallel to Victoria Road. The site is generally flat.

At the time of the investigation fly-dumped rubbish was present over areas of the site. Refer to the

contamination investigation (Golder report reference 18113391-002-R-Rev0, dated February 2019) for more

information on this material.

February 2019 18113391-001-R-Rev0

3

4.2 Regional Geology

The 1:50,000 scale Environmental Geology Series Perth sheet published by the Geological Survey of Western

Australia shows that the site is generally located in a region where subsurface conditions comprise

Bassendean Sand which is described as “white to pale grey at surface, yellow at depth, fine to medium

grained, moderately sorted, sub-angular to sub-rounded”.

4.3 Subsurface Conditions

Subsurface conditions at the site can be generalised as comprising Bassendean Sand, which was observed

as:

SAND (SP), loose, fine to medium grained, rounded to sub-angular, dark brown to grey becoming pale

brown with 15 – 20% silt, trace rootlets, becoming orange-brown and dark brown to black, weakly

cemented, below about 1.4 m bgl, extending to depth ranging from about 1.7 m to 2.0 m bgl, overlying

SAND, dense to very dense, inferred weakly to moderately cemented sand (“Coffee Rock”), ranging from

about 1.7 m to 3.1 m bgl, overlying

SAND, medium dense, density increasing with depth, becoming dense below about 8.0 m bgl, extending

to the maximum depth investigated, 12.0 m bgl.

4.4 Groundwater

The Perth Groundwater Atlas (1997) shows the maximum historical groundwater for the site to be about

RL 31.5 m AHD.

The ground surface level at the site based on Nearmap is expected to be between about RL 34 m and

RL 35 m AHD. This suggests groundwater is likely to be encountered between about 2.5 m to 3.5 m below

ground surface level. Given the presence of the drainage basin to the north of the site, it is likely that ground

water levels would be controlled by this feature and the associated stormwater drainage network.

Groundwater was not observed during the geotechnical investigation, however, groundwater seepage was

encountered at 1.7 m bgl in HA03.

5.0 LABORATORY TESTING

Geotechnical laboratory testing was conducted on one sample recovered from the hand auger

boreholes. The testing was conducted at Golder’s NATA-accredited laboratory and comprised determination

of:

Particle size distribution tests on one sample.

Moisture content tests on one sample.

5.1 Geotechnical Results

Geotechnical laboratory test certificates are provided in Appendix C. A summary of the laboratory testing is

provided in Table 2.

Table 2: Summary of Geotechnical Laboratory Testing

Location Depth Soil

Classification

Moisture

Content (%)

Particle Size Distribution (% Passing)

Gravel Sand Fines

HA06 1.65-1.80 SAND (SP) 18.2 0 94 6

Notes: Gravel – material passing the 63 mm sieve and retained on the 2.36 mm sieve, Sand – material passing the 2.36 mm sieve and

retained on the 0.075 mm sieve, Fines – material passing the 0.075 mm sieve.

February 2019 18113391-001-R-Rev0

4

6.0 GEOTECHNICAL DISCUSSION

6.1 Preliminary Site Classification

We have carried out a preliminary assessment of the classification of the site in accordance with AS 2870-

2011 “Residential Slabs and Footings – Construction”. AS 2870-2011 defines the site classification on the

basis of a characteristic surface movement associated with settlement. It must be noted that AS 2870-2011 is

applicable to simple dwellings, houses or structures in similar size to homes and is not directly applicable to

multi-storey buildings. The structural designer should consider this when using the site classification.

We consider that a preliminary site classification of “Class A” is appropriate for the site.

6.2 Site Preparation

The following site preparation procedures are recommended for the development:

Remove all topsoil, trees, rubbish and any other deleterious materials from the site, including grubbing

out roots and removing organic matter. Any buried services, rubble, structural elements or other

unsuitable or deleterious material encountered during excavation should be removed.

Excavate to the footing foundation level where required. The in situ sands are likely to be suitable for re-

use as structural fill (following the removal of any deleterious material that may be present) and may be

stockpiled for later re-use if required.

Densify the exposed ground beneath floor slabs and footings by compacting to achieve the level of

compaction specified in Section 6.3 to a minimum of 0.9 m below the underside of footings or ground

slabs. This may require over-excavation and replacement of soil in compacted layers.

Where required, place approved granular fill to the required levels in layers of no greater than 0.3 m

loose thickness and compact each layer to achieve the level of compaction outlined in Section 6.3.

Confirm that the specified level of compaction, as defined in Section 6.3 has been achieved to a depth of

0.9 m below the base of footings and slabs by testing:

▪ Each spread footing excavation

▪ At 2.5 m centres along strip footing excavations, and

▪ On a grid at 5 m centres beneath slab-on-ground-floors.

The occurrence of undetected unsuitable fill cannot be dismissed. Any deleterious material must be removed

from beneath the building and replaced with approved granular fill. Allowance for such a contingency should

be made in earthworks quantities.

6.3 Compaction

In situ sand and approved sand fill should be moisture conditioned and compacted using suitable compaction

equipment to achieve a Perth sand penetrometer (PSP) blow count of at least 8 blows per 0.3 m

penetration. If difficulty arises in achieving the specified PSP blow counts, then a geotechnical engineer must

be engaged to provide further advice.

Over-excavation and replacement of loose material may be required where the minimum density cannot be

achieved.

Fill should be placed in horizontal layers of not greater than 0.3 m loose thickness. Each layer should be fully

compacted by suitable compaction equipment and carefully controlled to ensure even compaction over the full

area and depth of each layer.

February 2019 18113391-001-R-Rev0

5

Care will need to be taken when compacting in the vicinity of existing structures, such as the adjacent

warehouses, roads and buried services. This is particularly important if vibratory compaction is being carried

out. Tynan (1973)1 provides assistance with the selection of compaction equipment for use adjacent to

structures.

6.4 Shallow Footings

Based on the subsurface conditions encountered, pad and strip footings are considered appropriate to support

the development of the waste transfer station, subject to the proposed design loads.

A design involving individual pad and strip footings with minimum depths of embedment of 0.5 m and 1.0 m

below adjacent finished surface level have been examined and are presented in Table 3. The design

assumes that the recommended site preparations outlines in Section 6.2 have been undertaken.

Table 3: Allowable Bearing Pressure and Settlement Estimate Under Static Load

Minimum Depth

of Embedment

(m)

Minimum Plan

Dimension

(m)

Allowable

Bearing Pressure

(kPa)

Expected Settlement at

Allowable Bearing Pressure

(Static load) (mm)

Pad Footings

0.5

1.0 200 <5

2.0 220 5 to 10

3.0 240 10 to 15

1.0

1.0 250 <5

2.0 250 5 to 10

3.0 250 10 to 15

Strip Footings

0.5

0.5 130 <5

1.0 150 5 to 10

1.5 170 5 to 10

1.0

0.5 250 <5

1.0 250 5 to 10

1.5 250 10 to 15

Allowable bearing pressures for footings of intermediate plan dimensions to those tabulated can be

interpolated. Footings that have a plan dimension either smaller or larger than those covered by the tables

above will need to be considered individually along with other embedment depths or alternative footing

systems (e.g. screw piles). Footings carrying significant eccentric loading need to be assessed separately.

An allowable working bearing pressure of 250 kPa is considered an upper limit for shallow footings at this site

to limit total and differential settlement. Alternatively, higher footing settlements associated with higher

bearing pressures can be provided.

Settlement of the proposed structure will depend on a number of factors including the applied pressures,

footing sizes and base preparations. The estimates of settlements provided are for single isolated footings for

the working bearing pressure values shown. Differential settlements of up to half of the total estimated

settlement values are likely between footings of similar size, depth and loadings.

1 Tynan (1973) Ground Vibration and Damage Effects on Buildings, Australia Road Research Board, Special Report No. 11.

February 2019 18113391-001-R-Rev0

6

6.5 Excavations

Excavations in sandy soils across the site, should generally be achieved by using standard earthmoving

equipment, such as a 5-tonne (or greater mass) excavator. If excavations are expected between 2 m and 3 m

bgl, weakly to moderately cemented sand (“coffee rock”) is expected to be encountered, which may require a

larger excavator.

Excavations in sandy soils are particularly prone to instability, especially where groundwater is encountered.

Care must be exercised in such excavations and appropriate safety measures should be adopted where

necessary. A short-term slope angle of 1V:1.5H and a long-term slope angle of 1V:2H is recommended for

dry sands with no seepage, provided there are no structures or surcharges located behind the crest.

6.6 Earthquake Design

6.6.1 Earthquake Site Subsoil Classification

We have assessed the seismic subsoil classification in accordance with AS 1170.4-2007 based on the results

of the investigation and using published information. A site subsoil class of “Ce” – Shallow Soil is considered

appropriate for the site.

6.7 Drainage

6.7.1 Stormwater Disposal

Based on the results of the hydraulic testing, the sandy soils occurring within the top 2 m are expected to be

permeable and likely to be suitable for on-site disposal of stormwater.

Falling head permeability tests were located within HA01, HA02, HA05 and HA06 at a depth of about 0.5 m to

1.0 2m. The tests were carried out using the inverse hand auger hole test method2. The tests were repeated

three times at each location to simulate saturation of the soil immediately below the casing which comprised

sand. The permeability results returned infiltration values ranging between about 5 m per day and 20 m per

day. An infiltration rate of 10 m per day is considered appropriate for infiltration systems founded at about 1 m

depth.

The design of any stormwater infiltration system should allow for reductions in the soil permeability arising

from:

Proximity to groundwater level or low permeability soil layers (e.g. cemented sand).

Clogging of sands with fine particles through ongoing infiltration.

Densification of in situ sands from compaction during construction.

Proximity to groundwater, coffee rock, retaining walls or other below ground structures will impede infiltration

from adjacent stormwater infiltration cells. Design for restricting build-up of water against these items must be

considered.

Where shallow footings are adopted and are founded on compacted backfill or sand, stormwater infiltration

cells should not be positioned within 3 m of these footings to limit the potential for settlement of the footings

caused by localised mounding of infiltration water.

2 Cocks (2007) Disposal of Stormwater Runoff by Soakage in Perth Western Australia, Journal and News of the Australian Geomechanics Society, Volume 43, pp101-114

February 2019 18113391-001-R-Rev0

7

6.8 Potential Geotechnical Risks

The following section provides details of potential geotechnical risks that could influence the design and/or the

construction of the project based on our understanding of the geotechnical conditions. This summary has

been developed on the available geotechnical information and it is expected that the designers will make an

independent assessment of potential risks following development of the project design and following

completion of a detailed geotechnical investigation (if required).

6.8.1 Uncontrolled Fill

The in situ sand encountered at the site appeared to be clean, showing no evidence of being composed of

uncontrolled fill. However, cables, fridges, oil drums and potential asbestos sheeting, among other items,

were observed at surface across the site. Therefore, although not encountered during the investigation, the

presence of uncontrolled fill and contaminated materials cannot be dismissed. For more information, refer to

Golder report reference 18113391-002-R-Rev0, dated February 2019.

6.8.2 Excavation Stability and Proximity to Adjacent Buildings or Services

Based on our understanding of the project, excavations for footings or services may be required in close

proximity to existing roads, structures, underground services and public footpaths. Works in these areas

would need to be designed to minimize the potential impacts to existing roads, structures, underground

services and public footpaths. It is expected that the risk of damage to adjacent facilities could be reduced by:

Performing a dewatering investigation and preparation of a dewatering management plan (DMP)

Providing suitable retention systems to support the excavation at all stages of the excavation.

Avoiding the use of retention systems that involve vibration and/or allow ground movements (such as

steel sheet piling or soldier piles with lagging) as these may cause damage to adjacent structures, roads

and services.

6.8.3 Settlement

Loose zones were noted within 2 m of ground level. Without site preparation heavily loaded shallow footings

founded in this material may result in settlements in excess of serviceability limits.

6.8.4 Reduced Effectiveness of Soakwells

The presence of coffee rock, as encountered at the site between 2 m and 3 m bgl, has the potential to affect

the efficiency of soakwells. The coffee rock has lower permeability than the surrounding sand, which could

result in a perched groundwater table. If the sand surrounding the installed soakwell is saturated, the flow rate

from the soakwell itself will reduce. The seasonal groundwater variation could be investigated further by

installing a monitoring well or performing a review of the local stormwater drainage network once the project

design has developed further.

6.8.5 Acid Sulfate Soil

The Acid Sulfate Soil (ASS) Risk map published by the Department of Environment and Regulation (DER)

indicates that the probability of ASS occurrence within 3 m of natural surface soil at the site is moderate to

low. In our experience, Bassendean Sands below groundwater level are likely to be potential ASS.

In accordance with DER Guidelines, an ASS management plan will be required where the volume of ASS to

be disturbed is greater than 100 m3. An ASS investigation of this site is recommended should the volume of

soil to be disturbed is greater than 100 m3 or where dewatering is required.

February 2019 18113391-001-R-Rev0

8

7.0 IMPORTANT INFOMATION

Your attention is drawn to the document titled – “Important Information Relating to this Report”, which is

included in Appendix D of this report. The statements presented in that document are intended to inform a

reader of the report and about its proper use. There are important limitations as to who can use the report

and how it can be used. It is important that a reader of the report understands and has realistic expectations

about those matters. The Important Information document does not alter the obligations Golder Associates

has under the contract between it and its clients.

February 2019 18113391-001-R-Rev0

9

Signature Page

Golder Associates Pty Ltd

Hannah Breen Simon Hope

Engineering Geologist Senior Geotechnical Engineer

HSB/SNH/hsl

A.B.N. 64 006 107 857

Golder and the G logo are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation

https://golderassociates.sharepoint.com/sites/101219/deliverables/001-r/18113391-001-r-rev0.docx

BENARA RD

CASSOWARY DR

TRUGANINA RD

WIDGEE RD

BELLEFIN

DR

VICTORIA RD

IRVINE DR

TONK I NHW

Y

HEPB

URN

AV

MULGUL RD

REID HWY

CAMB

OON

RD

ALTA LAGUNA CR

MANDILL A PDE

PELIC

ANPD

E

HAMELINDR

ALLINGTON AV

TRAD

E RD

ILLAWARRA CR

SOUTH

WYPERFELD GDNS

WOO DLE

IGHGDNS

GIRALIA PWY

BEACH RD

MCGI

LVRA

Y AV

MARSHALL RD

ORCH

IDAV

MITRALOOP

MCG RA T H PL

KILN

ST

PAVE

RS C

IR

GOR O KA GR

ROSELLA CIR

RAWL INNA

HTS

PARKINSON ST

LUDL O W MEWS

GROSE

WAY

CYGN

ET

CL

WATHEROO CT

TABUBI L

GDNS

NEWELL

WAY

CUSA

CK R

D

MUD LARK CR

SMITH

ERSO

NST

YANDALCR

CLIPPER DR

BELS

TEAD AV

JUNA DR

KIRKPATRICKCR

KIANDRAPDE

FORD

ER R

D

MERCANTILE WAY

IVORY ST

MIL LR O SE

DR

SUMMERLAKES PDE

HOLDEN DR

DENN

INUP

WA

Y

WEIR

RD

BOULDER RD

GUADALUPE DR

BLUEGUMRD

CRI MEAST

MALAGA DR

BERINGARRA AV

OXLE

IGH

DR

MILLY CT

CHAM B ERS

WAY

ARMSTRONG

WAY

HORSLAY WAY

STEWART WA Y

BELLEW WAY

MILLERICK WAY W EATHERILL WAY

NORANDA

BEECHBORO

MORLEY

BALLAJURA

MALAGA

CULLACABARDEE

BENNETTSPRINGS

WHITEMAN

395000

395000

396000

396000

397000

397000

398000

398000

6473

000

6473

000

6474

000

6474

000

6475

000

6475

000

6476

000

6476

000

CLIENTCITY OF SWAN

PROJECTLOT 269, 1 COGLA STREET, MALAGA

TITLELOCATION PLAN

18113391 001 R 0 1

2019.01.29TCJRPSNHSNH

PATH

: B:\C

ity_o

f_Swa

n\Mala

ga\99

_PRO

JECT

S\18

1133

91_L

ot_26

9_Co

gla_S

treet\

02_P

RODU

CTIO

N\MX

D\00

1-R\R

ev0\1

8113

391-0

01-R

-F001

-Rev

0.mxd

PRI

NTED

ON:

2019

-01-29

AT: 5

:11:44

PM

IF TH

IS M

EASU

REME

NT D

OES N

OT M

ATCH

WHA

T IS S

HOWN

, THE

SHEE

T SIZE

HAS

BEE

N MO

DIFIE

D FR

OM: IS

O A4

CONSULTANT

PROJECT NO. CONTROL REV. FIGURE

YYYY-MM-DDDESIGNEDPREPAREDREVIEWEDAPPROVED

25mm

0

NOTE:1. COORDINATE SYSTEM: GDA 1994 MGA ZONE 50

1. BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY AND WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE WESTERNAUSTRALIAN LAND INFORMATION AUTHORITY TRADING AS LANDGATE (2019).

REFERENCE:

0 500 1,000

METRES1:20,000

EASTBULLSBROOK

MOUNT HELENA

WOOROLOO

MORANGUP HILL

ARMADALE

MUCHEA

MIDLAND

QUINNS ROCKS

WANNEROO

FREMANTLE

PERTH

0 7.5 15

Kilometres

APPROXIMATEVIEW EXTENT

APPROXIMATESITE LOCATION

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.!.

COGL

A ST

VICTORIA RD

HA01

HA02HA03

HA04

HA05 HA06

CPT01

CPT02CPT03

CPT04

CPT05 CPT06

396150

396150

396200

396200

396250

396250

6474

400

6474

400

6474

450

6474

450

6474

500

6474

500

6474

550

6474

550

CLIENTCITY OF SWAN

LEGEND

!.CONE PENETRATION ANDHAND AUGER TEST LOCATION

PROJECTLOT 269, 1 COGLA STREET, MALAGA

TITLESITE PLAN

18113391 001 R 0 2

2019.01.29TCJRPSNHSNH

PATH

: B:\C

ity_o

f_Swa

n\Mala

ga\99

_PRO

JECT

S\18

1133

91_L

ot_26

9_Co

gla_S

treet\

02_P

RODU

CTIO

N\MX

D\00

1-R\R

ev0\1

8113

391-0

01-R

-F002

-Rev

0.mxd

PRI

NTED

ON:

2019

-01-29

AT: 5

:08:07

PM

IF TH

IS M

EASU

REME

NT D

OES N

OT M

ATCH

WHA

T IS S

HOWN

, THE

SHEE

T SIZE

HAS

BEE

N MO

DIFIE

D FR

OM: IS

O A4

CONSULTANT

PROJECT NO. CONTROL REV. FIGURE

YYYY-MM-DDDESIGNEDPREPAREDREVIEWEDAPPROVED

25mm

0

NOTE:1. COORDINATE SYSTEM: GDA 1994 MGA ZONE 50

1. AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NEARMAP DATED DECEMBER 2018.2. CADASTRE BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY AND WITH THE PERMISSION OF THEWESTERN AUSTRALIAN LAND INFORMATION AUTHORITY TRADING AS LANDGATE (2019).

REFERENCES:

0 25 50

METRES1:1,000

February 2019 18113391-001-R-Rev0

APPENDIX A

Cone Penetration Test Reports

LOCATION:

PROJECT:

CLIENT:

Co-ords:

RL (m):

Job No.:

22-Jan-19

Probe I.DELECTRIC FRICTION-CONE PENETROMETER

CPT 01

Rig Type: 22 tonne truck (Merc)Tested in accordance with AS 1289.6.5.1-1999 and IRTP 2001 for friction reducer

18113391

Malaga

1 Cogla Road

City of Swan

Refusal: 100MPa

Approx. Water (m): Dry to 0.1

Dummy probe to (m): File: GA3914G

Cone I.D.: EC07

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213

Friction Ratio Rf (%)

Dep

th (m

)

0 1 2 3 4 5

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213

Tip Resistance qc (MPa)

Dep

th (m

)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213

Friction Sleeve fs (kPa)


Dep

th (m

)

Tip

Res

ista

nce

Fric

tion

Slee

ve

LOCATION:

PROJECT:

CLIENT:

Co-ords:

RL (m):

Job No.:

22-Jan-19


CPT 01A


18113391

Malaga

1 Cogla Road

City of Swan

Refusal: 92MPa



Cone I.D.: EC07

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213


Dep

th (m

)

0 1 2 3 4 5

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213


Dep

th (m

)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213



Dep

th (m

)

Tip

Res

ista

nce

Fric

tion

Slee

ve

LOCATION:

PROJECT:

CLIENT:

Co-ords:

RL (m):

Job No.:

22-Jan-19


CPT 02


18113391

Malaga

1 Cogla Road

City of Swan

Refusal:



Cone I.D.: EC07

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213


Dep

th (m

)

0 1 2 3 4 5

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213


Dep

th (m

)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213



Dep

th (m

)

Tip

Res

ista

nce

Fric

tion

Slee

ve

LOCATION:

PROJECT:

CLIENT:

Co-ords:

RL (m):

Job No.:

22-Jan-19


CPT 03


18113391

Malaga

1 Cogla Road

City of Swan

Refusal:



Cone I.D.: EC07

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213


Dep

th (m

)

0 1 2 3 4 5

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213


Dep

th (m

)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213



Dep

th (m

)

Tip

Res

ista

nce

Fric

tion

Slee

ve

LOCATION:

PROJECT:

CLIENT:

Co-ords:

RL (m):

Job No.:

22-Jan-19


CPT 04


18113391

Malaga

1 Cogla Road

City of Swan

Refusal:



Cone I.D.: EC07

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213


Dep

th (m

)

0 1 2 3 4 5

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213


Dep

th (m

)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213



Dep

th (m

)

Tip

Res

ista

nce

Fric

tion

Slee

ve

LOCATION:

PROJECT:

CLIENT:

Co-ords:

RL (m):

Job No.:

22-Jan-19


CPT 05


18113391

Malaga

1 Cogla Road

City of Swan

Refusal:



Cone I.D.: EC07

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213


Dep

th (m

)

0 1 2 3 4 5

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213


Dep

th (m

)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213



Dep

th (m

)

Tip

Res

ista

nce

Fric

tion

Slee

ve

LOCATION:

PROJECT:

CLIENT:

Co-ords:

RL (m):

Job No.:

22-Jan-19


CPT 06


18113391

Malaga

1 Cogla Road

City of Swan

Refusal:



Cone I.D.: EC07

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213


Dep

th (m

)

0 1 2 3 4 5

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213


Dep

th (m

)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

01

23

45

67

89

1011

1213



Dep

th (m

) Tip

Res

ista

nce

Fric

tion

Slee

ve

February 2019 18113391-001-R-Rev0

APPENDIX B

Hand Auger Borehole Reports

Updated in line with Australian Standard Geotechnical Site Investigations (AS1726:2017) GAP Form No.5 RL9

January 2018

METHOD OF SOIL DESCRIPTION USED ON BOREHOLE AND TEST PIT REPORTS

SYMBOLS

FILL

CLAY (CL, CI or CH)

GRAVEL (GW, GP, GM or GC)

ORGANIC SOILS (OL, OH or Pt)

SAND (SW, SP, SM or SC)

COBBLES or BOULDERS

SILT (ML or MH)

Combinations of these basic symbols may be used to indicate mixed materials such as sandy clay.

CLASSIFICATION AND INFERRED STRATIGRAPHY

Soil and Rock is classified and described in Reports of Boreholes and Test Pits using the preferred method given in AS1726-2017. The material properties are assessed in the field by visual/tactile methods.

Particle Size Plasticity Properties

Soil Group Sub Division Particle Size

BOULDERS > 200 mm

COBBLES 63 to 200 mm

GRAVEL

Coarse 19 to 63 mm

Medium 6.7 to 19 mm

Fine 2.36 to 6.7 mm

SAND

Coarse 0.6 to 2.36 mm

Medium 0.21 to 0.6 mm

Fine 0.075 to 0.21 mm

SILT 0.002 to 0.075 mm

CLAY ˂ 0.002 mm

MOISTURE CONDITION

Symbol Term Description D Dry Sands and gravels are free flowing. Clays and silts may be brittle or friable and powdery. M Moist Soils are darker than in dry condition and may feel cool. Sands and gravels tend to cohere. W Wet Soils exude free water. Sand and gravels tend to cohere. Moisture condition for fine grained soils is described relative to the plastic limit or liquid limit as specified in AS1726-2017.

CONSISTENCY AND DENSITY

Fine Grained Soils Coarse Grained Soils

Symbol Term Undrained Shear Strength Symbol Term Density Index (%) SPN “N” *

VS Very Soft 0 to 12 kPa VL Very Loose Less than 15 0 to 4

S Soft 12 to 25 kPa L Loose 15 to 35 4 to 10

F Firm 25 to 50 kPa MD Medium Dense 35 to 65 10 to 30

St Stiff 50 to 100 kPa D Dense 65 to 85 30 to 50

VSt Very Stiff 100 to 200 kPa VD Very Dense Above 85 Above 50

H Hard Above 200 kPa

Fr Friable -

In the absence of test results, consistency and density may be assessed from correlations with the observed behaviour of the material. * SPT correlations are not stated in AS1726-2017, and may be subject to corrections for overburden pressure and equipment type.

CEMENTATION

Weakly Cemented The soil may be easily disaggregated by hand in air or water.

Moderately Cemented Effort is required to disaggregate the soil by hand in air or water.

Updated in line with Australian Standard Geotechnical Site Investigations (AS1726:2017) GAP Form No.6 RL8 January 2018

EXPLANATION OF NOTES, ABBREVIATIONS & TERMS USED ON BOREHOLE AND TEST PIT REPORTS

DRILLING/EXCAVATION METHOD

ADH Hollow auger drilling EX Excavator PQ3 Diamond core - 83 mm

ADT Auger drilling with tc-bit HA Hand auger PT Push tube sampling

ADV Auger drilling with v-bit HAND Excavated by hand methods RAB Rotary air blast

AIRCORE Aircore HMLC Diamond core - 63 mm RC Reverse circulation

AT Air track HQ3 Diamond core - 61 mm RT Rock roller

BH Backhoe bucket JET Jetting SONIC Sonic drilling

CT Cable tool rig MZ Mazier tube sampling SPT Standard penetration testing

DTC Diatube coring NDD Non-destructive digging U Undisturbed tube sampling

EE Existing excavation NMLC Diamond core - 52 mm WB Washbore drilling

EPT Extruded push tube NQ3 Diamond core - 45 mm

PENETRATION/EXCAVATION RESISTANCE

L Low resistance. Rapid penetration possible with little effort from the equipment used. M Medium resistance. Excavation/possible at an acceptable rate with moderate effort from the equipment used. H High resistance to penetration/excavation. Further penetration is possible at a slow rate and requires significant

effort from the equipment. R Refusal or Practical Refusal. No further progress possible without the risk of damage or unacceptable wear to

the digging implement or machine. These assessments are subjective and are dependent on many factors including the equipment power, weight, condition of excavation or drilling tools, and the experience of the operator.

WATER

Water level at date shown Partial water loss Water inflow Complete water loss

GROUNDWATER NOT OBSERVED

The observation of groundwater, whether present or not, was not possible due to drilling water, surface seepage or cave in of the borehole/test pit.

GROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED

The borehole/test pit was dry soon after excavation. However, groundwater could be present in less permeable strata. Inflow may have been observed had the borehole/test pit been left open for a longer period.

SAMPLING AND TESTING

SPT Standard Penetration Test to AS1289.6.3.1-2004 4,7,11 N=18 4,7,11 = Blows per 150mm. N = Blows per 300mm penetration following 150mm seating 30/80 mm Where practical refusal occurs, the blows and penetration for that interval are reported RW Penetration occurred under the rod weight only HW Penetration occurred under the hammer and rod weight only HB Hammer double bouncing on anvil DS Disturbed sample BDS Bulk disturbed sample G Gas Sample W Water Sample FP Field permeability test over section noted FV Field vane shear test expressed as uncorrected shear strength (sv = peak value, sr = residual value) PID Photoionisation Detector reading in ppm PM Pressuremeter test over section noted PP Pocket penetrometer test expressed as instrument reading in kPa U63 Thin walled tube sample - number indicates nominal sample diameter in millimetres WPT Water pressure test DCP Dynamic cone penetration test CPT Cone penetration test CPTu Cone penetration test with pore pressure (u) measurement

RANKING OF VISUALLY OBSERVABLE CONTAMINATION AND ODOUR (for specific soil contamination assessment projects)

R = 0 R = 1 R = 2 R = 3

No visible evidence of contamination Slight evidence of visible contamination Visible contamination Significant visible contamination

R = A R = B R = C R = D

No non-natural odours identified Slight non-natural odours identified Moderate non-natural odours identified Strong non-natural odours identified

ROCK CORE RECOVERY

TCR = Total Core Recovery (%)

RQD = Rock Quality Designation (%)

SCR = Solid Core Recovery (%)

F = Fracture Frequency

100runcoreofLength

eredcovrecoreofLength 100

runcoreofLength

mm100coreoflengthsAxial

100

runcoreofLength

recovered core alcyclindric of Length

(m) zoneofLength

defectsofNo.

Updated in line with Australian Standard Geotechnical Site Investigations (AS1726:2017) GAP Form No.7 RL7January 2018

TERMS FOR ROCK MATERIAL STRENGTH & WEATHERING AND ABBREVIATIONS FOR DEFECT DESCRIPTIONS

STRENGTH Symbol Term UCS (MPa) Field Guide

VLVery Low

0.6 to 2 Material crumbles under firm blows with sharp end of pick; can be peeled with knife; too hard to cut a triaxial sample by hand. Pieces up to 30 mm can be broken by finger pressure.

L Low 2 to 6

Easily scored with a knife; indentations 1 mm to 3 mm show in the specimen with firm blows of pick point; has dull sound under hammer. A piece of core 150 mm long by 50 mm diameter may be broken by hand. Sharp edges of core may be friable and break during handling.

M Medium 6 to 20 Readily scored with a knife; a piece of core 150 mm long by 50 mm diameter can be broken by hand with difficulty.

H High 20 to 60 A piece of core 150 mm long by 50 mm diameter cannot be broken by hand but can be broken with pick with a single firm blow; rock rings under hammer.

VHVery High

60 to 200 Hand specimen breaks with pick after more than one blow; rock rings under hammer.

EHExtremely

High >200

Specimen requires many blows with geological pick to break through intact material; rock rings under hammer.

Material with strength less than ‘Very Low’ shall be described using soil characteristics. The presence of an original rock structure, fabric or texture should be noted, if relevant. ROCK MATERIAL WEATHERING

Symbol Term Field Guide

RSResidual

Soil

Material is weathered to such an extent that it has soil properties. Mass structure and material texture and fabric of original rock are no longer visible, but the soil has not been significantly transported.

XW Extremely Weathered

Material is weathered to such an extent that it has soil properties. Mass structure and material texture and fabric of original rock are still visible.

DW

HW Highly

Weathered

The whole of the rock material is discoloured, usually by iron staining or bleaching to the extent that the colour of the original rock is not recognizable. Rock strength is significantly changed by weathering. Some primary minerals have weathered to clay minerals. Porosity may be increased by leaching, or may be decreased due to deposition of weathering products in pores.

MWModerately Weathered

The whole of the rock material is discoloured, usually by iron staining or bleaching to the extent that the colour of the original rock is not recognizable, but shows little or no change of strength from fresh rock.

SW Slightly

Weathered Rock is partially discoloured with staining or bleaching along joints but shows little or no change of strength from fresh rock.

FR Fresh Rock shows no sign of decomposition of individual minerals or colour changes.ABBREVIATIONS FOR DEFECT TYPES AND DESCRIPTIONSDefect Type Coating or Infilling RoughnessP Parting Cn Clean VRo Very RoughX Foliation Sn Stain Ro RoughL Cleavage Ve Veneer Sm SmoothC Contact Ct Coating Po PolishedJ Joint In Infill Sl SlickensidedSSu Sheared Surface Vertical Boreholes – The dip

(inclination from horizontal) of the defect is given. Inclined Boreholes – The inclination is measured as the acute angle between the core axis and the vertical direction.

SS Sheared Seam PlanaritySZ Sheared Zone Pl PlanarCS Crushed Seam Cv CurvedIS Infilled Seam Un UndulatingEWS Extremely Weathered Seam St Stepped V Vein Ir Irregular

L

M

R

SANDfine to medium grained, rounded to sub-rounded, darkbrown-grey, with silt, trace rootlets

SANDfine to medium grained, rounded to sub-angular, pale brown,mottled dark brown, trace rootlets

SANDfine grained, rounded to sub-rounded, orange-brown

SANDfine grained, rounded to sub-rounded, dark brown-black,sulphurous

trace gravel, medium to coarse grained, rounded to sub-roundedof cemented sand

END OF HAND AUGER @ 2.30 mREFUSALGROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTEREDBACKFILLED

SP

SP

SP

SP

0.80

1.10

2.00

2.15

HA

D

M

L

MD -D

water added to assist drilling

Infiltration test undertaken at 0.55 m

SHEET: 1 OF 1

Field Material DescriptionSamplingDrilling

PE

NE

TR

AT

ION

RE

SIS

TA

NC

E

SOIL/ROCK MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

RE

CO

VE

RE

D

GR

OU

P S

YM

BO

L

WA

TE

R

RLDEPTH

DE

PT

H(m

etre

s)

ME

TH

OD

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SAMPLE ORFIELD TEST

GAP gINT FN. F01aRL3

CLIENT:

PROJECT:

LOCATION:

JOB NO:

DATE: 22-1-19

DATE: 25-2-19

This report of hand augered borehole must be read in conjunction with accompanying notes and abbreviations. It has beenprepared for geotechnical purposes only, without attempt to assess possible contamination. Any references to potentialcontamination are for information only and do not necessarily indicate the presence or absence of soil or groundwater

contamination.

City of Swan

Lot 269 Cogla Street

Malaga

18113391

COORDS: 396214 m E 6474465 m N MGA94 50

SURFACE RL: DATUM: AHD

INCLINATION: -90°

HOLE DEPTH: 2.30 m

LOGGED: HB

CHECKED: SNH

REPORT OF HAND AUGERED BOREHOLE: HA01

GA

P 8

_16.

6 LI

B.G

LB L

og G

AP

NO

N-C

OR

ED

FU

LL P

AG

E 1

8113

391

_CO

S_M

ALA

GA

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

5-02

-201

9 15

:55

8.3

0.00

4 D

atge

l Too

ls

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

STRUCTURE ANDADDITIONAL

OBSERVATIONS

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

L

M

R

SANDfine to medium grained, rounded to sub-rounded, darkbrown-grey, with 15-20% low plasticity silt, trace rootlets

SANDfine grained, rounded to sub-rounded, pale brown

SANDfine to medium grained, rounded to sub-rounded, dark red-brown,trace silt, trace rootlets


SP

SP

SP

0.70

1.90

HA D

L

MD -D



SHEET: 1 OF 1


PE

NE

TR

AT

ION

RE

SIS

TA

NC

E


RE

CO

VE

RE

D

GR

OU

P S

YM

BO

L

WA

TE

R

RLDEPTH

DE

PT

H(m

etre

s)

ME

TH

OD

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SAMPLE ORFIELD TEST


CLIENT:

PROJECT:

LOCATION:

JOB NO:

DATE: 22-1-19

DATE: 25-2-19


contamination.

City of Swan


Malaga

18113391

COORDS: 396236 m E 6474505 m N MGA94 50


INCLINATION: -90°

HOLE DEPTH: 2.00 m

LOGGED: HB

CHECKED: SNH


GA

P 8

_16.

6 LI

B.G

LB L

og G

AP

NO

N-C

OR

ED

FU

LL P

AG

E 1

8113

391

_CO

S_M

ALA

GA

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

5-02

-201

9 15

:55

8.3

0.00

4 D

atge

l Too

ls

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY


OBSERVATIONS

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

L-M

MR

SANDfine to medium grained, rounded to sub-angular, darkbrown-grey, with 15-20% silt, trace rootlets, trace gravel, fine tocoarse grained, sub-rounded to angular of coffee rock andcobbles of limestone fine to medium grained, angular

with gravel and cobbles, about 20%

SANDfine grained, rounded to sub-angular, blue-grey

SANDfine to medium grained, sub-rounded to sub-angular, darkbrown-black, trace silt

END OF HAND AUGER @ 1.75 mREFUSALBACKFILLEDseepage at 1.7m

SP

SP

SP

0.40

0.80

1.70

HA

D

M

L

MD -D


SHEET: 1 OF 1


PE

NE

TR

AT

ION

RE

SIS

TA

NC

E


RE

CO

VE

RE

D

GR

OU

P S

YM

BO

L

WA

TE

R

RLDEPTH

DE

PT

H(m

etre

s)

ME

TH

OD

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SAMPLE ORFIELD TEST


CLIENT:

PROJECT:

LOCATION:

JOB NO:

DATE: 22-1-19

DATE: 25-2-19


contamination.

City of Swan


Malaga

18113391

COORDS: 396168 m E 6474501 m N MGA94 50


INCLINATION: -90°

HOLE DEPTH: 1.75 m

LOGGED: HB

CHECKED: SNH


GA

P 8

_16.

6 LI

B.G

LB L

og G

AP

NO

N-C

OR

ED

FU

LL P

AG

E 1

8113

391

_CO

S_M

ALA

GA

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

5-02

-201

9 15

:55

8.3

0.00

4 D

atge

l Too

ls

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY


OBSERVATIONS

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

L

M

R

SANDfine to medium grained, rounded to sub-angular, grey-brown,trace silt, trace rootlets

SANDfine to medium grained, sub-rounded to sub-angular, pale yellow

pale brown

SANDfine to medium grained, rounded to sub-rounded, dark red-brown,with gravel, fine to coarse, sub-rounded to angular coffee rock,about 10-20%


SP

SP

SP

0.30

1.20

1.40

HA

seep

age

D

M

L

MD -D


SHEET: 1 OF 1


PE

NE

TR

AT

ION

RE

SIS

TA

NC

E


RE

CO

VE

RE

D

GR

OU

P S

YM

BO

L

WA

TE

R

RLDEPTH

DE

PT

H(m

etre

s)

ME

TH

OD

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SAMPLE ORFIELD TEST


CLIENT:

PROJECT:

LOCATION:

JOB NO:

DATE: 22-1-19

DATE: 25-2-19


contamination.

City of Swan


Malaga

18113391

COORDS: 396174 m E 6474448 m N MGA94 50


INCLINATION: -90°

HOLE DEPTH: 1.70 m

LOGGED: HB

CHECKED: SNH


GA

P 8

_16.

6 LI

B.G

LB L

og G

AP

NO

N-C

OR

ED

FU

LL P

AG

E 1

8113

391

_CO

S_M

ALA

GA

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

5-02

-201

9 15

:56

8.3

0.00

4 D

atge

l Too

ls

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY


OBSERVATIONS

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

L

M

R

SANDfine to medium grained, rounded to sub-rounded, dark brown,trace silt, trace rootlets

Silty SANDfine grained, rounded to sub-rounded, grey, approx 15-20% silt

SANDfine grained, rounded to sub-rounded, grey-white

dark black

dark red-brown

with gravel approx 15%, cemented sand and coffee rock,sub-angular to sub-rounded, medium to coarse grained, tracelignite


SP

SM

SP

0.50

0.80

1.60

1.80

1.90

HA

D

M

L

MD

D



SHEET: 1 OF 1


PE

NE

TR

AT

ION

RE

SIS

TA

NC

E


RE

CO

VE

RE

D

GR

OU

P S

YM

BO

L

WA

TE

R

RLDEPTH

DE

PT

H(m

etre

s)

ME

TH

OD

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SAMPLE ORFIELD TEST


CLIENT:

PROJECT:

LOCATION:

JOB NO:

DATE: 22-1-19

DATE: 25-2-19


contamination.

City of Swan


Malaga

18113391

COORDS: 396164 m E 6474411 m N MGA94 50


INCLINATION: -90°

HOLE DEPTH: 2.00 m

LOGGED: HB

CHECKED: SNH


GA

P 8

_16.

6 LI

B.G

LB L

og G

AP

NO

N-C

OR

ED

FU

LL P

AG

E 1

8113

391

_CO

S_M

ALA

GA

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

5-02

-201

9 15

:56

8.3

0.00

4 D

atge

l Too

ls

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY


OBSERVATIONS

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

L

M

R

SANDfine to medium grained, rounded to sub-rounded, dark grey, tracesilt, trace rootlets

SANDfine to medium grained, rounded to sub-rounded, grey-white

brown-white

black, trace gravel, sub-round to sub-angular of cemented sand,fine to medium grained, organic sulphurous


SP

SP0.40

1.20

1.65

HA

D

M

L

MD -D

Water added to assist drilling


SHEET: 1 OF 1


PE

NE

TR

AT

ION

RE

SIS

TA

NC

E


RE

CO

VE

RE

D

GR

OU

P S

YM

BO

L

WA

TE

R

RLDEPTH

DE

PT

H(m

etre

s)

ME

TH

OD

GR

AP

HIC

LOG

SAMPLE ORFIELD TEST


CLIENT:

PROJECT:

LOCATION:

JOB NO:

DATE: 22-1-19

DATE: 25-2-19


contamination.

City of Swan


Malaga

18113391

COORDS: 396226 m E 6474409 m N MGA94 50


INCLINATION: -90°

HOLE DEPTH: 1.80 m

LOGGED: HB

CHECKED: SNH


GA

P 8

_16.

6 LI

B.G

LB L

og G

AP

NO

N-C

OR

ED

FU

LL P

AG

E 1

8113

391

_CO

S_M

ALA

GA

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

5-02

-201

9 15

:56

8.3

0.00

4 D

atge

l Too

ls

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY


OBSERVATIONS

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

February 2019 18113391-001-R-Rev0

APPENDIX C

Geotechnical Laboratory

Certificates

-

mm

mm

mm

mm

mm

mm

mm

mm

mm

mm

mm

mm

mm

μm

μm

μm

μm

μm

x y x y x y x y x y x y x y

0.075 0% 2.36 0% 63 0% 200 0% 0.001 10% 0.001 30% 0.001 60%

0.075 6% 2.36 100% 63 100% 200 100% 0.163 10% 0.280 30% 0.389 60%

SIEVE 125 75 63 53 37.5 26.5 19 13.2 9.5 6.7 4.75 2.36 1.18 0.6 0.425 0.3 0.15 0.075

RESULT 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 90% 71% 33% 8% 6%

LBS #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A

UBS #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A

These tests were carried out in accordance with the Australian standards identified in this certificate.

13.2

33%

8%

6%

71%

0.389

D60

0.163 0.280

D10

Phone: +61 (0)8 9441 0700 [email protected]

(>75 μm - <2.36 mm)

Web: www.golder.com.auFax: +61 (0)8 9441 0701 E-mail:

75

26.5

Gravel*

LSM = Linear shrinkage mould

UB S = Upper bound specification

Cobbles

Testing performed by: Results reviewed by:

Fines

(<75 μm)

Sand*

Rep AS1289.3.6.1 - RL34

Northing (m)SAND with fines, fine to coarse grained, blackish grey

Golder Associates Pty LtdLab sample ID:

100%

100%

100%

Passing LB S UB S

TRP19-0026

Client address:

Project ID:

Project name:

100%

53

37.5- -

84 Guthrie Street,

Osborne Park,

Western Australia 6017LPER_19022760

LPER2019020130

Method:

Lab report ref.:

Location: 1 Cogla Street, Malaga Project reference:

PERTH GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY

Sampling co-ordinatesSpecimen description:

Client:

N/A = Not applicable

100%

LB S:

-Result:

City of Swan

2 Midland Square, Midland 6056

18113391

Lot 269, 1 Cogla Street, MalagaExploratory Hole

HA06

LSM length (mm):

LB S = Lower bound specification

100%19

AS1289.3.6.1, 2.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.2.1, 3.3.1 & 3.4.1

Test request #:

125

63

100%

100%

Att. preparation method:

Sieve Size

18.2%

As Rcvd.

Preparation of specimen and testing performed on sample supplied to the

laboratory

UB S:

1.18

600

100%

100%

100%

6.7

4.75

2.36

100%

90%

9.5

GRADING SUMMARY

Specimen

history/notes:

Definitions:

NO = Not obtainable; NP = Non plastic

ND = Not determined; SIB = Slip in bowl

0.0%

THIS DOCUMENT SHALL ONLY BE REPRODUCED IN FULL Sean Lenihan - Laboratory Technician

7/02/2019

Gravel

Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025 - Testing

RT SLenihan

D30

(>2.36 mm - <63 mm)

PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION AS 1289.3.6.1

100%

Date reported:

AS 1289.2.1.1 AS 1289.3.1.2 AS 1289.3.2.1 AS 1289.3.3.1

1 point

Proportions based on guidance in AS1726-2017 Section 6.1.4.2

AS 1289.3.4.1

Liquid

limit

Moisture

content

Plastic

limit

Plasticity

index

Linear

shrinkage

Sample depth (m):

Client sample ref:

1.65 1.80

Reduced

LevelEasting (m)

Cert. ref.: 18113391_HA06_TRP19-0026_PSD_19020130_Rep19022760 Approved signatory:

NATA accreditation number: 1961 - Site:1598 - Perth

Curling/

Crumbling/

Cracking

-

-

Soils testing - Particle size distribution & consistency limits test report

Standard method (by sieving)

Cobbles*

(>63mm - <200 mm)

Fines Sand

Demarcation lines

0.0%5.8% 94.2%

425

300

150

75

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Pe

rce

nta

ge p

assi

ng

Particle size (mm)

PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION

FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE MEDIUM COARSE

BOULDERSCOBBLESSAND FRACTION

0.002 0.006 0.02 0.075 0.2 0.6 2 6 20 60 200 600

CL

AY SILT FRACTION GRAVEL FRACTION

Divisions based on AS1289, interpolation based on AS1726

http://www.golder.com.au/en/modules.php?name=Contact&sp_id=91&back=list






February 2019 18113391-001-R-Rev0

APPENDIX D

Important Information

GOLDER ASSOCIATES PTY LTD

IMPORTANT INFORMATION RELATING TO THIS REPORT

Error! Unknown document property name. Page 1 of 1 GAP Form No. LEG04 RL2

5/2018

The document (“Report”) to which this page is attached and which this page forms a part of, has been issued

by Golder Associates Pty Ltd (“Golder”) subject to the important limitations and other qualifications set out below.

This Report constitutes or is part of services (“Services”) provided by Golder to its client (“Client”) under and subject

to a contract between Golder and its Client (“Contract”). The contents of this page are not intended to and do not

alter Golder’s obligations (including any limits on those obligations) to its Client under the Contract.

This Report is provided for use solely by Golder’s Client and persons acting on the Client’s behalf, such as its

professional advisers. Golder is responsible only to its Client for this Report. Golder has no responsibility to any other

person who relies or makes decisions based upon this Report or who makes any other use of this Report. Golder

accepts no responsibility for any loss or damage suffered by any person other than its Client as a result of any

reliance upon any part of this Report, decisions made based upon this Report or any other use of it.

This Report has been prepared in the context of the circumstances and purposes referred to in, or derived from,

the Contract and Golder accepts no responsibility for use of the Report, in whole or in part, in any other context

or circumstance or for any other purpose.

The scope of Golder’s Services and the period of time they relate to are determined by the Contract and are subject to restrictions and limitations set out in the Contract. If a service or other work is not expressly referred to in this Report, do not assume that it has been provided or performed. If a matter is not addressed in this Report, do not assume that any determination has been made by Golder in regards to it.

At any location relevant to the Services conditions may exist which were not detected by Golder, in particular due to

the specific scope of the investigation Golder has been engaged to undertake. Conditions can only be verified at the

exact location of any tests undertaken. Variations in conditions may occur between tested locations and there may

be conditions which have not been revealed by the investigation and which have not therefore been taken into account

in this Report.

Golder accepts no responsibility for and makes no representation as to the accuracy or completeness of the

information provided to it by or on behalf of the Client or sourced from any third party. Golder has assumed that such

information is correct unless otherwise stated and no responsibility is accepted by Golder for incomplete or

inaccurate data supplied by its Client or any other person for whom Golder is not responsible. Golder has not taken

account of matters that may have existed when the Report was prepared but which were only later disclosed to

Golder.

Having regard to the matters referred to in the previous paragraphs on this page in particular, carrying out the

Services has allowed Golder to form no more than an opinion as to the actual conditions at any relevant location.

That opinion is necessarily constrained by the extent of the information collected by Golder or otherwise made

available to Golder. Further, the passage of time may affect the accuracy, applicability or usefulness of the opinions,

assessments or other information in this Report. This Report is based upon the information and other circumstances

that existed and were known to Golder when the Services were performed and this Report was prepared.

Golder has not considered the effect of any possible future developments including physical changes to any

relevant location or changes to any laws or regulations relevant to such location.

Where permitted by the Contract, Golder may have retained subconsultants affiliated with Golder to provide some or all of the Services. However, it is Golder which remains solely responsible for the Services and there is no legal recourse against any of Golder’s affiliated companies or the employees, officers or directors of any of them.

By date, or revision, the Report supersedes any prior report or other document issued by Golder dealing with any

matter that is addressed in the Report.

Any uncertainty as to the extent to which this Report can be used or relied upon in any respect should be

referred to Golder for clarification

golder.com

report lot 269, 1 cogla street, malaga wa

Documents