119 Kennedys Bush Road 53 Hereford Street, PO Box 73015 Christchurch 8154, New Zealand Tel 64 3 941 8999 LIM Number: 70215887 Fax 64 3 941 8984 Page 1

Land Information Memorandum

Property address: Christchurch City Council 119 Kennedys Bush Road 53 Hereford Street, PO Box 73015 Christchurch 8154, New Zealand Tel 64 3 941 8999 LIM number: 70215887 Fax 64 3 941 8984 Page 1 www.ccc.govt.nz

Land Information Memorandum

Application details

Please supply to GW CASHMERE LIMITED PO BOX 36511 MERIVALE CHRISTCHURCH 8146 Client reference QUARRY GATE Phone number Fax number Date issued 6 December 2018 Date received 4 December 2018

Property details

Property address 119 Kennedys Bush Road Valuation roll number 23562 44002 Valuation information Capital Value: $1500000 Land Value: $1500000 Improvements Value: $0 Please note: these values are intended for Rating purposes Legal description Lot 2 DP 474804 Existing owner Brian Gillman Ltd PO Box 36511 Christchurch 8146

Council references

Debtor number 3315548

Rate account ID 73172606

LIM number 70215887

Property ID 1170567

Land Information Memorandum

Document information

This Land Information Memorandum (LIM) has been prepared for the purpose of section 44A of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA). It is a summary of the information that we hold on the property. Each heading or "clause" in this LIM corresponds to a part of section 44A.

Sections 1 to 11 contain all of the information known to the Christchurch City Council that must be included under section 44A(2) LGOIMA. Any other information concerning the land as the Council considers, at its discretion, to be relevant is included at section 11 of this LIM (section 44A(3) LGOIMA).

The information included in this LIM is based on a search of Council records only and there may be other information relating to the land which is unknown to the Council. Council records may not show illegal or unauthorised building or works on the property. The applicant is solely responsible for ensuring that the land is suitable for a particular purpose. If there are no comments or information provided in any section of this LIM this means that the Council does not hold information on the property that corresponds to that part of section 44A. A LIM is only valid at the date of issue as information is based only upon information the Council held at the time of that LIM request being made.

Property file service

This Land Information Memorandum does not contain all information held on a property file. Customers may request property files by phoning the Council's Customer Call Centre on (03) 941 8999, or visiting any of the Council Service Centres. For further information please visit www.ccc.govt.nz .

To enable the Council to measure the accuracy of this LIM document based on our current records, we would appreciate your response should you find any information contained therein which may be considered to be incorrect or omitted. Please telephone the Customer Call Centre on (03) 941 8999.

A search of records held by the Council has revealed the following information: 1. Special features and characteristics of the land Section 44A(2)(a) LGOIMA. This is information known to the Council but not apparent from the district scheme under the Town and Country Planning Act 1977 or a district plan under the Resource Management Act 1991. It identifies each (if any) special feature or characteristic of the land concerned, including but not limited to potential erosion, avulsion, falling debris, subsidence, slippage, alluvion, or inundation, or likely presence of hazardous contaminants.

( For enquiries, please phone (03) 941 8999 or visit www.ccc.govt.nz.

l ECan Liquefaction Assessment ECan holds indicative information on liquefaction hazard in the Christchurch area.Information on liquefaction can be found on the ECan website at www.ecan.govt.nz/liq or by calling ECan customer services on Ph 03 353 9007. The Christchurch City Council may require site-specific investigations before granting future subdivision or building consent for the property, depending on the liquefaction potential of the area that the property is in. l Consultant Report Available Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) engaged Tonkin and Taylor to provide a Geotechnical Report on Ground Movements that occurred as a result of the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence. The report indicates this property may have been effected by a degree of earthquake induced subsidence. The report obtained by LINZ can be accessed on their website at https://www.linz.govt.nz/land/surveying/earthquakes/canterbury-earthquakes/ information-for-canterbury-surveyors l Consultant Report Available The Tonkin & Taylor Darfield Earthquake 4 September 2010 Geotechnical Land Damage Assessment & Reinstatement Stage 1 Report indicates areas of observed surface manifestations of liquefaction resulting from the earthquake. This property is within one of the identified areas. The report can be viewed at www.eqc.govt.nz/ canterbury-quake/stage-one/stage1.aspx Related information

l There is attached a sub division soil investigation report covering this property.

2. Private and public stormwater and sewerage drains

Section 44A(2)(b) LGOIMA. This is information about private and public stormwater and sewerage drains as shown in the Council's records.

( For stormwater and sewerage enquiries, please phone (03) 941 8999 or visit www.ccc.govt.nz.

l Property within Local Pressurised Sewer System Zone This property is in a local pressure sewer system catchment within the Christchurch wastewater network. If there is a house on the property, there will already be a wastewater pressure pump and tank. If a house is yet to be built, a new wastewater pressure pump and tank will need to be installed. General information about pressure sewer systems can be found on the Council website. More detailed information can be obtained by contacting Council Customer Services on 03 941 8999.

Related information

l No up-to-date drainage plan is available for the development of this site. However, the installation of sewer and stormwater drains is checked by the Council prior to the issue of a Code Compliance Certificate. l The Council's records show a public sewer main passing through the site. l The Council's records show a public water main passing through the site. l This property has been identified as being in a pressurised wastewater system zone and attached is a copy of the systems user guide. For more information you can refer to https://ccc.govt.nz/services/water-and-drainage/ wastewater/about-wastewater/types-of-wastewater-systems or contact Christchurch City Councils 3 waters unit on (03) 941-8999.

3. Drinking Water Supply

Section 44A(2)(ba) and (bb) LGOIMA. This is information notified to the Council about whether the land is supplied with drinking water, whether the supplier is the owner of the land or a networked supplier, any conditions that are applicable, and any information the Council has about the supply.

Please note the council does not guarantee a particular water quality to its customers. If you require information on current water quality at this property please contact the Three Waters & Waste Unit.

( For water supply queries, please phone (03) 941 8999 or visit www.ccc.govt.nz.

Water Supply There is either a water meter not in use or no water connection to this property. Christchurch City Council is the networked supplier of water to this property. An application can be made to the Christchurch City council for a water connection. The conditions of supply are set out in the Christchurch City Council Water Supply, Wastewater & Stormwater Bylaw (2014), refer to www.ccc.govt.nz.

Christchurch City Council is the networked supplier of water to this property. This property can be connected to the Christchurch City Council Water Supply. The conditions of supply are set out in the Christchurch City Council Water Supply, Wastewater & Stormwater Bylaw (2014), refer to www.ccc.govt.nz.

Related information

l No up-to-date drainage plan is available for the development of this site. However, the installation of a water connection is checked by the Council prior to the issue of a Code Compliance Certificate.

Land Information Memorandum

4. Rates

Section 44A(2)(c) LGOIMA. This is information on any rates owing in relation to the land.

( For rates enquiries, please phone (03) 941 8999 or visit www.ccc.govt.nz.

(a) Annual rates

Annual rates to 30/06/2019: $ 7,782.07

Instalment Amount Date Due

Instalment 1 $ 1,945.45 31/08/2018

Instalment 2 $ 1,945.45 30/11/2018

Instalment 3 $ 1,945.45 28/02/2019

Instalment 4 $ 1,945.72 31/05/2019

Rates owing as at 06/12/2018: $ 0.00

(b) Excess water charges

$ 0.00

( For water charge enquiries, please phone (03) 941 8999 or visit www.ccc.govt.nz.

No Reading Required

( To arrange a final water meter reading, please phone (03) 941 8999 or visit www.ccc.govt.nz.

5. Consents, certificates, notices, orders, or requisitions affecting the land and buildings Section 44A(2)(d) LGOIMA. This is information concerning any consent, certificate, notice, order, or requisition, affecting the land or any building on the land, previously issued by the Council.

Section 44A(2)(da) LGOIMA. The information required to be provided to a territorial authority under section 362T(2) of the Building Act 2004. There is currently no information required to be provided by a building contractor to a territorial authority under section 362T(2) of the Building Act 2004. The Building (Residential Consumer Rights and Remedies) Regulations 2014 only prescribed the information that must be given to the clients of a building contractor.

( For building enquiries, please phone (03) 941 8999 or visit www.ccc.govt.nz.

(a) Consents (b) Certificates Note: Code Compliance Certificates were only issued by the Christchurch City Council since January 1993. (c) Notices

l Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment Foundation Design Some properties have experienced land damage and considerable settlement during the sequence of Canterbury earthquakes. While land in the green zone is still generally considered suitable for residential construction, houses in some areas will need more robust foundations or site foundation design where foundation repairs or rebuilding are required. Most properties have been assigned a technical category. Details of the MBIE guidance can be found at www.building.govt.nz/ (d) Orders (e) Requisitions

Land Information Memorandum

6. Certificates issued by a building certifier

Section 44A(2)(e) LGOIMA. This is information notified to the Council concerning any certificate issued by a building certifier pursuant to the Building Act 1991 or the Building Act 2004.

( For building enquiries, please phone (03) 941 8999 or visit www.ccc.govt.nz.

Land Information Memorandum

7. Weathertightness Section 44A(2)(ea) LGOIMA. This is information notified to the Council under section 124 of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006. ( For weathertight homes enquiries, please phone (03) 941 8999 or visit www.ccc.govt.nz. If there is no information below this means Council is unaware of any formal Weathertight Homes Resolution Services claim lodged against this property.

Land Information Memorandum

8. Land use and conditions

Section 44A(2)(f) LGOIMA. This is information relating to the use to which the land may be put and conditions attached to that use. The planning information provided is not exhaustive and reference to the Christchurch District Plan is recommended. There maybe some provisions of the Christchurch City Plan or Banks Peninsula District Plan that affect this property that are still operative.

( For planning queries, please phone (03) 941 8999 or visit www.ccc.govt.nz. l Regional plan or bylaw There may be objectives, policies or rules in a regional plan or a regional bylaw that regulate land use and activities on this site. Please direct enquiries to Canterbury Regional Council (Environment Canterbury).

(a)(i)Christchurch City Plan & Banks Peninsula District Plan

(ii)Christchurch District Plan

l Liquefaction Management Area (LMA) Property or part of property within the Liquefaction Management Area (LMA) Overlay which is operative. l Outline Development Plan Property or part of property is within an Outline Development Plan area which is affected by specific provisions that are operative. l District Plan Zone Property or part of property within the Residential New Neighbourhood Zone which is operative.

(b) Resource consents If there are any land use resource consents issued for this property the Council recommends that you check those resource consents on the property file. There may be conditions attached to those resource consents for the property that are still required to be complied with. l RMA/2018/1737 - Combined subdivision / land use consent 117 Kennedys Bush Road Halswell Fee Simple Subdivision - One Hundred and Four Lots with Land Use Status: Not accepted for processing Applied 19/07/2018 Not accepted for processing 27/07/2018

Land Information Memorandum

l RMA/2018/2135 - Combined subdivision / land use consent 117 Kennedys Bush Road Halswell Ninetyfive lot subdivision Status: Consent issued Applied 31/08/2018 Granted 13/11/2018 Decision issued 13/11/2018

l RMA/2013/2645 - Subdivision Consent TWO LOT FEE SIMPLE SUBDIVISION ASSOCIATED WITH LUS RMA92024372 - Historical Reference RMA92024371 Status: s223 Certificate issued Applied 05/12/2013 s223 Certificate issued 29/04/2014 Decision issued 24/02/2014 Granted 24/02/2014

Land Information Memorandum

9. Other land and building classifications

Section 44A(2)(g) LGOIMA. This is information notified to the Council by any statutory organisation having the power to classify land or buildings for any purpose.

( For land and building enquiries, please phone (03) 941 8999 or visit www.ccc.govt.nz.

Please refer to Section 1 for details

Land Information Memorandum

10. Network utility information

Section 44A(2)(h) LGOIMA. This is information notified to the Council by any network utility operator pursuant to the Building Act 1991 or the Building Act 2004.

( For network enquiries, please phone (03) 941 8999 or visit www.ccc.govt.nz.

l None recorded for this property

Land Information Memorandum

11. Other information

Section 44A(3) LGOIMA. This is information concerning the land that the Council has the discretion to include if it considers it to be relevant.

( For any enquiries, please phone (03) 941 8999 or visit www.ccc.govt.nz.

(a) Kerbside waste collection

l Your recycling is collected Fortnightly on the Week 2 collection cycle on a Tuesday. Please leave your recycling at the Kerbside by 6:00 a.m. Your nearest recycling depot is the Parkhouse Road Refuse Station.

l Your refuse is collected Fortnightly on the Week 2 collection cycle on a Tuesday. Please leave your rubbish at the Kerbside by 6:00 a.m. Your nearest rubbish depot is the Parkhouse Road Refuse Station.

l Your organics are collected Weekly on Tuesday. Please leave your organics at the Kerbside by 6:00 a.m.

(b) Other

l Community Board Property located in Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board

l Electoral Ward Property located in Halswell Electoral Ward

l Listed Land Use Register Hazardous activities and industries involve the use, storage or disposal of hazardous substances. These substances can sometimes contaminate the soil. Environment Canterbury identifies land that is used or has been used for hazardous activities and industries. This information is held on a publically available database called the Listed Land Use Register (LLUR). The Christchurch City Council may not hold information that is held on the LLUR Therefore, it is recommended that you check Environment Canterbury's online database at www.llur.ecan.govt.nz

l Spatial Query Report A copy of the spatial query report is attached at the end of this LIM. The spatial query report lists land use resource consents that have been granted within 100 metres of this property.

Quarryview Subdivision, Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report

GW Cashmere Ltd Reference: 253852 Revision: 1 2018-05-04

Document control record

Document prepared by: Aurecon New Zealand Limited Level 2, Iwikau Building 93 Cambridge Terrace Christchurch 8013 New Zealand

T +64 3 366 0821 F +64 3 379 6955 E [email protected] W aurecongroup.com

A person using Aurecon documents or data accepts the risk of: a) Using the documents or data in electronic form without requesting and checking them for accuracy against the original hard copy version. b) Using the documents or data for any purpose not agreed to in writing by Aurecon.

Document control

Report title Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report

Document code Project number 253852

File path P:\253852 - Quarry View\253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx Client GW Cashmere Ltd

Client contact Dean Gregory Client reference

Rev Date Revision details/status Author Reviewer Verifier Approver (if required) 0 2018-05-02 Draft for internal review K. Foote D. Mahoney - -

1 2018-05-04 Client issue copy K. Foote D. Mahoney - J. Kupec

Current revision 1

Approval

Author signature Approver signature

Name Kieran Foote Name Jan Kupec

Title Geotechnical Engineer Title Technical Director – Ground Engineering

Project 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx 2018-05-04 Revision 1

Contents

Executive Summary ...... 5 1 Introduction ...... 7 2 Site Conditions ...... 8 2.1 Site Features ...... 8 2.2 Regional Geology and Seismicity ...... 8 2.2.1 Regional Geology ...... 8 2.2.2 GNS Active Fault Database ...... 8 2.2.3 Recorded Earthquake Damage ...... 8

3 Geotechnical Investigation ...... 10 3.1 Environment Canterbury Database ...... 10 3.2 New Zealand Geotechnical Database ...... 10 3.3 Stage 1 (2016) Aurecon Investigations ...... 10 3.3.1 Cone Penetration Testing ...... 10 3.4 Stage 2 (2017) Aurecon Investigations ...... 11 3.4.1 Multi-Channel Analysis of Surface Wave (MASW) Testing ...... 11 3.4.2 Cone Penetration Testing ...... 11 3.5 Stage 3 (2018) Aurecon Investigations ...... 12 3.5.1 Cone Penetration Testing ...... 12 3.5.2 Geotechnical Boreholes ...... 12 3.5.3 Laboratory Testing ...... 12

4 Engineering Considerations ...... 13 4.1 General ...... 13 4.2 Ground Model ...... 13 4.2.1 Soil Classification ...... 13 4.2.2 Groundwater ...... 14 4.3 Liquefaction Assessment ...... 14 4.3.1 Introduction ...... 14 4.3.2 Liquefaction Assessment ...... 15 4.3.3 Lateral Spreading ...... 17 4.4 Technical Category Classification ...... 19 4.5 Liquefaction Mitigation ...... 20 4.5.1 General ...... 20 4.5.2 Technical Category 2 Area ...... 21 4.5.3 Technical Category 3 Area ...... 21

5 Assessment Against RMA Section 106 ...... 23 6 References...... 24 7 Limitations ...... 25

Appendices

Appendix A – Figures Appendix B – ECAN and NZGD Investigation Logs Appendix C – Stage 1 CPT Logs Appendix D – MASW Testing Results Appendix E – Stage 2 CPT Logs Appendix F – Stage 3 CPT Logs Appendix G – Aurecon Boreholes Appendix H – Laboratory Testing

Appendix I – Cfc Curve Fitting Appendix J – Liquefaction Outputs Appendix K – RMA Assessment

Tables

Table 1 Recent Earthquake Activity Table 2 NZGD Recorded Deformation and Land Damage Table 3 Depth of refusal and groundwater levels measured during Stage 1 CPTs Table 4 Depth of refusal and groundwater levels measured during Stage 2 CPTs Table 5 Depth of refusal and groundwater levels measured during Stage 3 CPTs Table 6 Inferred ground model for Zone 1 Table 7 Inferred ground model for Zone 2 Table 8 Inferred ground model for Zone 3 Table 9 Design Ground Motions Table 10 Liquefaction Assessment References Table 11 Liquefaction Assessment Summary Table 12 Liquefaction Deformation Limits and House Foundation Implications

Executive Summary

Introduction GW Cashmere Ltd is proposing to subdivide a 6.8ha area of rural land in Halswell, Christchurch into a residential lot subdivision with associated infrastructure such as drainage and internal roads. The subdivision will be an extension to the existing Quarry View Subdivision to the north. GW Cashmere Ltd has engaged Aurecon New Zealand Ltd to assess the general suitability of the land for residential development from a geotechnical perspective.

Geotechnical Investigations Aurecon has undertaken three stages of geotechnical testing across the site between 2016 and 2018, comprising in total 30 Piezocone and Cone Penetration Tests, Multi-Channel Analysis of Surface Wave (MASW) testing, and two boreholes with laboratory testing. Based upon the results of the geotechnical investigations the site is underlain by highly variable ground conditions. The northern half of the site is underlain by 2m to 4m of silt and sand overlying variable thickness of gravel. The southern half of the site is underlain by 9m to 19m of silt and sand, overlying gravel. Accounting for seasonal variation we infer groundwater level to be approximately 1.5m below ground level.

Liquefaction Assessment A liquefaction assessment has been carried out at the site. The assessment indicated the following:

¢ The site has been ‘sufficiently tested’ twice to at least SLS level during the major earthquakes of 2010 and 2011. Varying levels of ground damage and surface expression of liquefaction were observed across the site following these earthquakes.

¢ The northern half of the site has limited susceptibility to liquefaction due to gravel at shallow depths (2 to 4m). However, due to the shallow groundwater table, upper silt and sand layers are expected to liquefy to varying degrees.

¢ The southern half of the site, where the shallow gravel was not encountered is susceptible to liquefaction in the saturated and loose silty-sandy soils.

¢ The ground damage that occurred during both the Darfield and Christchurch Earthquake is similar to that which is expected to occur during an Ultimate Limit State design earthquake event.

¢ Lateral spreading is not considered a risk at the site due to the lack of any free edges.

Technical Category Classification Based on both the observed site performance during the recent earthquakes and the information collected as part of our geotechnical testing regime, we consider:

¢ The majority of the site in its current form is consistent with MBIE Technical Category 2 classification.

¢ Localised areas in the southern end of the site in its current from is consistent with MBIE Technical Category 3 classification. The demarcation between these areas is detailed in Figure 7 in Appendix A. When the site is developed appropriate liquefaction mitigation measures will need to be implemented.

¢ In the Technical Category 2 areas this should comprise utilising more robust TC2 type house foundations systems.

¢ In the Technical Category 3 areas this ideally would include improving the expected ground performance to a TC2 equivalent level with some form of ground improvement.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 5

At this stage the ground improvement would most likely take the form of strengthening with an area wide capping layer that would result in seismic performance equivalent to TC2. The geotechnical investigation and design work associated with this should be undertaken at the detailed subdivision design stage of the residential development. An alternative approach could be to provide TC3 properties. Significantly more robust TC3 house foundations would be required with associated restrictions on house form, cladding and roof weight etc. and all house foundations would need to have specific engineering design. Consideration would also need to be given to the seismic performance on the ground and council vested infrastructure (roading, pipes, sewers etc.).

RMA Section 106 Assessment (2017) Based on our assessment we consider that at the site there are no significant geotechnical hazards other than the potential for earthquake induced soil liquefaction of varying degrees. However, provided that the geotechnical recommendations provided within this report are followed, and the appropriate engineering measures are implemented, then we consider that the development is unlikely to be affected by significant geotechnical hazards nor will the development worsen, accelerate or result in material damage. Therefore, from a geotechnical perspective we consider that the residential subdivision development can proceed.

Our Limitations are attached as Section 7 of this report. This report shall be read as a whole.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 6

1 Introduction

GW Cashmere Ltd is proposing to develop 6.8ha area of rural land in Halswell, Christchurch into a residential subdivision with associated infrastructure such as drainage and internal roads. The subdivision will be an extension to the existing Quarry View Subdivision located directly to the of the site. GW Cashmere Ltd has engaged Aurecon New Zealand Ltd (Aurecon) to assess the general suitability of the land for residential development from a geotechnical perspective and provide geotechnical advice as part of residential development. Aurecon has previously carried out the geotechnical investigations for the site in 2016 (Stage 1) and 2017 (Stage 2) as well as for the neighbouring Quarry View site to the north. The site has previously been identified as being underlain by three distinct geological zones. The northern end (Zones 1 and 2) are underlain by shallow gravel of various thicknesses. In the southern end (Zone 3) the gravel is deeper and overlain by significant thickness of interbedded silts and sands with a higher liquefaction risk. GW Cashmere Ltd is now looking to develop the entire site and a determination of the effective Technical Category Classification is required as site development. To better quantify the Technical Category Classification (this) Stage 3 geotechnical investigation and updated assessment has been undertaken. The scope of the work undertaken for this current assessment is as follows:

¢ Organise for an independent sub-contractor to drill two machine boreholes to 10m depth with standard penetration tests at 1.5m intervals.

¢ Organise for an independent laboratory to undertake six to eight fines content split tests to refine the CFC factor for the liquefaction analysis from collected borehole soil samples.

¢ Organise for an independent sub-contractor to conduct six to eight Cone Penetrometer Tests (CPT) to refusal of the rig (anticipated to be between 2-4m and 19m depth).

¢ Upload borehole and CPTu logs to the New Zealand Geotechnical Database.

¢ Make recommendations for additional geotechnical testing as part of future residential development, if required.

¢ Assess the site from a geotechnical perspective for residential development including assessing a likely residential land liquefaction hazard Technical Category (TC) classification in accordance with the principles of the MBIE guidelines issued mid-2017.

¢ Prepare this factual and interpretive geotechnical report outlining the above and Statement of Professional Opinion. This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation and recommendations for residential development. Our work was carried out in accordance with our fee proposal (dated 14 March 2018) and short form agreement. Approval to proceed was given by Mr Dean Gregory of GW Cashmere Ltd on 16 March 2018. This report supersedes our previous geotechnical reporting for the site and presents our updated assessment of the suitability of the land for residential development. Our Limitations are attached as Section 7 of this report. This report shall be read as a whole.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 7

2 Site Conditions

2.1 Site Features The site is located in Halswell, southwest of Christchurch as shown on Figures 1 and 2 in Appendix A. The main site features are:

¢ The site is currently three blocks of land with legal descriptions of Lot 1 & Lot 2 DP474804 and Lot 2 DP356839 and has an approximate total area of 6.8 hectares.

¢ The site is located at the base of the Port Hills with Halswell Quarry directly south of Cashmere Road. There is a gentle slope in the south-eastern corner that begins to slope towards the Port Hills.

¢ The site is bound by residential properties to the north, to the east by rural land, to the south by Cashmere Road and west by Kennedys Bush Road. Four existing houses front onto Kennedys Bush Road to the west of the site.

¢ The site is currently grassed and divided into fenced paddocks. The site topography is generally flat with small undulations and a slight rise is ground level at the south-western boundary associated with the Port Hills.

¢ Drainage is inferred to be via direct soakage into the ground.

¢ The site has the current MBIE Technical Category Classification of N/A – Rural & Unmapped with residential properties fronting onto Kennedys Bush Road also classified as N/A – Rural & Unmapped .

2.2 Regional Geology and Seismicity

2.2.1 Regional Geology The regional geology of the site is described by Forsyth and Barrel (2008) as ‘Grey river alluvium beneath plains or low-level terraces (Q1a).’ The underlying geology changes at the south-eastern site boundary where it is described as “Basaltic to trachytic lava flows interbedded with breccia and tuff. Numerous dikes and minor domes (Mvl)”.

2.2.2 GNS Active Fault Database A review of the Geological and Nuclear Sciences Active Fault Database (GNS, 2018) indicates five recorded active faults within the vicinity of the site. The nearest recorded active fault is the Greendale Fault, with the mapped eastern end of this fault 17km west of the site. The 4 September 2010 Darfield Earthquake was caused by movement of this fault.

2.2.3 Recorded Earthquake Damage Canterbury has recently been affected by a series of large earthquakes from September 2010 through to December 2011. The earthquake accelerations have been assessed for the Christchurch area by Bradley and Hughes (2012) and are shown in Table 1 below.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 8

Table 1 Recent Earthquake Activity

Earthquake Distance to Epicentre Moment Median PGA Equivalent Magnitude on Site (1) mean PGA (M w) for M w 7.5 Event (2) Darfield Earthquake 17km west to the eastern 7.1 0.29g 0.26g 4 September 2010 end of the Darfield fault trace Christchurch Earthquake 8km east 6.2 0.38g 0.27g 22 February 2011 Major Aftershock 13km east 6.0 0.15g 0.10g 13 June 2011 Major Aftershock 16km north east 5.9 0.14g 0.09g 23 December 2011 (1) Peak Ground Accelerations (PGA) on site based on the median values of the study by Bradley Seismic Limited as published on the NZGD (Bradley and Hughes, 2012). (2) Calculated using the magnitude scaling factor based on the method of Idriss and Boulanger (2008).

Aspects of the ground damage across Christchurch and parts of Canterbury have been recorded and published on the New Zealand Geotechnical Database (NZGD). The observed damage near the site is summarised in Table 2. Table 2 NZGD Recorded Deformation and Land Damage

4 September 2010 22 February 2011 13 June 2011 23 December 2011 Review of Aerial Surface expression Minor surface - - Photographs of liquefaction expression of visible in the north- liquefaction in the western corner, northwest corner eastern half and a and a channel channel orientated orientated southwest to southwest to north northeast through east through the the centre of the centre of the site. site. Ejected water is pooled on the eastern side of the site. Surface expression is visible along Kennedys Bush and Cashmere Roads. Liquefaction and No lateral Minor to moderate No observed Not recorded. Lateral Spreading spreading but quantities of ground cracking or Observations moderate quantities ejected material. ejected liquefied of ejected material. material. (Kennedys Bush Road observations)

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 9

3 Geotechnical Investigation

The geotechnical investigations comprised the following:

¢ A review of publicly available geotechnical information from Environment Canterbury (ECan, 2018) and the New Zealand Geotechnical Database (NZGD, 2018).

¢ Cone Penetration Test (CPTu), undertaken in three stages, supervised by geotechnical engineers from Aurecon undertaken in three stages of investigation between 2016 and 2018.

¢ Multi-Channel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW) testing supervised by geotechnical engineers from Aurecon carried out as part of Stage 2 investigations in 2017.

¢ Two geotechnical boreholes and associated laboratory testing supervised by geotechnical engineers from Aurecon carried out as part of Stage 3 investigations in 2018.

3.1 Environment Canterbury Database Three Environment Canterbury (ECan) boreholes are located close to the site. The ECan boreholes indicate varying ground conditions across the site. Gravel was encountered at 3.5m depth in ECan borehole M36/1284 on the western side of the site, 19 to 19.5m depth in M36/4575 and 20m in M36/5237 located approximately 20m south of the southern site boundary. The ECan borehole logs are attached in Appendix B and locations shown on Figure 3. Groundwater monitoring was undertaken in ECan well M36/7089 over a 15-year period from September 2000 to July 2015. The well is located at a reduced level approximately 0.5m to 1m below the site. The calculated minimum depth of 1.02m below ground level, corresponding to approximately 1.5m below ground level (bgl) in reference to the site.

3.2 New Zealand Geotechnical Database One borehole and one CPT log listed on the NZGD are located in close proximity to the site. Borehole BH_37095 (listed as Riley Consultants BH1 in Appendix B) is located approximately 250m northwest of the site boundary and indicates gravels are present from approximately 2.5m to 8.5m depth and are generally dense to 7.5m with SPT values ranging from 28 to 42. We note the borehole was drilled in January 2013 and groundwater was measured at 2.0m following drilling. The CPT_1194 located less than 50m from the north-western site boundary and indicates gravels present from 3m to at least 4m depth. The test was completed in November 2010 and groundwater was measured at 2m below ground level (bgl).

3.3 Stage 1 (2016) Aurecon Investigations A geotechnical investigation was carried out across the site area to better investigate the ground conditions and likely seismic performance of the site for development. The geotechnical investigation comprised the following:

¢ Site walkover by a geotechnical engineer;

¢ Nine Piezocone Penetration Tests (CPTu);

3.3.1 Cone Penetration Testing McMillan Drilling Group Limited undertook nine CPTu tests to refusal across the site on 11 October 2016. The test locations are shown on Figure 3 in Appendix A and the CPTu logs are presented in Appendix C. The CPT tests were advanced to effective refusal which was encountered at depths summarised in Table 3 below.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 10

Table 3 Depth of refusal and groundwater levels measured during Stage 1 CPTs

Test CPT CPT CPT CPT CPT CPT CPT CPT CPT 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109

Depth of refusal 3.6 2.7 4.2 8.7 8.8 10.3 9.1 19.4 8.6 (m)

Groundwater level 1.6 1.3 1.6 - 2.1 1.7 - 1.4 - (m bgl)

The groundwater table was measured in CPT holes at depths between 1.3m and 2.1m depth following completion of the test. Groundwater was not recorded in CPT104 and CPT107 as the holes collapsed above the groundwater level or CPT109 as the equipment was damaged.

3.4 Stage 2 (2017) Aurecon Investigations Further geotechnical investigation was carried out across the site area to better investigate the ground conditions and likely seismic performance of the site for development. The geotechnical investigation comprised the following:

¢ Multi-channel analysis of surface wave (MASW) testing

¢ 12 additional Cone Penetration Tests (CPT) 3.4.1 Multi-Channel Analysis of Surface Wave (MASW) Testing Southern Geophysical Limited completed one day of MASW testing consisting of seven linear arrays across the site on 23 February 2017. The test locations are shown on Figure 4 in Appendix A and the resulting shear wave velocity profiles and their technical report are attached as Appendix D. The MASW tests were primarily conducted to better delineate the boundary between zones where shallow gravels were encountered in Stage 1 CPTs and determine the likely thickness of this gravel layer. The results generally indicate three distinct geological zones across the site. The south and central parts of the site returned profiles with materials in the top 10m exhibiting low shear wave velocities (generally less than 160m/s), consistent with layers of sands and silts encountered during Stage 1 CPTu’s. The northernmost end of the site generally showed a high velocity layer (> 160 m/s) present from around 3m depth and of approximately 3m thickness overlying low velocity material, inferred to be gravels overlying silty/sandy layers. Between the north and central parts of the site, high velocity material (inferred gravel) is present from approximately 4m to over 10m depth.

3.4.2 Cone Penetration Testing McMillan Drilling Group Limited conducted 12 additional CPT tests to refusal across the site on 9 March 2017. The test locations are shown on Figure 3 in Appendix A and the CPT logs are presented in Appendix E. The CPT tests were advanced to effective refusal which was encountered at depths summarised in Table 4 below.

Table 4 Depth of refusal and groundwater levels measured during Stage 2 CPTs

Test CPT CPT CPT CPT CPT CPT CPT CPT CPT CPT CPT CPT 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212

Depth of 3.2 3.3 2.7 3.9 4.8 8.6 4.4 8.8 5.1 8.9 10.7 16.3 refusal (m)

Groundwater - 2.3 1.8 - - 1.9 - - - - 2.4 - level (m bgl)

The groundwater table was measured in CPT holes at depths between 1.8m and 2.4m depth following completion of the test as indicated in Table 4. Groundwater was not recorded in CPTs 201, 204-205,207-210 and CPT212 as the holes collapsed above the groundwater level.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 11

3.5 Stage 3 (2018) Aurecon Investigations A third stage of geotechnical investigations were carried out in April 2018 to better investigate the liquefaction susceptibility of the soils within the central and southern areas of the site. These investigations comprised the following:

¢ Eight additional Cone Penetration Tests (CPT)

¢ Two geotechnical boreholes

¢ Seven wet sieve fines content laboratory tests using selected samples taken from the geotechnical boreholes

3.5.1 Cone Penetration Testing McMillan Drilling Group Limited conducted eight additional CPT’s to 10m below ground level or refusal on the 28 and 29 March 2018. Test locations are shown on Figure 3 in Appendix A and the CPT logs are presented in Appendix F. The refusal depths and groundwater levels, where applicable, are included in Table 5.

Table 5 Depth of refusal and groundwater levels measured during Stage 3 CPTs

Test CPT CPT CPT CPT CPT CPT CPT CPT 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308

Depth of 10 9.4 8.5 8.6 8.6 8.4 9.5 8.8 refusal (m)

Groundwater - 2 1.9 1.5 - - 1.9 - level (m bgl)

The groundwater table was measured in CPT holes at depths between 1.5m and 2m depth following completion of the test as indicated in Table 5. Groundwater was not recorded in CPTs 301, 305-306 and CPT308 as the holes collapsed above the groundwater level.

3.5.2 Geotechnical Boreholes McMillan Drilling Group Ltd completed two geotechnical boreholes to 10m below ground level on the 5 April 2018. The boreholes were drilled to obtain soil samples for laboratory testing. Testing locations are shown in Figure 3 in Appendix A and the borehole logs are presented in Appendix G. The boreholes were logged by an Aurecon Geotechnical Engineer, and contained interbedded sands and silts underlain by gravels. Groundwater was measured at 2m below ground level within both boreholes.

3.5.3 Laboratory Testing Central Testing Services completed laboratory testing on seven samples obtained from the geotechnical boreholes. The tests were conducted to provide the percentage of fines content present within selected soil types, using the wet sieve method (NZS 4402:1986, Test 2.8.1 – Wet Sieve Analysis, and NZS 4402:1986, Test 2.1 – Water Content). These fines content values were then used to calibrate the liquefaction triggering assessment as detailed in Section 4.3 below. The results of the laboratory testing are contained within Appendix H.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 12

4 Engineering Considerations

4.1 General GW Cashmere Ltd are proposing to develop a 6.8 Ha area of land in Halswell into a residential subdivision with associated roading and infrastructure. To assess the suitability of the land for development and fulfil the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE, 2012) guidelines on residential development, the liquefaction risk for the site needs to be assessed. This section of the report presents our interpretation of the ground conditions at the site, details our liquefaction assessment, and presents our recommendations for liquefaction mitigation as part of the subdivision development.

4.2 Ground Model

4.2.1 Soil Classification Based upon the results of the geotechnical site investigations we infer three ground models, presented in Tables 6, 7 and 8 below. The ground models correspond to geotechnical zonings as presented on Figure 5 in Appendix A.

Table 6 Inferred ground model for Zone 1

Unit Top of Layer Thickness Soil Description 1 Surface 1.8m to 3.2m Topsoil overlying interbedded layers of SILT, SAND and Silty SAND. 2 1.8m to 3.2m Approx. 3m Sandy Gravel interbedded with gravelly SAND and dense SAND. (from MASW) 3 Approx. 6m Approx. 5m Layers of SILT/SAND/Sandy SILT/Silty SAND (inferred from (from MASW) (from MASW) MASW profiles). 3 Approx. 10m Likely to over Sandy GRAVEL. (from MASW) 20m

Table 7 Inferred ground model for Zone 2

Unit Top of Layer Thickness Soil Description 1 Surface 3.0m to 4.2m Topsoil overlying interbedded layers of SILT, SAND and Silty SAND. 2 3.0m to 4.2m Likely to over Sandy GRAVEL/gravelly SAND. 20m

Table 8 Inferred ground model for Zone 3

Unit Top of Layer Thickness Soil Description 1 Surface 7.8m to 10.7m Topsoil overlying Interbedded layers of SILT, SAND and Sandy SILT. 2[1] 7.5m to 10.7m Unknown Sandy GRAVEL to GRAVEL and occasional SAND layer. 3[2] Unknown 19.3m SAND and silty SAND with interbedded SILT layers. 4 16.5m to 19.3m Sandy GRAVEL to GRAVEL and occasional SAND layer. 19.3m onwards Notes: [1] Based on Environment Canterbury Borehole M36/4575 the gravel layer encountered between 8.6 and 10.3m depth may not be continuous to depth and may be underlain by sands and silts similar to those encountered in CPT108. [2] Unit 3 ground conditions based on the results of CPT108.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 13

4.2.2 Groundwater Groundwater has been measured from several sources as follows:

¢ Various test logs from the NZGD indicate groundwater level at approximately 2m bgl

¢ Long-term groundwater monitoring of a bore just to the south has a calculated level corresponding to the site of approximately 1.5m bgl

¢ Groundwater levels have been measured throughout the duration of Aurecon’s site investigation stages. Groundwater was measured at 16 different test points over a duration of approximately 18 months from October 2016 to April 2018 typically ranging from 1.3 to 2.4m below ground level, with a significant number of these greater than 2m. Based on our interpretation of this data and considering the potential for seasonal variation within groundwater levels, a groundwater level of 1.5m bgl has been assumed for design.

4.3 Liquefaction Assessment

4.3.1 Introduction Under cyclic loading loose, non-plastic materials such as gravel, sand and silt tend to decrease in volume. If these soils are saturated and rapid loading occurs under un-drained conditions, the soil densification causes pore water pressure to increase. The increase in pore water pressure results in a loss of soil strength due to a decrease in effective stress, and eventually leads to liquefaction once effective stress drops to near zero. Liquefaction can lead to large displacements of foundations, flow failures of slopes, ground surface settlement, sand boils, and post-earthquake stability failures. Based on Aurecon’s review of post-earthquake aerial photographs and other records there was moderate surface expression of liquefaction on the site following 4 September 2010 Darfield Earthquake and minor to moderate surface expression of liquefaction following the 22 February 2011 aftershock. In assessing the liquefaction potential of the site, the main factors to consider are:

¢ Which layers have historically liquefied?

¢ What is the likelihood of liquefaction in a future event?

¢ How does potential liquefaction affect the site development? These factors have been considered in our liquefaction assessment.

4.3.2 Potential for Liquefaction Three primary factors contribute to liquefaction potential:

¢ Soil grading and density.

¢ Groundwater.

¢ Earthquake intensity and level of ground shaking. Each of these is discussed below.

Soil Character and Density The geotechnical investigation across the site indicates two different ground profiles with different earthquake responses. Loose to medium dense sand and silty-sand encountered on site are considered to be potentially liquefiable from a soil character and density perspective. In situ materials with higher clay contents are considered non-liquefiable. For the ground penetrated by the CPT profiles this non-liquefiable cut-off is assumed to be where the Soil Character Index, I c, is greater than 2.6. The underlying gravel is also considered to be non-liquefiable, although it is expected that isolated layers of sand within gravel may liquefy.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 14

Groundwater Based on our site investigations and accounting for seasonal variation in ground water level, we have assumed a groundwater depth of 1.5m across the site for our analysis. Soils above the ground water table will not be susceptible to liquefaction.

Earthquake Intensity and Back Analysis of Recent Earthquakes The MBIE Guidelines (MBIE, 2012) require analysis for Serviceability Limit State (SLS) and Ultimate Limit State (ULS) cases, using specified peak ground accelerations (PGA) of 0.13g and 0.35g respectively and a magnitude M w 7.5 event. An additional SLS-b case has also been included for liquefaction assessment which represents an earthquake of smaller magnitude closer to the site. This earthquake case has a magnitude Mw 6.0 and an acceleration of 0.19g. For calibration purposes we will also undertake a liquefaction assessment using the largest two seismic events of the Canterbury earthquake sequence (4 September 2010 Darfield Earthquake and 22 February 2011 Christchurch Earthquake). The details of the design earthquakes are summarised in Table 9 below.

Table 9 Design Ground Motions

Design Event Return Period Peak Ground Moment Acceleration Magnitude (PGA) (M w) Serviceability Limit State (SLS-a) 25 years 0.13g 7.5 Serviceability Limit State (SLS-b) 25 years 0.19g 6.0 Ultimate Limit State (ULS) 500 years 0.35g 7.5 4 September 2010 Darfield EQ - 0.29g 7.2 22 February 2011 Christchurch EQ - 0.38g 6.2

Based on the New Zealand Building Code, buildings designed for the ULS event are expected to retain their structural integrity and form during an earthquake and not endanger life. Some plastic deformation of structural elements within the structure is expected to occur but ideally the damage can be repaired and the structure can be returned to service after the event, although repair may be uneconomical. Buildings are expected to perform well for the SLS event and be returned to service after only nominal repair. As indicated in Table 1 of Section 2.2, the site has experienced a number of large earthquakes recently. Table 1 shows the site is estimated to have experienced PGAs up to 0.27g scaled to a Magnitude of 7.5, which is less than the ULS acceleration specified in the MBIE guidelines but greater than 170% of the design SLS PGA (0.22g). Hence the site has been ‘sufficiently tested’ to above SLS level during both the Darfield and Christchurch Earthquakes. During this ‘significant’ testing varying degrees of surface expressions and ground damage were observed across the site.

4.3.3 Liquefaction Assessment

Methodology The ability for soils to resist the effect of ground shaking associated with the design ground accelerations has been assessed from the subsoil information obtained from the site investigations, predominantly using CPT. Liquefaction can have a number of effects on buildings and land. In our assessment we have considered the following on a site-specific basis:

¢ The nature of the soil profile and subsequent liquefiable layers

¢ Liquefaction induced ground damage and non-liquefiable crust thickness

¢ Limitations of the prescribed liquefaction assessment methodologies The liquefaction assessment is detailed below.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 15

Site Specific Soil Profile The site subsoil profile has been investigated using both cone penetration testing and geotechnical boreholes. Based on the results of these investigations, the soil profile is considered to display significant lenticular behaviour and contains significant interbedding of sandy and silty deposits. It is accepted that liquefaction analysis within highly interbedded sandy, silt and clayey soils is often considered to over-predict liquefaction effects, as is detailed in Boulanger et. al. (2016) and Rhodes and Cubrinovski (2018). The effect of the highly varying fines content of the soil deposits have been assessed by calibrating the fines correction curve fitting parameter C fc for CPT-based liquefaction triggering, as is recommended in Idriss and Boulanger (2014) and MBIE (2012). Using fines content laboratory testing on seven site specific soil samples, a C fc of 0.2 has been used to allow fines correction to be applied. The C fc curve fitting procedure has been included in Appendix I with percentage fines – Ic correlation developed from the borehole – CPT pairing of CPTu105 – BH01 and CPT211 – BH02 and the associated fines content laboratory testing.

Liquefaction Induced Ground Damage and Crust Thickness The potential for liquefaction ground induced damage has been assessed using both the correlations of Ishihara (1985) and Tonkin and Taylor’s (2013) Liquefaction Severity Number (LSN). Ishihara relates the likelihood of ground expression of liquefaction to the thickness of the non-liquefiable crust and the liquefiable layer immediately below this crust, while Tonkin and Taylor calculate the severity of land damage based on the proximity of a soil profile’s liquefiable layers to the ground surface. The thickness of the non-liquefiable surface crust (i.e. the depth below ground level to the first expression of liquefaction) is known to be a significant contributor to the potential for liquefaction induced ground damage. Bowen and Jacka (2013) correlated ground damage and crust thickness based on the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence between September 2010 and June 2011 and found that a crust thickness greater than 3.5-4.0m was sufficient to prevent any liquefaction induced damage, even with significant thickness of liquefied soil below this. This is consistent with Ishihara (1985) when used in the SLS earthquake case. The Department of Building and Housing Christchurch Ground Improvement Trials in the Residential Red Zone (DBH, 2012) demonstrated that the presence of continuous densified crust significantly reduce the amount of ground settlement when compared to control (non-densified crust) area, i.e. over a 50% reduction in ground settlement.

Limitations of the Prescribed Liquefaction Methodology Liquefaction susceptibility has been calculated using the CPT based liquefaction triggering procedure of Idriss and Boulanger (2014). It is noted that this methodology has significant limitations as discussed within Boulanger et. al. (2016). Limitations suggested within this paper which apply to the site include:

¢ Reduced cone tip penetration (q c) in sand near interfaces with silts or clays.

¢ Thin layer effects where penetration resistance is reduced in sand layers less than 1m thick, where clays or silts are on either side of the sand layer.

¢ Presumption of 100% saturation below the groundwater table underestimates cyclic strengths for partially saturated zones.

¢ Correlations for estimating shear and volumetric strains have been developed primarily from data sets for sands and clays and the subsequent applicability of these correlations to intermediate soils is unknown.

¢ The assumption that liquefiable layers are laterally continuous can contribute to over-estimation of potential liquefaction effects.

¢ Thick crust layers can reduce surface expression of liquefaction in areas not subject to lateral spreading.

¢ Liquefaction of loose layers in one interval of a soil profile may reduce the seismic demand on other soil layers.

¢ Seepage within stratified soil profiles driven by excess pore pressures may increase or decrease surface expression.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 16

The effect of reduced cone tip penetrations due to interfaces between sandy and silty material has been accounted for with the use of a thin layer correction factor. Where rapid changes in the soil behaviour index (I c) occur, the potential for liquefaction is not considered within the soil profile. The cone tip penetration, and hence the ability to resist liquefaction of a sandy material, is reduced by the surrounding silty layers, while the I c of the silt layers is reduced due to the presence of the surrounding sandy layers and hence the liquefaction susceptibility of the silt layers is overestimated. To assess the effect of thin layer limitations on the liquefaction analysis, a thin layer correction factor has been applied, which eliminates the liquefaction potential of layers where there is a significant change in I c. For our analysis an I c change of greater than 0.05 / 10mm of soil profile has been adopted. The effect of the remainder of these known limitations is not able to be corrected for, and as such the liquefaction assessment is likely to be overly conservative based on the site-specific soil profile. The liquefaction assessments have been carried out using the references in Table 10 below:

Table 10 Liquefaction Assessment References

Test Liquefaction Fines Liquefaction Thin Layer Crust Liquefaction Liquefaction Assessment Content Cut Off Correction Thickens Settlement Ground Method Method Damage Method

CPT Boulanger Based Based on a Discard Cumulative Zhang et. al. Ishihara (1985) and Idriss upon I c 2.6 I c cut off layers where thickness of (2002) and Tonkin & (2014) with Ic change upper soils Taylor (2013) Cfc =0.2 >0.05/10mm where FoS liq soil profile >1.0

Liquefaction Results The liquefaction assessment has been carried out for five earthquakes, the three design level earthquakes, and the Darfield and Christchurch Earthquakes as a comparison between actual and predicted future performance. The results of the liquefaction assessment are summarised in Table 11 and the results are presented in Appendix J. Under the SLS design earthquake scenario limited localised liquefaction may be possible with limited if any ground damage. Under the ULS design earthquake scenario liquefaction is expected to occur in the saturated loose silty- sandy soils. Minor to moderate liquefaction surface expression likely with potential for localised pockets of major expression. The level of ground damage that occurred during the 4 September 2010 Darfield Earthquake is expected to be similar to that which is expected to occur under a ULS design earthquake event.

4.3.4 Lateral Spreading Lateral spreading occurs when subsoil liquefaction results in the surface soils moving downslope or towards a free edge. At present there are no substantial drainage paths or stormwater ponds that would provide a ‘free edge’ for lateral spreading, so the risk of lateral spreading is currently assumed to be minor. However, as part of the development stormwater ponds or drainage channels may be required. If stormwater ponds or drainage channels are to be constructed at the site, the risk of lateral spreading should be confirmed by a geotechnical engineer once the final location and geometry is known.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 17

Table 11 Liquefaction Assessment Summary

Earthquake Earthquake Effects Ground Profile Zone 1 Ground Profile Zone 2 Ground Profile Zone 3 Events

SLS-a Potentially Little to no liquefaction. Minor liquefaction in the silty sand and sand layers between the Interbedded liquefiable layers present below the groundwater table. (0.13g M w7.5) Liquefiable Layers groundwater table and upper surface of the sandy gravel layer.

Crust Thickness 3m+ 2.2 to 4m+ 4.3 to 7.8m+

Settlement <5mm <5 to 25mm 15 to 55mm

Ground Damage Little to none. Little to minor. Little to minor.

Comments Surface expression unlikely. Minor surface expression possible. Minor surface expression possible.

SLS-b Potentially Little to no liquefaction. Minor liquefaction in the silty sand and sand layers between the Interbedded liquefiable layers present below the groundwater table. (0.19g M w6.0) Liquefiable Layers groundwater table and surface of the sandy gravel layer.

Crust Thickness 3m+ 2.2 to 4m+ 1.8 to 7.8m

Settlement <5mm 5 to 10mm 25 to 75mm

Ground Damage Little to none. Little to minor. Little to minor.

Comments Surface expression unlikely. Minor surface expression possible. Minor surface expression possible.

ULS Potentially Minor to moderate liquefaction in the silty sand and sand layers between the Minor to moderate liquefaction in the silty sand and sand layers between the Moderate to severe expression of liquefaction in the silty sand and sand (0.35g M w7.5) Liquefiable Layers groundwater table and surface of the sandy gravel layer. groundwater table and surface of the sandy gravel layer. layers between the groundwater table and surface of the sandy gravel layer. Non-liquefiable layers up to 3.5m thick in localised areas.

Crust Thickness 1.5 to 2.7m+ 1.5 to 2.6m 1.5 to 6.4m

Settlement <5mm to 15mm 15 to 25mm 50 to 85mm

Ground Damage Minor to moderate. Minor to moderate. Minor to moderate surface expression likely.

Comments Minor liquefaction surface expression possible. Minor to moderate liquefaction surface expression likely with potential for Minor to moderate liquefaction surface expression likely with potential for localised pockets of major expression. localised pockets of major expression.

Darfield EQ Potentially Minor to moderate liquefaction in the silty sand and sand layers between the Minor to moderate liquefaction in the silty sand and sand layers between the Moderate to severe expression of liquefaction in the silty sand and sand Liquefiable Layers groundwater table and surface of the sandy gravel layer. groundwater table and surface of the sandy gravel layer. layers between the groundwater table and surface of the sandy gravel layer. (0.29g M w7.5) Non-liquefiable layers up to 3.5m thick in localised areas.

Crust Thickness 1.5 to 2.7m+ 1.5 to 2.6m 1.5 to 6.4m

Settlement 5-15mm 15-35mm 50 to 80mm

Ground Damage Little to none. Minor to moderate. Minor to moderate surface expression likely.

Christchurch Potentially Minor to moderate liquefaction in the silty sand and sand layers between the Minor to moderate liquefaction in the silty sand and sand layers between the Moderate to severe expression of liquefaction in the silty sand and sand EQ Liquefiable Layers groundwater table and surface of the sandy gravel layer. groundwater table and surface of the sandy gravel layer. layers between the groundwater table and surface of the sandy gravel layer. Non-liquefiable layers up to 3.5m thick in localised areas. (0.38g M w6.2) Crust Thickness 1.5 to 2.7m+ 1.5 to 2.6m 1.5 to 6.4m

Settlement 5-15mm 15-35mm 50 to 80mm

Ground Damage Little to none. Minor to moderate. Minor to moderate liquefaction surface expression likely.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 18

4.4 Technical Category Classification This assessment quantifies the risk of future liquefaction in relation to the technical category classification system outlined in the MBIE (2012) guidelines. This classification system is divided into three technical categories based on the future performance expectations. The categories and corresponding criteria are summarised as follows:

¢ Technical Category 1 (TC1) – Future land damage from liquefaction is unlikely, and ground settlements are expected to be within normally accepted tolerances.

¢ Technical Category 2 (TC2) – Minor to moderate land damage from liquefaction is possible in future large earthquakes.

¢ Technical Category 3 (TC3) – Moderate to significant land damage from liquefaction is possible in future large earthquakes. MBIE (2012) indicates the following settlement and lateral spreading deformation criteria for residential foundations, as summarised in Table 12 below.

Table 12 Liquefaction Deformation Limits and House Foundation Implications

Technical Index Liquefaction Deformation Limits Likely Implication for House Category Foundations (subject to individual Vertical Lateral Spread assessment) SLS ULS SLS ULS TC1 15mm 25mm Nil Nil Standard NZS3604 type foundations with tied slabs TC2 50mm 100mm 50mm 100mm MBIE enhanced foundation solutions TC3 >50mm >100mm >50mm >100mm Site specific foundation solution

Due to the significant variation of ground subsoil profiles across the site, the Technical Category Classification assessment is developed for each geological zone separate as detailed below.

Geological Zones 1 and 2 The calculated settlements from CPTs conducted in Geological Zones 1 and 2 (see Figure 5 in Appendix A) are consistent with a TC2 classification, with the exception of CPT101 and CPT203 where low settlements are calculated which are consistent with a TC1 classification. Based on the shallow liquefiable layers encountered in Zones 1 and 2, and the relatively high liquefaction severity number (LSN) calculated (minor ground damage expected in SLS-b and ULS design earthquake), and minor to moderate surface expression during the recent earthquakes shallow liquefaction is likely to have direct interaction with building foundations. Despite TC1 levels of settlement calculated in CPT101 and CPT203, there is a risk of punching bearing failure of foundations into the underlying liquefied soil through the thin crust with potential differential settlements across building platforms. Therefore, we consider that a TC2 classification is appropriate across Zones 1 and 2.

Geological Zone 3 Within Geological Zone 3, the majority of CPT calculated settlements are consistent with a TC2 classification, with the exception of five tests (CPT108, CPT109, CPT212, CPT301 and CPT308) in the south-eastern corner of the site and one further test (CPT210). In addition to the calculated settlements in Zone 3, we have considered the following in our classification of technical category:

¢ The overarching intent of a TC2 Classification of Minor to moderate land damage from liquefaction is possible in future large earthquakes .

¢ The actual site performance and a lack of any significant observed damage in previous large seismic events, including both the Darfield and Canterbury Earthquakes, both of which are much greater than an SLS event and are close to ULS events, i.e. two large earthquakes.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 19

¢ No expression of ground damage in a SLS intensity earthquake and minor to moderate expressions of ground damage in an ULS intensity earthquake, in accordance with methods of Ishihara and LSN.

¢ When accounting for the additional 0.5m average thickness of engineered fill for stormwater control purposes there will be a non-liquefiable crust across the site of at least two metres and often greater than 3m in an ULS earthquake scenario and typically over 3.5m in a SLS earthquake scenario. This thickness of crust is expected to significantly reduce the effects of deeper liquefaction.

¢ Calculated ULS settlements which are typically less than the limit for TC2 classification.

¢ Calculated SLS settlements that typically straddle the upper limit for TC2 classification. However, with the presence of the greater than 3m thick crust and highly lenticular and interbedded soil profile ground surface settlement from a SLS earthquake event is expected to be significantly less than that calculated and hence within TC2 limits.

¢ The acknowledged inaccuracies and overprediction of liquefaction effects of the prescribed liquefaction analysis in evaluating liquefaction susceptibility in highly lenticular and interbedded soils. It is noted that crust thickness within Zone 3 generally thins at the south-eastern corner, in addition to the increase in calculated settlements. Therefore, considering the actual land performance during large earthquakes, calculated liquefaction susceptibility and inaccuracies and conservatism of the assessment methodologies we consider the majority of Geological Zone 3 to be TC2 classification, with the south-eastern area likely to perform equivalent to a TC3 classification.

Summary Therefore, based on the above, we consider:

¢ Geological Zones 1 and 2, in addition to the majority of Geological Zone 3 are likely to perform equivalent to a MBIE TC2 classification.

¢ The southwest corner of Geological Zone 3 is likely to perform equivalent to a MBIE TC3 classification, but ground can be modified during subdivision development to meet TC2 level performance. These areas can be seen in Figure 7 of Appendix A.

4.5 Liquefaction Mitigation

4.5.1 General We consider that parts of the site in its current assessed state are susceptible to varying degrees of seismically induced liquefaction in a future major seismic event. In terms of liquefaction hazard mitigation at this site, and considering the proposed site layout and development, there are two basic approaches available as follows:

1. Building Strengthening Structurally design the building to accommodate the effects of liquefaction. Examples of this include using raft or piled foundations. These methods do not remove the liquefaction hazard but reinforce the structure in such a way that it maintains stability during a liquefaction event. This approach is recommended in the TC2 equivalent area. This approach could potentially be used in TC3 equivalent areas. However, due to the disproportional detrimental effects liquefaction can have on residential dwellings is not recommended here.

2. Ground Improvement Improve the soil at the site so that it is less susceptible to seismically induced liquefaction. This general approach can be divided into three categories:

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 20

a) Densify the soil so that soil grain skeleton will not collapse under earthquake loading. Examples of this include compaction and replacement (refilling with material which will not liquefy or loose strength), creation of a densified and strengthened capping/crust layer. b) Soil reinforcement. Examples include stone columns, driven piles to densify and stiffen the soil, deep soil mixing, soil cement columns etc. c) Allow dissipation of excess pore water pressure so that liquefaction is reduced. Examples of this include installation of drains, drainage blankets, and or stone columns. Ground improvement is recommended in the TC3 areas to improve the expected performance during a major seismic event to that of an equivalent level of TC2.

The recommended approach for liquefaction mitigation in each Technical Category classification zone is discussed below.

4.5.2 Technical Category 2 Area This section provides generic foundation advice for the wider subdivision development. It does not constitute detailed design of foundations, and additional investigations will be required at the building consent stage for each house to determine the appropriate foundations and to support a building consent application. It is considered that the site in its current assessed state is consistent with a MBIE TC2 classification. The foundation recommendations are therefore specific to TC2. Land with the deformation characteristics of TC2 does not meet the definition of ‘Good Ground’ as per the New Zealand Standards (NZS3604 ‘Timber Framed Buildings’ and NZS4229 ‘ Concrete Masonry Buildings not requiring Specific Engineering Design’ ) without modification to the standard foundation system as described below. The generic foundation types in these documents are not appropriate due to their potential for damage in liquefaction events. The risk of building damage due to liquefaction in TC2 land can be mitigated by providing strengthened foundations, which reduce the differential settlement of the building and are designed to be re-levellable following a major earthquake. There are a range of standard foundation types available for TC2 land which are presented in the MBIE Guidelines and include typical waffle-slab type foundations, among other foundation solutions. Although it is not an explicit consent requirement, we would recommend that lightweight cladding and roofing materials are used on all dwellings in TC2 areas, as reducing the dwelling mass will lead to reduced foundation movements and associated building damage in future large earthquakes.

4.5.3 Technical Category 3 Area We understand that at this stage GW Cashmere Ltd are intending to progressively develop the entire site for residential dwellings and associated infrastructure. When the southern part of the site is developed appropriate liquefaction mitigation measures will need to be implemented. For ‘green field’ TC3 land MBIE Guidelines recommend that these areas are not developed without appropriate liquefaction mitigation measures being implemented. Ideally this would include improving the expected ground performance to a TC2 equivalent level. Based upon the currently available geotechnical information, the TC3 areas of the site are geotechnically suitable for area wide ground improvement to achieve a TC2 equivalent performance. At this stage the ground improvement would most likely take the form of a strengthened crust which would result in seismic performance equivalent to TC2 and allow the use of TC2 foundation systems. It is recommended that this take the form of a densified and strengthened continuous capping layer equivalent to 2m thickness of densely compacted gravel fill or basely reinforced recompacted site won fill such as those shown in Section 15 of the MBIE Guidelines. During detailed subdivision design this capping layer can optimised and potentially thinned by using a combination of geogrid reinforced gravel and recompacted site won fill to lift the base of the excavation above the ground water table. The geotechnical investigation and design work associated with this should be undertaken at the detailed subdivision design stage of the residential development. A potential alternative approach could be to develop the land and maintain its TC3 classification. If this was to be done then significantly more robust TC3 house foundations would be required. These foundations

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 21 could take the form of robust surface structures. Due to the depth to a suitable pile bearing layer deep piles are not considered a practicable foundation option at this stage. This approach would likely result in restrictions on house size/number of stories; and cladding and roofing weights etc. in order to meet the requirements of the MBIE Guidelines and hence the New Zealand Building Code. As noted in the MBIE Guidelines “It is strongly recommended that residential lots in new subdivisions meet the performance criteria specified for TC1 or TC2” In this southern area consideration will also need to be given towards the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction on Council vested infrastructure (roading, pipes, sewers etc.). Seismic effects on Council infrastructure should be assessed as part of the detailed subdivision planning and design and account for the effects of any potential ground improvement works.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 22

5 Assessment Against RMA Section 106

Section 106 of the Resource Management Act (RMA) (2017) states inter alia

Consent authority may refuse subdivision consent in certain circumstances 1) A consent authority may refuse to grant a subdivision consent, or may grant a subdivision consent subject to conditions, if it considers that— a) there is a significant risk from natural hazards; or b) Repealed c) sufficient provision has not been made for legal and physical access to each allotment to be created by the subdivision. 1A) For the purpose of subsection (1) (a), an assessment of the risk from natural hazards requires a combined assessment of— a) the likelihood of natural hazards occurring (whether individually or in combination); and b) the material damage to land in respect of which the consent is sought, other land, or structures that would result from natural hazards; and c) any likely subsequent use of the land in respect of which the consent is sought that would accelerate, worsen, or result in material damage of the kind referred to in paragraph (b). 2) Conditions under subsection (1) must be— a) for the purposes of avoiding, remedying, or mitigating the effects referred to in subsection (1); and b) of a type that could be imposed under section 108.

A risk assessment approach has been undertaken on the significant geotechnical hazards that may affect the site, which is presented in Appendix K. Based on this assessment we consider that at the site there are no significant geotechnical hazards other than the potential for earthquake induced soil liquefaction of varying degrees. However, provided that the geotechnical recommendations provided within this report are followed, and the appropriate engineering measures are implemented, then we consider that the development is unlikely to be affected by significant geotechnical hazards nor will the development worsen, accelerate or result in material damage. Therefore, from a geotechnical perspective we consider that the residential subdivision development can proceed.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 23

6 References

Boulanger and Idriss, 2014. CPT and SPT based liquefaction triggering procedures. Report no UCD/CGM- 14/01, released April 2014. Boulanger, Moug, Munter, Price and DeJong, 2016. Evaluating liquefaction and lateral spreading in interbedded sand silt, and clay deposits using the cone penetrometer. Geotechnical and Geophysical Site Characterisation 5. Australian Geomechanics Society, Sydney, Australia. Bowen and Jacka, 2013. Liquefaction induced ground damage in the Canterbury earthquakes: predictions vs. reality. Proc. 19th NZGS Geotechnical Symposium Bradley and Hughes, 2012. Conditional Peak Ground Accelerations in the Canterbury Earthquakes for Conventional Liquefaction Assessment. Technical Report for the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, April 2012. 22p. DBH, 2012. Christchurch Ground Improvement Trials. Report prepared for the Department of Building and Housing by Tonkin & Taylor Ltd. March 2012. ECan, 2013. http://canterburymaps.govt.nz/Viewer/#webmap=0c3ca2ccfe1145c5849dc39864590d0b Accessed 29 April 2018. Forsyth and Barrel, (compliers), 2008. Geology of the Christchurch area. Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences, 1:25,000 geological map 16. 1 sheet + 87p. Lower Hutt, New Zealand. GNS, 2018. Active Fault Database. Retrieved 3 May 2018 from http://data.gns.cri.nz/af/ Idriss and Boulanger, 2008. Soil liquefaction during earthquakes. EERI monograph MNO12. Earthquake Engineering Institute, Oakland, California, USA. Ishihara, 1985. Stability of natural deposits during earthquakes, Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, San Francisco, 12-16 August 1985 Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, 2012. Revised issue of Repairing and rebuilding houses affected by the Canterbury earthquakes. Originally released December 2012, but including updates to April 2015. Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, Wellington, New Zealand. New Zealand Geotechnical Database (NZGD), 2018. Retrieved 29 April 2018 from https://www.nzgd.org.nz Rhodes and Cubrinovski, 2018. Liquefaction evaluation in stratified soils. NZSEE Conference proceeding, 2018. Tonkin and Taylor Ltd, 2013. Liquefaction Vulnerability Study. Prepared for the Earthquake Commission, T&T Ref. 52020.0200/v1.0. Zhang, Robertson, and Brachman, 2002. Estimating liquefaction-induced ground settlements from CPT for level ground. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 39, pp.1168 – 1180.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 24

7 Limitations

We have prepared this report in accordance with the brief as provided. The contents of the report are for the sole use of the Client and no responsibility or liability will be accepted to any third party. Data or opinions contained within the report may not be used in other contexts or for any other purposes without our prior review and agreement. The recommendations in this report are based on data collected at specific locations and by using appropriate investigation methods with limited site coverage. Only a finite amount of information has been collected to meet the specific financial and technical requirements of the Client’s brief and this report does not purport to completely describe all the site characteristics and properties. The nature and continuity of the ground between test locations has been inferred using experience and judgment and it must be appreciated that actual conditions could vary from the assumed model. Subsurface conditions relevant to construction works should be assessed by contractors who can make their own interpretation of the factual data provided. They should perform any additional tests as necessary for their own purposes. Subsurface conditions, such as groundwater levels, can change over time. This should be borne in mind, particularly if the report is used after a protracted delay. This report is not to be reproduced either wholly or in part without our prior written permission.

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 25

Appendix A – Figures

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 26 Approximate Site Location

CLIENT PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ALL DIMENSIONS APPROXIMATE ONLY SCALE SIZE NTS A3 TITLE REGIONAL LOCATION PLAN BY FIGURE FIGURE 1 K. FOOTE BACKGROUND IMAGE SOURCED FROM LINZ CROWN APPROVED REFERENCE COPYRIGHT RESERVED KENNEDYS BUSH ROAD - QUARRY D. MAHONEY PROJECT DATE PROJECT WBS TYPE DISC NUMBER REV FIGURE No. VIEW 4 MAY 2018 253852 002 FIG GEO 01 1 Approximate Site Boundary

CLIENT PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ALL DIMENSIONS APPROXIMATE ONLY SCALE SIZE NTS A3 TITLE SITE LOCATION PLAN BY FIGURE FIGURE 2 K. FOOTE APPROVED REFERENCE BACKGROUND IMAGE SOURCED FROM CANTERBURY MAPS KENNEDYS BUSH ROAD - QUARRY D. MAHONEY PROJECT DATE PROJECT WBS TYPE DISC NUMBER REV FIGURE No. VIEW 4 MAY 2018 253852 002 FIG GEO 02 1 Legend CPTu102 CPT201

CPTu101 CPTu101 2016 Cone CPT202 Penetrometer Test CPT203 CPT201 2017 Cone Penetrometer Test CPT205 CPT204 CPTu301 2018 Cone Penetrometer Test

CPTu104 BH01 2018 Geotechnical CPT206 Borehole M36/1284 CPT207 CPTu307 M36/0000 ECAN Borehole CPTu306 CPT208

CPTu103 CPT209

CPTu305 CPTu304 CPTu106

CPT210 CPTu303 CPT212 BH01 CPTu105

BH02 CPTu302 CPTu308 CPT211

CPTu109

CPTu301 CPTu107 CPTu108

M36/4575 M36/5237

CLIENT PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ALL DIMENSIONS APPROXIMATE ONLY SCALE SIZE GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION NTS A3 TITLE BY LOCATIONS FIGURE FIGURE 3 K. FOOTE APPROVED REFERENCE BACKGROUND IMAGE PROVIDED BY GILLMAN WHEELANS KENNEDYS BUSH ROAD - QUARRY D. MAHONEY PROJECT DATE PROJECT WBS TYPE DISC NUMBER REV FIGURE No. VIEW 4 MAY 2018 253852 002 FIG GEO 03 1 Legend

147.1m MASW Sounding

CLIENT PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ALL DIMENSIONS APPROXIMATE ONLY SCALE SIZE NTS A3 TITLE MASW GROUND MODEL BY FIGURE FIGURE 4 K. FOOTE BACKGROUND IMAGE SOURCED FROM SOUTHERN APPROVED REFERENCE GEOPHYSICAL KENNEDYS BUSH ROAD - QUARRY D. MAHONEY PROJECT DATE PROJECT WBS TYPE DISC NUMBER REV FIGURE No. VIEW 4 MAY 2018 253852 002 FIG GEO 04 1 Legend

Zone 1 ? Inferred boundary between geotechnical zones

? ?

Zone 2

Zone 3

CLIENT PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ALL DIMENSIONS APPROXIMATE ONLY SCALE SIZE NTS A3 TITLE GEOTECHNICAL ZONE BOUNDARIES BY FIGURE FIGURE 5 K. FOOTE APPROVED REFERENCE BACKGROUND IMAGE PROVIDED BY GILLMAN WHEELANS KENNEDYS BUSH ROAD - QUARRY D. MAHONEY PROJECT DATE PROJECT WBS TYPE DISC NUMBER REV FIGURE No. VIEW 4 MAY 2018 253852 002 FIG GEO 05 1 Legend CPT201 CPTu102 0/1/3.2+/N 0/1/2.7+/N 15/7/2.3/N CPTu101 15/7/1.5/N CPTu101 Cone Penetrometer Test 0/1/3.6+/N 5/4/1.6/N SLS Settlement/LSN/Crust Thickness/Expression CPT203 CPT202 0/0/2.7+/N SLS Settlement/LSN/Crust Thickness/Expression 0/1/3.3+/N 0/0/2.7+/N 15/7/1.5/N

CPT204 CPT205 0/0/3.9+/N 10/4/2.2/N 15/7/2.0/N 40/13/2.2/Y

CPTu104 CPT206 35/6/3.5/N 60/12/3.4/Y 40/11/2.7/N CPT207 75/20/1.7/Y 5/1/4.4+/N CPT307 25/11/1.5/N CPT306 27/5/3.1/N CPT208 55/14/2.4/Y SLS Settlement/LSN/Crust Thickness/Expression CPTu103 55/13/4.3/N 25/5/7.8/N 75/19/2.7/Y SLS Settlement/LSN/Crust Thickness/Expression 5/3/4.2+/N CPT209 65/16/2.5/Y 15/5/2.6/N 0/1/5.1+/N 20/8/1.5/N CPT305 45/9/3.4/N CPT304 CPTu106 70/17/2.7/Y 35/6/3.6/N 35/7/7.1/N 60/12/1.8/Y CPT210 70/18/1.7/N CPT212 55/10/3.5/N CPT303 70/14/2.1/N 80/18/2.1/N 25/5/7.2/N 75/15/2.1/N CPTu105 55/13/1.5/N 50/10/3.6/N 75/17/2.7/Y CPT302 CPT308 CPT211 55/9/6.4/N 30/5/4.8/N 55/9/6.4/N 50/13/1.5/N 50/10/3.4/N CPTu109 85/18/2.1/N 30/5/5.9/N 55/13/1.5/Y CPT301 65/12/1.8/N CPTu107 75/17/1.5/N 30/6/7.2/N CPTu108 60/15/1.7/N 60/11/2.2/N 80/18/1.5/Y

CLIENT PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ALL DIMENSIONS APPROXIMATE ONLY SCALE SIZE NTS A3 TITLE LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY BY FIGURE FIGURE 6 K. FOOTE APPROVED REFERENCE BACKGROUND IMAGE PROVIDED BY GILLMAN WHEELANS KENNEDYS BUSH ROAD - QUARRY D. MAHONEY PROJECT DATE PROJECT WBS TYPE DISC NUMBER REV FIGURE No. VIEW 4 MAY 2018 253852 002 FIG GEO 06 1 Legend

? InferredSite Boundary boundary between geotechnical TC2zones Equivalent

TC3 Equivalent

CLIENT PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ALL DIMENSIONS APPROXIMATE ONLY SCALE SIZE NTS A3 TITLE TECHNICAL CATEGORY ZONES BY FIGURE FIGURE 7 K. FOOTE APPROVED REFERENCE BACKGROUND IMAGE SOURCED FROM CANTERBURY MAPS KENNEDYS BUSH ROAD - QUARRY D. MAHONEY PROJECT DATE PROJECT WBS TYPE DISC NUMBER REV FIGURE No. VIEW 4 MAY 2018 253852 002 FIG GEO 07 1

Appendix B – ECAN and NZGD Investigation Logs

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 27 Riley Consultants 395 Madras Street Christchurch 8013 Tel: 03 379 4402 BORE HOLE LOG Fax: 03 379 4403 Project: Location: Hole position: No.: 21 Larsens Road Halswell, Christchurch Refer to site plan Job No.: Start Date: 24-01-13 Ground Level (m LINZ): Co-Ordinates (NZTM2000): BH1 12880/32 Finish Date: 25-01-13 12.80 E 1,565,232.1 N 5,173,307.2 Client: Hole Depth: Sheet: MWH Mainzeal 18.70 m 1 of 3

Geological Interpretation Tests Samples / Sample Description Run Type (refer to separate Geotechnical and Geological Legend Backfill / Backfill

Information sheet for further information) Depth (m) Piezometer Fluid & Water Fluid & Elevation (m LINZ) Elevation

0.00 Fine to coarse GRAVEL with minor sand and trace brick fragments; brownish +12.55 grey. Gravel, subrounded to angular, unweathered, greywacke sandstone; sand, fine. (FILL)

Interbedded thin to very thick bedded, very loose to dense SAND, SILT and GRAVEL mixtures, interbedded with organics. (YALDHURST MEMBER,

HAND DUG HAND SPRINGSTON FORMATION) 1

0.25m - 1.55m Fine SAND with some silt and trace organics; brownish grey. Organics, fibrous.

1.50 1.55m - 1.75m SILT with minor sand and trace organics; grey. Soft to firm (when SPT 1.55 m moist); slightly dilatant; low plasticity; sand, fine; organics, fibrous. 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0; - Rec: 450 mm 1.75m - 1.90m Silty fine SAND with trace organics; grey. Very loose; organics, N = 0 fibrous. 2 1.90m - 2.30m Sandy SILT; grey. Soft to firm (when moist); dilatant; non-plastic to low plasticity; sand, fine. +10.50

Sandy fine to coarse GRAVEL with trace silt; grey. Dense; gravel, subrounded to angular, unweathered, greywacke sandstone; sand, fine to coarse.

2.90 2.90m - 3.40m CORE LOSS 3 SPT 2.95 m 6, 6, 11, 9, 9, - SOLID CONE 9; Nc = 38

4.45 4.45m - 5.10m CORE LOSS SPT 4.50 m 4.50m Grades to medium dense. 6, 8, 7, 7, 8, 6; - SOLID CONE Nc = 28 DP 5

6 6.05 6.05m - 6.40m CORE LOSS SPT 6.10 m 6.10m Grades to dense. 10, 10, 10, 10, - SOLID CONE 10, 12; Nc = 42

7.45 7.45m - 8.15m CORE LOSS SPT 7.50 m 7.50m Grades to medium dense to loose. 4, 5, 3, 2, 2, 3; - SOLID CONE Nc = 10

Explanations: Remarks Soil Types: Backfill: 1. Ground levels and coordinates approximate - subject to survey confirmation. Water Strike (1st, 2nd ...) 2. Casing upstanding ~ 0.15 m during drilling; run lengths range from 1.40 m - 1.60 m. SPT tests CLAY TOPSOIL Bentonite commence 70 mm below end of run depths, rounded to 0.05m. Water Rise (1st, 2nd ...) and 3. SPT hammer energy ratio 85.4 %. All SPT tests undertaken with split spoon unless stated as solid Rise Time (minutes) SILT PEAT Grout cone. Rec = recovered sample length (max 450 mm). 4. Heave minimal unless otherwise stated. 5. Hole diameter 70 mm; core diameter 50 mm. Small Disturbed Sample (SDS) SAND FILL Drill arisings or collapsed hole 6. Moisture content affected by water flushed drill method. Large Disturbed Sample (LDS) 7. CORE LOSS attributed to one or more of compression, outflow of material during extraction, GRAVEL Filter material blockage or damage of liner. Standard Penetration Test (SPT) 8. Cohesive soil strength based on field description. NO RECOVERY * 9. A driller log for this borehole is also present on the Canterbury Geotechnical Database (ref. 14669).

All dimensions in metres Contractor: Rig/Plant Used: Driller: Logged by: Checked by: Scale 1:50 McMillan Drilling Direct Push Sampler Daniel Berger CD AvD RILEY AGS 3_1 NZ LIB 13.GLB Log RILEY BH 21 LARSENS12880-32 RD.GPJ <> 19/02/2014 15:50 by gINTProduced Professional Riley Consultants 395 Madras Street Christchurch 8013 Tel: 03 379 4402 BORE HOLE LOG Fax: 03 379 4403 Project: Location: Hole position: No.: 21 Larsens Road Halswell, Christchurch Refer to site plan Job No.: Start Date: 24-01-13 Ground Level (m LINZ): Co-Ordinates (NZTM2000): BH1 12880/32 Finish Date: 25-01-13 12.80 E 1,565,232.1 N 5,173,307.2 Client: Hole Depth: Sheet: MWH Mainzeal 18.70 m 2 of 3

Geological Interpretation Tests Samples / Sample Description Run Type (refer to separate Geotechnical and Geological Legend Backfill / Backfill

Information sheet for further information) Depth (m) Piezometer Fluid & Water Fluid & Elevation (m LINZ) Elevation

7.45

8.60m - 8.70m Grades to silty GRAVEL with trace organics; brown. Silt, soft +4.10 (when moist), slightly dilatant, low plasticity; organics, amorphous.

SILT with minor sand; greyish brown. Soft (when moist), slightly dilatant, low 9 9.05 plasticity; sand, fine. SPT 9.10 m 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1; - Rec: 450 mm 8.85m - 8.95m Fine SAND with minor silt; grey. Loose. N = 3 8.95m - 9.30m SILT to sandy SILT; grey. Soft to firm (when moist); dilatant to slightly dilatant; non-plastic to low plasticity; sand, fine. 9.30m - 9.65m Grades to slightly organic SILT with trace sand; brownish grey. Dilatant; low plasticity; organics amorphous. 9.65m - 9.85m Silty fine SAND; grey. Very loose. 9.85m - 12.05m Grades to SAND with trace silt. 10

10.60 10.65m Grades to medium dense. SPT 10.65 m 10.75m Grades to some to minor silt. 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5; - Rec: 450 mm N = 17 11

11.85m Very thin fibrous PEAT lens; brown. 12 12.05 12.05m - 13.05m Sandy SILT; grey. Soft to firm (when moist); dilatant; sand, fine. SPT 12.10 m 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 2; - Rec: 450 mm N = 6 DP

-0.25 13

SILT with some organics; grey speckled black. Soft (when moist); slightly dilatant; low plasticity; organics, fibrous and amorphous.

13.35m - 14.30m Grades to highly organic SILT (greyish brown) interbedded with 13.60 thin to moderately thin PEAT lenses (brownish black). SPT 13.65 m 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1; - Rec: 450 mm N = 2 13.95m Grades to moderately organic SILT with PEAT lenses. 14

14.30m - 15.10m Grades to SILT with minor sand and trace to minor organics; grey. Soft to firm (when moist); dilatant.

15 15.10m - 15.80m Grades to sandy SILT with local trace organics. Organics, 15.20 fibrous. SPT 15.25 m 15.20m Grades to non-plastic. 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0; - Rec: 450 mm N = 0

15.80m - 15.90m Grades to SILT with minor sand. Low plasticity. 15.90m - 16.10m Moderately thin amorphous PEAT lens; brown. 16 16.10m - 16.70m Sandy SILT with trace organics; grey. Firm (when moist); dilatant; low plasticity; sand, fine; organics, amorphous.

Geological Interpretation Tests Samples / Sample Description Run Type (refer to separate Geotechnical and Geological Legend Backfill / Backfill

Information sheet for further information) Depth (m) Piezometer Fluid & Water Fluid & Elevation (m LINZ) Elevation

15.20 -3.90 16.70 SPT 16.75 m Sandy fine to coarse GRAVEL with some to trace silt; grey. Very dense; gravel, 11, 16, 18, 20, - Rec: 270 mm subrounded to angular, unweathered, greywacke sandstone; sand, fine to 17 20, 19; N = 77 coarse. (RICCARTON GRAVEL) DP 17.50m Grades to yellowish grey.

SPT 18.25 m 17, 19, 20, 22, - SOLID CONE 22, 22; SPT -5.90 Nc = 86

EOH @ 18.70 m 19

All dimensions in metres Contractor: Rig/Plant Used: Driller: Logged by: Checked by: Scale 1:50 McMillan Drilling Direct Push Sampler Daniel Berger CD AvD RILEY AGS 3_1 NZ LIB 13.GLB Log RILEY BH 21 LARSENS12880-32 RD.GPJ <> 19/02/2014 15:50 by gINTProduced Professional Project: Darfield 2010 Earthquake - EQC Ground Investigations Page: 1 of 1 CPT-HAL-29 Test Date: 22-Nov-2010 Location: Halswell Operator: Perry Pre-Drill: 0.8m Assumed GWL: 2mBGL Located By: Survey GPS Position: 2475425.8mE 5734827.7mN 13.34mRL Coord. System: NZMG & MSL Other Tests: Comments:

Cone Sleeve Cone Resistance (MPa) Friction Ratio (%) Pore Pressure (kPa) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 100 200 300 0 0

2 2

4 4

6 6

8 8 Depth( m) Depth( 10 10

12 12

14 14

16 16

18 18

20 20 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 100 200 300 Sleeve Friction (kPa)

T+T Ref: 51731.001 Printed: 21/12/2010 4:15 p.m. Template: CPT Graph Template v0.41.xls

Appendix C – Stage 1 CPT Logs

Project number 253852 File 253852 - Kennedys Bush Road - Quarry View Halswell Geotechnical Subdivision Consent Report Rev 1.docx, 2018-05-04 Revision 1 28 Generated with Core-GS by Geroc CONE PENETRATION TEST (CPT) REPORT Location: Printed: Client: 17/10/2016 Christchurch Kennedys Bush Road, Quarry View Aurecon NZ Ltd Generated with Core-GS by Geroc EOH: 3.6m Testing for Geotechnical Engineering, 4th Edition. T 4thEdition. Engineering, Geotechnical for Testing geotechnical soil and design parameters using metho using parameters design and soil geotechnical any of the geotechnical soil and design parameters parameters design and soil geotechnical the of any Notes & Limitations Tip Resistance (MPa)Initial: carefully reviewed by the user. Both McMillan Drill McMillan Both user. the by reviewed carefully Predrill Pore Pressure (KPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Location: Cone AreaRatio: Cone Reference: Data shown on this report has been assessed to prov to assessed been has report this on shown Data review. The user should be fully aware of the techn the of aware fully be should user The review. Client: Name:

Cone Type: 10 Operator: Resistance

20 (MPa) Aurecon NZAurecon Ltd Kennedys BushRoad,Christchurch Quarry View Tip Rig:

I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 100992 Geomil Panther100 -track R. Wyllie 30

40 75.515 -0.0006 0.3909

1 2 RAW DATA CONE PENETRATION TEST Friction

3 Ratio

4 (%) 5 6 7 ing Ltd & Geroc Solutions Ltd do not warranty the c the warranty not do Ltd Solutions Geroc & Ltd ing he interpretations are presented only as a guide fo guide a as only presented are interpretations he

shown and does not assume any liability for any use any for liability any assume not does and shown 8 ds published in P. K. Robertson and K.L. Cabal (201Cabal K.L. and Robertson K. P. in published ds Water Level: 9 iques and limitations of any method used to derive derive to used method any of limitations and iques ide a basic interpretation in terms of Soil Behavio Soil of terms in interpretation basic a ide Collapse:

Final: Final: Final: 0 Predrill: Pressure 200 (kPa) Pore Date:

34.591 -0.0017 0.2089 400

600 2.70 1.60 0.00 11/10/2016

800 Inclination (Degrees) 5

15 Effective Refusal 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 6 5 4 3 2 1 9 8 7 Target Depth: Inclinometer: Scale

1 Hole Depth (m): Gauge: Other: Elevation (m): r geotechnical use, and should be use, geotechnical r 2 orrectness or the applicability of applicability the or orrectness

3 SBT SOIL BEHAVIOUR TYPE

Tip: 4 of the results in any design or design any in results the of (NON-NORMALISED) 0), Guide to Cone Penetration Cone to Guide 0),

ur Type various and Type (SBT) ur 5 data shown in this report. this in shown data 6 7

8 Datum: 9 SBT Description Soil Behaviour Type (SBT) -Robertson etal.1986 Ground 0.00 3.60 (filtered) 4 3 2 1 0 CPT No.: silt &siltyclay Silt mixtures:clayey clay Clays: claytosilty Clay -organicsoil grained Sensitive fine- Undefined Job: Effective Refusal Remarks

Hole Depth (m): 20 ESTIMATED PARAMETERS (%) 40 Dr

60 North (m): East (m): 80 9 8 7 6 5 Sheet 1of CPTu101 50 Grid: Stiff fine-grained sand Stiff sandtoclayey gravelly sand Dense sandto to siltysands Sands: cleansands sand tosandysilt Sand mixtures:silty 16421

100 (kPa)

150 Su

200 NZTM 1565546.00 5173192.00 250 300 350

3.60 10 20 N 60 30 40 Generated with Core-GS by Geroc EOH: 2.66m Testing for Geotechnical Engineering, 4th Edition. T 4thEdition. Engineering, Geotechnical for Testing geotechnical soil and design parameters using metho using parameters design and soil geotechnical any of the geotechnical soil and design parameters parameters design and soil geotechnical the of any Notes & Limitations Tip Resistance (MPa)Initial: carefully reviewed by the user. Both McMillan Drill McMillan Both user. the by reviewed carefully Predrill Pore Pressure (KPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Location: Cone AreaRatio: Cone Reference: Data shown on this report has been assessed to prov to assessed been has report this on shown Data review. The user should be fully aware of the techn the of aware fully be should user The review. Client: Name:

Cone Type: 10 Operator: Resistance

20 (MPa) Aurecon NZAurecon Ltd Kennedys BushRoad,Christchurch Quarry View Tip Rig:

I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 111007 Geomil Panther100 -track R. Wyllie 30

40 -58.865 0.0038 -3.7644

1 2 RAW DATA CONE PENETRATION TEST Friction

3 Ratio

Final: Final: Final: 0 Predrill: Pressure 200 (kPa) Pore Date:

-5.738 0.0049 -3.8124 400

600 2.20 1.30 0.00 11/10/2016

800 Inclination (Degrees) 5

15 Effective Refusal 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 6 5 4 3 2 1 9 8 7 Target Depth: Inclinometer: Scale

1 Hole Depth (m): Gauge: Other: Elevation (m): r geotechnical use, and should be use, geotechnical r 2 orrectness or the applicability of applicability the or orrectness

3 SBT SOIL BEHAVIOUR TYPE

Tip: 4 of the results in any design or design any in results the of (NON-NORMALISED) 0), Guide to Cone Penetration Cone to Guide 0),

ur Type various and Type (SBT) ur 5 data shown in this report. this in shown data 6 7

8 Datum: 9 SBT Description Soil Behaviour Type (SBT) -Robertson etal.1986 Ground 0.00 2.66 (filtered) 4 3 2 1 0 CPT No.: silt &siltyclay Silt mixtures:clayey clay Clays: claytosilty Clay -organicsoil grained Sensitive fine- Undefined Job: Effective Refusal Remarks

Hole Depth (m): 20 ESTIMATED PARAMETERS (%) 40 Dr

60 North (m): East (m): 80 9 8 7 6 5 Sheet 1of CPTu102 50 Grid: Stiff fine-grained sand Stiff sandtoclayey gravelly sand Dense sandto to siltysands Sands: cleansands sand tosandysilt Sand mixtures:silty 16421

100 (kPa)

150 Su

200 NZTM 1565669.00 5173202.00 250 300 350

2.66 10 20 N 60 30 40 Generated with Core-GS by Geroc EOH: 4.2m Testing for Geotechnical Engineering, 4th Edition. T 4thEdition. Engineering, Geotechnical for Testing geotechnical soil and design parameters using metho using parameters design and soil geotechnical any of the geotechnical soil and design parameters parameters design and soil geotechnical the of any Notes & Limitations Tip Resistance (MPa)Initial: carefully reviewed by the user. Both McMillan Drill McMillan Both user. the by reviewed carefully Predrill Pore Pressure (KPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Location: Cone AreaRatio: Cone Reference: Data shown on this report has been assessed to prov to assessed been has report this on shown Data review. The user should be fully aware of the techn the of aware fully be should user The review. Client: Name:

Cone Type: 10 Operator: Resistance

20 (MPa) Aurecon NZAurecon Ltd Kennedys BushRoad,Christchurch Quarry View Tip Rig:

I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 111007 Geomil Panther100 -track R. Wyllie 30

40 -6.185 0.0041 -3.7688

1 2 RAW DATA CONE PENETRATION TEST Friction

3 Ratio

Final: Final: Final: 0 Predrill: Pressure 200 (kPa) Pore Date:

-4.537 0.0047 -3.7761 400

600 3.10 1.60 0.00 11/10/2016

800 Inclination (Degrees) 5

15 Effective Refusal 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 6 5 4 3 2 1 9 8 7 Target Depth: Inclinometer: Scale

1 Hole Depth (m): Gauge: Other: Elevation (m): r geotechnical use, and should be use, geotechnical r 2 orrectness or the applicability of applicability the or orrectness

3 SBT SOIL BEHAVIOUR TYPE

Tip: 4 of the results in any design or design any in results the of (NON-NORMALISED) 0), Guide to Cone Penetration Cone to Guide 0),

ur Type various and Type (SBT) ur 5 data shown in this report. this in shown data 6 7

8 Datum: 9 to sandysilt Sand mixtures:siltysand SBT Description Soil Behaviour Type (SBT) -Robertson etal.1986 Ground 0.00 4.20 (filtered) 4 3 2 1 0 CPT No.: silt &siltyclay Silt mixtures:clayey clay Clays: claytosilty Clay -organicsoil grained Sensitive fine- Undefined Job: Effective Refusal Remarks

Hole Depth (m): 20 ESTIMATED PARAMETERS (%) 40 Dr

60 North (m): East (m): 80 9 8 7 6 5 Sheet 1of CPTu103 50 Grid: Stiff fine-grained sand Stiff sandtoclayey gravelly sand Dense sandto to siltysands Sands: cleansands sand tosandysilt Sand mixtures:silty 16421

100 (kPa)

150 Su

200 NZTM 1565488.00 5173061.00 250 300 350

4.20 10 20 N 60 30 40 Generated with Core-GS by Geroc EOH: 8.7m Testing for Geotechnical Engineering, 4th Edition. T 4thEdition. Engineering, Geotechnical for Testing geotechnical soil and design parameters using metho using parameters design and soil geotechnical any of the geotechnical soil and design parameters parameters design and soil geotechnical the of any Notes & Limitations Tip Resistance (MPa)Initial: carefully reviewed by the user. Both McMillan Drill McMillan Both user. the by reviewed carefully Predrill Pore Pressure (KPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Location: Cone AreaRatio: Cone Reference: Data shown on this report has been assessed to prov to assessed been has report this on shown Data review. The user should be fully aware of the techn the of aware fully be should user The review. Client: Name:

Cone Type: 10 Operator: Resistance

20 (MPa) Aurecon NZAurecon Ltd Kennedys BushRoad,Christchurch Quarry View Tip Rig:

I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 100992 Geomil Panther100 -track R. Wyllie 30

40 20.809 -0.0016 0.2976

1 2 RAW DATA CONE PENETRATION TEST Friction

3 Ratio

Final: Final: Final: 0 Predrill: Pressure 200 (kPa) Pore Date:

72.701 -0.0011 0.3817 400

600 1.30 - 0.00 11/10/2016

800 Inclination (Degrees) 5

15 Effective Refusal 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 6 5 4 3 2 1 9 8 7 Target Depth: Inclinometer: Scale

1 Hole Depth (m): Gauge: Other: Elevation (m): r geotechnical use, and should be use, geotechnical r 2 orrectness or the applicability of applicability the or orrectness

3 SBT SOIL BEHAVIOUR TYPE

Tip: 4 of the results in any design or design any in results the of (NON-NORMALISED) 0), Guide to Cone Penetration Cone to Guide 0),

ur Type various and Type (SBT) ur 5 data shown in this report. this in shown data 6 7

8 Datum: 9 Clays: claytosilty to sandysilt Sand mixtures:siltysand SBT Description Soil Behaviour Type (SBT) -Robertson etal.1986 Ground 0.00 8.70 (filtered) 4 3 2 1 0 CPT No.: silt &siltyclay Silt mixtures:clayey clay Clays: claytosilty Clay -organicsoil grained Sensitive fine- Undefined Job: Effective Refusal Remarks

Hole Depth (m): 20 ESTIMATED PARAMETERS (%) 40 Dr

60 North (m): East (m): 80 9 8 7 6 5 Sheet 1of CPTu104 50 Grid: Stiff fine-grained sand Stiff sandtoclayey gravelly sand Dense sandto to siltysands Sands: cleansands sand tosandysilt Sand mixtures:silty 16421

100 (kPa)

150 Su

200 NZTM 1565637.00 5173116.00 250 300 350

8.70 10 20 N 60 30 40 Generated with Core-GS by Geroc EOH: 8.84m Testing for Geotechnical Engineering, 4th Edition. T 4thEdition. Engineering, Geotechnical for Testing geotechnical soil and design parameters using metho using parameters design and soil geotechnical any of the geotechnical soil and design parameters parameters design and soil geotechnical the of any Notes & Limitations Tip Resistance (MPa)Initial: carefully reviewed by the user. Both McMillan Drill McMillan Both user. the by reviewed carefully Predrill Pore Pressure (KPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Location: Cone AreaRatio: Cone Reference: Data shown on this report has been assessed to prov to assessed been has report this on shown Data review. The user should be fully aware of the techn the of aware fully be should user The review. Client: Name:

Cone Type: 10 Operator: Resistance

20 (MPa) Aurecon NZAurecon Ltd Kennedys BushRoad,Christchurch Quarry View Tip Rig:

I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 100992 Geomil Panther100 -track R. Wyllie 30

40 -6.861 0.0007 0.3064

1 2 RAW DATA CONE PENETRATION TEST Friction

3 Ratio

Final: Final: Final: 0 Predrill: Pressure 200 (kPa) Pore Date:

-6.985 -0.0005 0.2416 400

600 2.60 2.10 0.00 11/10/2016

800 Inclination (Degrees) 5

15 Effective Refusal 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 6 5 4 3 2 1 9 8 7 Target Depth: Inclinometer: Scale

1 Hole Depth (m): Gauge: Other: Elevation (m): r geotechnical use, and should be use, geotechnical r 2 orrectness or the applicability of applicability the or orrectness

3 SBT SOIL BEHAVIOUR TYPE

Tip: 4 of the results in any design or design any in results the of (NON-NORMALISED) 0), Guide to Cone Penetration Cone to Guide 0),

ur Type various and Type (SBT) ur 5 data shown in this report. this in shown data 6 7

8 Datum: 9 to sandysilt Sand mixtures:siltysand SBT Description Soil Behaviour Type (SBT) -Robertson etal.1986 Ground 0.00 8.84 (filtered) 4 3 2 1 0 CPT No.: silt &siltyclay Silt mixtures:clayey clay Clays: claytosilty Clay -organicsoil grained Sensitive fine- Undefined Job: Effective Refusal Remarks

Hole Depth (m): 20 ESTIMATED PARAMETERS (%) 40 Dr

60 North (m): East (m): 80 9 8 7 6 5 Sheet 1of CPTu105 50 Grid: Stiff fine-grained sand Stiff sandtoclayey gravelly sand Dense sandto to siltysands Sands: cleansands sand tosandysilt Sand mixtures:silty 16421

100 (kPa)

150 Su

200 NZTM 1565564.00 5173030.00 250 300 350

8.84 10 20 N 60 30 40 Generated with Core-GS by Geroc EOH: 10.32m Testing for Geotechnical Engineering, 4th Edition. T 4thEdition. Engineering, Geotechnical for Testing geotechnical soil and design parameters using metho using parameters design and soil geotechnical any of the geotechnical soil and design parameters parameters design and soil geotechnical the of any Notes & Limitations Tip Resistance (MPa)Initial: carefully reviewed by the user. Both McMillan Drill McMillan Both user. the by reviewed carefully Predrill Pore Pressure (KPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Location: Cone AreaRatio: Cone Reference: Data shown on this report has been assessed to prov to assessed been has report this on shown Data review. The user should be fully aware of the techn the of aware fully be should user The review. Client: Name:

Cone Type: 10 Operator: Resistance

20 (MPa) Aurecon NZAurecon Ltd Kennedys BushRoad,Christchurch Quarry View Tip Rig:

I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 111007 Geomil Panther100 -track R. Wyllie 30

40 -3.539 0.0047 -3.7782

1 2 RAW DATA CONE PENETRATION TEST Friction

3 Ratio

Final: Final: Final: 0 Predrill: Pressure 200 (kPa) Pore Date:

-4.972 0.0043 -3.7654 400

600 2.40 1.75 0.00 11/10/2016

800 Inclination (Degrees) 5

15 Effective Refusal 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 6 5 4 3 2 1 9 8 7 Target Depth: Inclinometer: Scale

1 Hole Depth (m): Gauge: Other: Elevation (m): r geotechnical use, and should be use, geotechnical r 2 orrectness or the applicability of applicability the or orrectness

3 SBT SOIL BEHAVIOUR TYPE

Tip: 4 of the results in any design or design any in results the of (NON-NORMALISED) 0), Guide to Cone Penetration Cone to Guide 0),

ur Type various and Type (SBT) ur 5 data shown in this report. this in shown data 6 7

8 Datum: 9 Clays: claytosilty silty sands Sands: cleansandsto to sandysilt Sand mixtures:siltysand to sandysilt Sand mixtures:siltysand SBT Description Soil Behaviour Type (SBT) -Robertson etal.1986 Ground 0.00 10.32 (filtered) 4 3 2 1 0 CPT No.: silt &siltyclay Silt mixtures:clayey clay Clays: claytosilty Clay -organicsoil grained Sensitive fine- Undefined Job: Effective Refusal Remarks

Hole Depth (m): 20 ESTIMATED PARAMETERS (%) 40 Dr

60 North (m): East (m): 80 9 8 7 6 5 Sheet 1of CPTu106 50 Grid: Stiff fine-grained sand Stiff sandtoclayey gravelly sand Dense sandto to siltysands Sands: cleansands sand tosandysilt Sand mixtures:silty 16421

100 (kPa)

150 Su

200 NZTM 1565692.00 5173050.00 250 300 350 10.32 10 20 N 60 30 40 Generated with Core-GS by Geroc EOH: 9.1m Testing for Geotechnical Engineering, 4th Edition. T 4thEdition. Engineering, Geotechnical for Testing geotechnical soil and design parameters using metho using parameters design and soil geotechnical any of the geotechnical soil and design parameters parameters design and soil geotechnical the of any Notes & Limitations Tip Resistance (MPa)Initial: carefully reviewed by the user. Both McMillan Drill McMillan Both user. the by reviewed carefully Predrill Pore Pressure (KPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Location: Cone AreaRatio: Cone Reference: Data shown on this report has been assessed to prov to assessed been has report this on shown Data review. The user should be fully aware of the techn the of aware fully be should user The review. Client: Name:

Cone Type: 10 Operator: Resistance

20 (MPa) Aurecon NZAurecon Ltd Kennedys BushRoad,Christchurch Quarry View Tip Rig:

I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 081034 Geomil Panther100 -track R. Wyllie 30

40 -1.695 -0.004 -0.1611

1 2 RAW DATA CONE PENETRATION TEST Friction

3 Ratio

Final: Final: Final: 0 Predrill: Pressure 200 (kPa) Pore Date:

0.203 -0.0064 -0.1079 400

600 1.20 - 0.00 10/10/2016

800 Inclination (Degrees) 5

15 Effective Refusal 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 6 5 4 3 2 1 9 8 7 Target Depth: Inclinometer: Scale

1 Hole Depth (m): Gauge: Other: Elevation (m): r geotechnical use, and should be use, geotechnical r 2 orrectness or the applicability of applicability the or orrectness

3 SBT SOIL BEHAVIOUR TYPE

Tip: 4 of the results in any design or design any in results the of (NON-NORMALISED) 0), Guide to Cone Penetration Cone to Guide 0),

ur Type various and Type (SBT) ur 5 data shown in this report. this in shown data 6 7

8 Datum: 9 Clays: claytosilty Clays: claytosilty to sandysilt Sand mixtures:siltysand silty sands Sands: cleansandsto SBT Description Soil Behaviour Type (SBT) -Robertson etal.1986 Ground 0.00 9.10 (filtered) 4 3 2 1 0 CPT No.: silt &siltyclay Silt mixtures:clayey clay Clays: claytosilty Clay -organicsoil grained Sensitive fine- Undefined Job: Effective Refusal Remarks

Hole Depth (m): 20 ESTIMATED PARAMETERS (%) 40 Dr

60 North (m): East (m): 80 9 8 7 6 5 Sheet 1of CPTu107 50 Grid: Stiff fine-grained sand Stiff sandtoclayey gravelly sand Dense sandto to siltysands Sands: cleansands sand tosandysilt Sand mixtures:silty 16421

100 (kPa)

150 Su

200 NZTM 1565570.00 5172932.00 250 300 350

9.10 10 20 N 60 30 40 Generated with Core-GS by Geroc EOH: 19.37m Testing for Geotechnical Engineering, 4th Edition. T 4thEdition. Engineering, Geotechnical for Testing geotechnical soil and design parameters using metho using parameters design and soil geotechnical any of the geotechnical soil and design parameters parameters design and soil geotechnical the of any Notes & Limitations Tip Resistance (MPa)Initial: carefully reviewed by the user. Both McMillan Drill McMillan Both user. the by reviewed carefully Predrill Pore Pressure (KPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Location: Cone AreaRatio: Cone Reference: Data shown on this report has been assessed to prov to assessed been has report this on shown Data review. The user should be fully aware of the techn the of aware fully be should user The review. Client: Name:

Cone Type: 10 Operator: Resistance

20 (MPa) Aurecon NZAurecon Ltd Kennedys BushRoad,Christchurch Quarry View Tip Rig:

I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 100992 Geomil Panther100 -track R. Wyllie 30

40 -3.007 0 0.2482

1 2 RAW DATA CONE PENETRATION TEST Friction

3 Ratio

Final: Final: Final: 0 Predrill: Pressure 200 (kPa) Pore Date:

-7.693 -0.001 0.2567 400

600 2.20 1.40 0.00 10/10/2016

800 Inclination (Degrees) 5

15 Effective Refusal 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 6 5 4 3 2 1 9 8 7 Target Depth: Inclinometer: Scale

1 Hole Depth (m): Gauge: Other: Elevation (m): r geotechnical use, and should be use, geotechnical r 2 orrectness or the applicability of applicability the or orrectness

3 SBT SOIL BEHAVIOUR TYPE

Tip: 4 of the results in any design or design any in results the of (NON-NORMALISED) 0), Guide to Cone Penetration Cone to Guide 0),

ur Type various and Type (SBT) ur 5 data shown in this report. this in shown data 6 7

8 Datum: 9 to sandysilt Sand mixtures:siltysand SBT Description Soil Behaviour Type (SBT) -Robertson etal.1986 Ground 0.00 19.37 (filtered) 4 3 2 1 0 CPT No.: silt &siltyclay Silt mixtures:clayey clay Clays: claytosilty Clay -organicsoil grained Sensitive fine- Undefined Job: Effective Refusal Remarks

Hole Depth (m): 20 ESTIMATED PARAMETERS (%) 40 Dr

60 North (m): East (m): 80 9 8 7 6 5 Sheet 1of CPTu108 50 Grid: Stiff fine-grained sand Stiff sandtoclayey gravelly sand Dense sandto to siltysands Sands: cleansands sand tosandysilt Sand mixtures:silty 16421

100 (kPa)

150 Su

200 NZTM 1565674.00 5172938.00 250 300 350 19.37 10 20 N 60 30 40 Generated with Core-GS by Geroc EOH: 8.59m Testing for Geotechnical Engineering, 4th Edition. T 4thEdition. Engineering, Geotechnical for Testing geotechnical soil and design parameters using metho using parameters design and soil geotechnical any of the geotechnical soil and design parameters parameters design and soil geotechnical the of any Notes & Limitations Tip Resistance (MPa)Initial: carefully reviewed by the user. Both McMillan Drill McMillan Both user. the by reviewed carefully Predrill Pore Pressure (KPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Location: Cone AreaRatio: Cone Reference: Data shown on this report has been assessed to prov to assessed been has report this on shown Data review. The user should be fully aware of the techn the of aware fully be should user The review. Client: Name:

Cone Type: 10 Operator: Resistance

20 (MPa) Aurecon NZAurecon Ltd Kennedys BushRoad,Christchurch Quarry View Tip Rig:

I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 081034 Geomil Panther100 -track R. Wyllie 30

40 -7.454 -0.0037 -0.1134

1 2 RAW DATA CONE PENETRATION TEST Friction

3 Ratio

Final: Final: Final: 0 Predrill: Pressure 200 (kPa) Pore Date:

- - - 400

600 - 0.00 10/10/2016

800 Inclination (Degrees) 5

15 Effective Refusal 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 6 5 4 3 2 1 9 8 7 Target Depth: Inclinometer: Scale

1 Hole Depth (m): Gauge: Other: Elevation (m): r geotechnical use, and should be use, geotechnical r 2 orrectness or the applicability of applicability the or orrectness

3 SBT SOIL BEHAVIOUR TYPE

Tip: 4 of the results in any design or design any in results the of (NON-NORMALISED) 0), Guide to Cone Penetration Cone to Guide 0),

ur Type various and Type (SBT) ur 5 data shown in this report. this in shown data 6 7

8 Datum: 9 to sandysilt Sand mixtures:siltysand Clays: claytosilty silty sands Sands: cleansandsto SBT Description Soil Behaviour Type (SBT) -Robertson etal.1986 Ground 0.00 8.59 (filtered) 4 3 2 1 0 CPT No.: silt &siltyclay Silt mixtures:clayey clay Clays: claytosilty Clay -organicsoil grained Sensitive fine- Undefined Job: Cone lost:nofinal offset Effective Refusal Remarks

Hole Depth (m): 20 ESTIMATED PARAMETERS (%) 40 Dr

60 North (m): East (m): 80 9 8 7 6 5 Sheet 1of CPTu109 50 Grid: Stiff fine-grained sand Stiff sandtoclayey gravelly sand Dense sandto to siltysands Sands: cleansands sand tosandysilt Sand mixtures:silty 16421

100 (kPa)

150 Su

200 NZTM 1565750.00 5172991.00 250 300 350

8.59 10 20 N 60 30 40 Generated with Core-GS by Geroc Sounding: PointID: Sounding: PointID: Sounding: PointID: TEST DETAIL Sounding: PointID: Sounding: PointID: 101 CPTu101 CPTu105 104 CPTu104 103 CPTu103 102 CPTu102 105 Cone AreaRatio: Cone AreaRatio: Cone AreaRatio: Cone AreaRatio: Cone AreaRatio: Cone Reference: Cone Reference: Cone Reference: Cone Reference: Cone Reference: Tip Resistance (MPa) Initial: Tip Resistance (MPa) Initial: Tip Resistance (MPa)Initial: Tip Resistance (MPa)Initial: Tip Resistance (MPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Pore Pressure (kPa)Initial: Pore Pressure (kPa)Initial: Pore Pressure (kPa)Initial: Pore Pressure (kPa)Initial: Pore Pressure (kPa)Initial: Cone Type: Cone Type: Cone Type: Cone Type: Cone Type: Operator: Operator: Operator: Operator: Operator: 100992 R. Wyllie I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 100992 R. Wyllie I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 100992 R. Wyllie I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 111007 R. Wyllie I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 111007 R. Wyllie I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 20.809 -0.0016 0.2976 -6.185 0.0041 -3.7688 -58.865 0.0038 -3.7644 75.515 -0.0006 0.3909 -6.861 0.0007 0.3064 Water Level: Water Level: Water Level: Water Level: Water Level: Collapse: Collapse: Collapse: Collapse: Collapse: Predrill: Predrill: Predrill: Predrill: Predrill: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: -5.738 0.0049 -3.8124 2.20 1.30 0.00 11/10/2016 34.591 -0.0017 0.2089 2.70 1.60 0.00 11/10/2016 -6.985 -0.0005 0.2416 2.60 2.10 0.00 11/10/2016 72.701 -0.0011 0.3817 1.30 - 0.00 11/10/2016 -4.537 0.0047 -3.7761 3.10 1.60 0.00 11/10/2016 Effective Refusal Effective Refusal Effective Refusal Effective Refusal Effective Refusal Target Depth: Target Depth: Target Depth: Target Depth: Target Depth: Inclinometer: Inclinometer: Inclinometer: Inclinometer: Inclinometer: Gauge: Gauge: Gauge: Gauge: Gauge: Other: Other: Other: Other: Other: Tip: Tip: Tip: Tip: Tip: Generated with Core-GS by Geroc Sounding: PointID: Sounding: PointID: Sounding: PointID: TEST DETAIL Sounding: PointID: 106 CPTu106 109 CPTu109 108 CPTu108 107 CPTu107 Cone AreaRatio: Cone AreaRatio: Cone AreaRatio: Cone AreaRatio: Cone Reference: Cone Reference: Cone Reference: Cone Reference: Tip Resistance (MPa) Initial: Tip Resistance (MPa) Initial: Tip Resistance (MPa)Initial: Tip Resistance (MPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Local Friction (MPa)Initial: Pore Pressure (kPa)Initial: Pore Pressure (kPa)Initial: Pore Pressure (kPa)Initial: Pore Pressure (kPa)Initial: Cone Type: Cone Type: Cone Type: Cone Type: Operator: Operator: Operator: Operator: 111007 R. Wyllie I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 081034 R. Wyllie I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 100992 R. Wyllie I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 081034 R. Wyllie I-CFXYP20-10 0.75 -7.454 -0.0037 -0.1134 -3.007 0 0.2482 -1.695 -0.004 -0.1611 -3.539 0.0047 -3.7782 Water Level: Water Level: Water Level: Water Level: Collapse: Collapse: Collapse: Collapse: Predrill: Predrill: Predrill: Predrill: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Final: Date: Date: Date: Date: 0.203 -0.0064 -0.1079 1.20 - 0.00 10/10/2016 -4.972 0.0043 -3.7654 2.40 1.75 0.00 11/10/2016 - - - - 0.00 10/10/2016 -7.693 -0.001 0.2567 2.20 1.40 0.00 10/10/2016 Effective Refusal Effective Refusal Effective Refusal Effective Refusal Target Depth: Target Depth: Target Depth: Target Depth: Inclinometer: Inclinometer: Inclinometer: Inclinometer: Gauge: Gauge: Gauge: Gauge: Other: Other: Other: Other: Tip: Tip: Tip: Tip: Generated with Core-GS by Geroc iesoa seiiain fr l cn tps r d are types cone CPT on fie all recorded manually are taken for measurements specifications Dimensional Dimensions • • • • These notes describe the technical specifications and a and specifications the technical describe notes These CALIBRATION ANDCPT TECHNICAL NOTES I-C5F0p15XYP20-10 measuring sensitive cone resistan cone sensitive measuring I-C5F0p15XYP20-10 I-CFXYP20-10 measuring cone resistance, sleeve frict sleeve resistance, cone I-CFXYP20-10 measuring I-CFXY-15 measuring cone resistance, sleeve friction sleeve resistance, cone I-CFXY-15 measuring I-CFXY-10 measuring cone resistance, sleeve friction sleeve resistance, cone I-CFXY-10 measuring ld sheets. All field sheets are kept on file and av and file kept on are Allsheets field sheets. ld ssociated calibration references pertaining to the f pertaining references calibration ssociated tie blw Al oeacs r ruiey hce p checked routinely are tolerances All below. etailed and inclination (standard cone, 15cm²);cone, (standard inclination and and inclination (standard cone, 10cm²);cone, (standard inclination and ion, inclination and pore pressure (piezocone, 10cm² (piezocone, pressure pore and inclination ion, ce, sleeve friction, inclination and pore pressure (p pressure pore and friction, inclination ce, sleeve β / B = = A 1 - 0.25 Cone ratio area α / =B = A 0.75 ailable on request.on ailable ollowing cone types: cone ollowing rior to testing and and testing to rior iezocone, 10cm²).iezocone, ); CPT CALIBRATION AND TECHNICAL NOTES (cont.)

Calibration

Each cone has a unique identification number that is electronically recorded and reported for each CPT test. The identification number enables the operator to compare ‘zero-load offsets’ to manufacturer calibrated zero-load offsets.

The recommended maximum zero-load offset for each sensor is determined as ± 5% of the nominal measuring range.

In addition to maximum zero-load offsets, McMillan Drilling also limits the difference in zero load offset before and after the test as ± 2% of the maximum measuring range. See table below:

Tip (MPa) Friction (MPa) Pore Pressure (MPa)

Maximum Measuring Range: 150 1.50 3.00 Nominal Measuring Range: 75 1.00 2.00 Max. ‘zero-load offset’: 7.5 0.10 0.20 Max ‘before and after test’: 3 0.03 0.06

Note : The zero offsets are electronically recorded and reported for each test in the same units as that of each sensor. Generated with Core-GS by Geroc with Core-GS Generated Generated with Core-GS by Geroc CONE CERTIFICATES Generated with Core-GS by Geroc CONE CERTIFICATES Generated with Core-GS by Geroc CONE CERTIFICATES

Your guide to the pressure wastewater system

For alarms call

(03) 941 8999

Rev 3 - Updated 21/08/2014 If the alarm sounds

1. The alarm noise can be turned off by pressing the button underneath the alarm panel. The alarm light on the panel will remain on. If your pressure wastewater system has had a short term build up of wastewater then the system will automatically clean itself and the alarm light will go out. 2. If the alarm light is still on after one hour (1 hr) then call the Christchurch City Council on (03) 941 8999. The Council Press the button located number is also on the alarm panel. under the alarm panel. This 3. The Council call centre operator will ask will turn off the sound but the light will remain on. you a series of questions to help determine the urgency and nature of any repairs that may be required. 4. The Council call centre operator will ask Wait an hour and then check for your name and contact number so that to see if the light on the alarm panel is still on. the maintenance contractor can call you regarding any repairs. 5. The system has a 24hr emergency storage capacity. However, while waiting for any If the light on the alarm repairs you should try to minimise the panel is no longer lit then no further action is required. amount of wastewater going through the system. 6. If the alarm sounded because of a short If the light on the alarm term build up of wastewater and then panel is still on then call the cleared you should consider what might Christchurch City Council on have made this happen (for example (03) 941 8999. ﬂ ushing inappropriate items) and avoid this happening again.

7. If you notice any irregularity with the The call centre operator will system (for example the alarm sounding ask for your address, name often), contact the Christchurch City and contact number. Council on (03) 941 8999. The pressure wastewater system

The wastewater system for this property is a pressure wastewater system.

A pressure wastewater system includes an individual pump and tank. The pump is located within the tank. The tank is located underground and you will only see the lid at the surface. Wastewater from your house ﬂ ows through a pipe (a private lateral) to the tank. The tank then pumps the wastewater to the pipes in the street. From the street the wastewater goes to the wastewater treatment plant.

The pressure wastewater system is very reliable and robust. There is very little you need to do and very little that can go wrong.

The pressure wastewater system

Above ground

Below ground Wastewater Wastewater ﬂ ow to the ﬂ ow from pipe in the the house. street. The alarm will sound if Emergency storage wastewater in this tank rises (about 24 hours). above this level. Even after the alarm Wastewater is pumped sounds you can through this pipe to the continue to use the pipes in the street. system for around 24 hours. However, you The pump will automatically are encouraged to turn itself on. minimise water use during this time. The grinder mechanism grinds up solids in the wastewater. Using the system

There are a few things you need to know to ensure that the pressure wastewater system runs smoothly. The system operates like a normal wastewater system. It takes wastewater from your toilet, sink, shower, bath, dishwasher, and washing machine and transfers it to the wastewater pipes in the street, and onto the wastewater treatment plant.

To avoid blockages and damage to the pressure wastewater system there are a number of items that should not be disposed of via the system.

The following items should not be ﬂ ushed down the toilet or sink:

• glass

• metal

• gravel or sand, including stone from ﬁ sh tanks

• seafood shells

• socks, rags, clothes

• plastic

• nappies, sanitary napkins, tampons, ‘wet’ wipes

• kitty litter

• explosives

• ﬂ ammable materials

• lubricating oil and grease

• strong chemicals

• petol, diesel

• stormwater runoff

Before you go on holiday

Before you go on holiday, even if it is just for a few days, you should fl ush the pressure wastewater system before you go. This is to avoid the possibility of the system becoming smelly while you are away. To fl ush the system simply run a tap in the kitchen or bathroom sink for about fi ve minutes before you go.

Taking care of the system

Do not flush any inappropriate items through the system.

Do not put heavy weights on the lid of the tank. The lid can be walked on, but this should be avoided.

Do not touch the valves in the boundary kit.

Do not turn off the power to the pump unless evacuating in an emergency or if there is a broken wastewater pipe.

Do not cover the unit in any way. This includes covering it with dirt, garden mulch, or concrete.

Ensure access to the unit is available at all times.

If you are going on holiday, even for just a few days, you should ﬂ ush the system before you go. Simply run clean water down your kitchen or bathroom sink for ﬁ ve minutes (5 mins).

If you do accidentally break a pipe under the ground contact the Christchurch City Council on (03) 941 8999 immediately and tell them what happened. While waiting for the pipe to be repaired minimise the amount of wastewater going through the system.

Contact the Christchurch City Council on (03) 941 8999 if you install a swimming or spa pool.

Contact the Christchurch City Council on (03) 941 8999 if you are making any modiﬁ cations to your home which may affect the system (for example a house addition).

Do not attempt to repair the system yourself. Always call the Christchurch City Council on (03) 941 8999. Trouble shooting

What happens if... 1. The system is damaged and needs repair? The alarm will go off. Follow the alarm procedure on page 2. 2. You notice a bad smell around the tank When operating normally there should be no noticeable odours coming from the unit. If it is smelly, the unit may just need fl ushing. Just run clean water down your kitchen or bathroom sink for about fi ve minutes. If the unit remains smelly contact the Christchurch City Council on (03) 941 8999. 3. You notice wet spots around the unit or wastewater pipes The pumping unit and pipes are sealed. If you notice wet spots and there hasn’t been any recent heavy rain contact the Christchurch City Council on (03) 941 8999. 4. The alarm keeps going off when it rains This means that rainwater may be getting into the system and overloading it. Contact the Christchurch City Council on (03) 941 8999. 5. The neighbours alarm goes and they are away Do not investigate yourself. Contact the Christchurch City Council on (03) 941 8999. 6. There is a power failure If there is a power failure the pump will not run. The tank has 24 hours of emergency storage so minimise the amount of wastewater going through the system. When the power comes on again the system will reset itself. 7. There is a fl ood If you can safely stay in your home in a fl ood then simply minimise the amount of wastewater going through the system. 8. You need to evacuate due to an emergency (such as an earthquake) If you can, fl ush out the system by running water down your kitchen or bathroom sink for about fi ve minutes. Turn off the power to the pump. The on/ off switch is located by the alarm panel. Spatial Query Report

Thursday, 06 December 2018 Page 1 of 5 Spatial Query Report

Thursday, 06 December 2018 Page 2 of 5 Spatial Query Report

Land Use Resource Consents within 100 metres of 119 Kennedys Bush Road Note:This list does not include subdivision Consents and Certificates of Compliance issued under the Resource Management Act.

117 Kennedys Bush Road RMA/2013/2646 TWO RESIDENTIAL UNITS ASSOCIATED WITH SUB RMA92024371 - Historical Reference RMA92024372 Processing complete Applied 05/12/2013 Decision issued 24/02/2014 Granted 24/02/2014

RMA/2018/1737 Fee Simple Subdivision - One Hundred and Four Lots with Land Use Not accepted for processing Applied 19/07/2018 Not accepted for processing 27/07/2018

RMA/2018/2135 Ninetyfive lot subdivision Consent issued Applied 03/09/2018 Decision issued 13/11/2018 Granted 13/11/2018

121 Kennedys Bush Road RMA/1985/468 Construction of a covered way and pengola between my house and garage - Historical Reference RES9208504 Processing complete Applied 18/12/1985 Decision issued 01/01/1999 Declined 01/01/1999

RMA/1986/443 Siting a swimming pool within 3m of pump and changing shed - Historical Reference RES9208502 Processing complete Applied 08/07/1986 Decision issued 01/01/1999 Declined 01/01/1999

Thursday, 06 December 2018 Page 3 of 5 Spatial Query Report

RMA/2004/2029 Application to subdivide an existing site into two lots. Retain Lot 1 with the existing house and use Lot 2 for rural purposes - Historical Reference RMA20017662 Processing complete Applied 05/08/2004 Decision issued 13/05/2005 Granted 13/05/2005

RMA/2007/2175 construct garages & music room - Historical Reference RMA92009481 Processing complete Applied 06/08/2007 Decision issued 24/09/2007 Granted 24/09/2007

50 Glovers Road RMA/1992/1244 Site garage on boundry line - Historical Reference RES953314 Processing complete Applied 06/03/1992 Decision issued 18/03/1992 Granted 18/03/1992

RMA/2003/3376 Application to subdivide the existing property into two allotments and allow the retention of the existing house on Proposed Lot 1 - Historical Reference RMA20015743 Withdrawn Applied 24/12/2003

RMA/2012/543 ESTABLISH AND UTILISE A RESIDENTIAL UNIT AND ACCESSORY BUILDINGS FOR 252 LOTS ASSOCIATED TO A SUBDIVISION SUB - RMA92019884 - Historical Reference RMA92019883 On hold - waiting for response from applicant Applied 17/04/2012

RMA/2018/1006 Stockpiling of 6000m³ of material Processing complete Applied 23/04/2018 Decision issued 22/06/2018 Granted 22/06/2018

Data Quality Statement

Thursday, 06 December 2018 Page 4 of 5 Spatial Query Report

Land Use Consents All resource consents are shown for sites that have been labelled with an address. For sites that have been labelled with a cross (+) no resource consents have been found. Sites that have no label have not been checked for resource consents. This will be particularly noticeable on the margins of the search radius. If there are such sites and you would like them included in the check, please ask for the LIM spatial query to be rerun accordingly. This will be done free of charge although there may be a short delay. Resource consents which are on land occupied by roads, railways or rivers are not, and currently cannot be displayed, either on the map or in the list. Resource consents that relate to land that has since been subdivided, will be shown in the list, but not on the map. They will be under the address of the land as it was at the time the resource consent was applied for. Resource consents that are listed as Non-notified and are current, may in fact be notified resource consents that have not yet been through the notification process. If in doubt. Please phone (03)941 8999. The term “resource consents” in this context means land use consents. Subdivision consents and certificates of compliance are excluded.

Subdivision Consents All subdivision consents are shown for the sites that have been labelled with consent details. For Sites that have been labelled with a cross (+) no records have been found. Sites that have no label have not been checked for subdivision consents. This will be particularly noticeable on the margins of the search radius. If there are such sites and you would like them included in the check, please ask for the LIM spatial query to be rerun accordingly. This will be done free of charge although there may be a short delay. The term “subdivision consents” in this context means a resource consent application to subdivide land. Non subdivision land use resource consents and certificates of compliance are excluded. This report will only record those subdivision applications which have not been completed i.e once a subdivision has been given effect to and the new lots/properties have been established the application which created those lots will not be shown All subdivision consent information is contained on the map and no separate list is supplied

Thursday, 06 December 2018 Page 5 of 5