Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations -...

of 39 /39
SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06 6-1 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations 6.1 Introduction This section provides the key geotechnical considerations for the pipeline and associated structures based on the geotechnical study/investigations to date. 6.2 Slope Stability Slope instability either during construction or the design life of the pipeline and its associated structures is one of the main geotechnical hazards. As part of the geotechnical investigations/study, the high-risk areas have been visited and an assessment made to identify preferred location for the pipeline/structure. 6.2.1 Slope Stability Analyses to Determine Setback Distances To determine the setback distance for a pipeline/structure from steep slopes / relic slips, generic slope stability analyses have been undertaken using Slope/W software. Numerous combinations of the following scenarios were investigated. Embankment heights of 20m, 10m, and 5m. Slope angles of 2H:1V, 1H: 1V, and 1H:2V. A completely saturated slope with the water table at the surface of the slope; and a slope having a water table 4m deep (at the top of the Hamilton Ash layer) Static loading and a horizontal seismic load of 0.4g (1 in 2500yr event). A generalised soil profile based on available information from the Tauranga area was used for the analyses. The profile consisted of a 1m layer of fill, overlying 3m of Rotoehu Ash, which overlies 5m of Hamilton and Older Ashes. Beneath the Older ashes is weathered Ignimbrite. The following table provides the geotechnical properties applied to the various units in the Tauranga region. Table 6-1: Geotechnical Properties of Soil Units used for Generic Slope Stability Analyses for Setback Distance Soil Unit Unit Weight (γ, kN/m 3 ) Effective Cohesion (c’, kPa) Friction Angle (ϕ’, degrees) Fill 17 4 28 Younger Ashes 16 5 35 Rotoehu Ash 16 5 35 Hamilton Ash 17 10 25 Weathered Ignimbrite 17 5 32

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations -...

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-1

    6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    6.1 Introduction

    This section provides the key geotechnical considerations for the pipeline and associated structures based on the geotechnical study/investigations to date.

    6.2 Slope Stability

    Slope instability either during construction or the design life of the pipeline and its associated structures is one of the main geotechnical hazards. As part of the geotechnical investigations/study, the high-risk areas have been visited and an assessment made to identify preferred location for the pipeline/structure.

    6.2.1 Slope Stability Analyses to Determine Setback Distances

    To determine the setback distance for a pipeline/structure from steep slopes / relic slips, generic slope stability analyses have been undertaken using Slope/W software. Numerous combinations of the following scenarios were investigated.

    Embankment heights of 20m, 10m, and 5m.

    Slope angles of 2H:1V, 1H: 1V, and 1H:2V.

    A completely saturated slope with the water table at the surface of the slope; and a slope having a water table 4m deep (at the top of the Hamilton Ash layer)

    Static loading and a horizontal seismic load of 0.4g (1 in 2500yr event).

    A generalised soil profile based on available information from the Tauranga area was used for the analyses. The profile consisted of a 1m layer of fill, overlying 3m of Rotoehu Ash, which overlies 5m of Hamilton and Older Ashes. Beneath the Older ashes is weathered Ignimbrite. The following table provides the geotechnical properties applied to the various units in the Tauranga region.

    Table 6-1: Geotechnical Properties of Soil Units used for Generic Slope Stability Analyses for Setback Distance

    Soil Unit Unit Weight (, kN/m3)

    Effective Cohesion (c, kPa)

    Friction Angle (, degrees)

    Fill 17 4 28

    Younger Ashes 16 5 35

    Rotoehu Ash 16 5 35

    Hamilton Ash 17 10 25

    Weathered Ignimbrite

    17 5 32

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-2

    The following is the summary of the analyses results for the worst-case scenario (fully saturated slope and seismic loading). It is clear from the table that the setback distance required is very long and may not be available in a few places. However, it should be noted that these distances are the absolute worst-case scenario and further site-specific assessment should be made during detailed design to quantify the risk to determine whether mitigative geotechnical works are required for a section of pipeline traversing the relic slips/steep slopes.

    Table 6-2: Summary of Results for Setback Distances

    Slope Angle Embankment Height (m) Loading Condition Setback Distance (m)

    2H:1V (26.5o) 5 Static 8

    2H:1V (26.5o) 5 Seismic 46

    2H:1V (26.5o) 10 Static 26

    2H:1V (26.5o) 10 Seismic 56

    2H:1V (26.5o) 20 Static 51

    2H:1V (26.5o) 20 Seismic 51

    1H:1V (45o) 5 Static 7

    1H:1V (45o) 5 Seismic 45

    1H:1V (45o) 10 Static 23

    1H:1V (45o) 10 Seismic 50

    1H:1V (45o) 20 Static 50

    1H:1V (45o) 20 Seismic 50

    1H:2V (63o) 5 Static 7

    1H:2V (63o) 5 Seismic 45

    1H:2V (63o) 10 Static 23

    1H:2V (63o) 10 Seismic 50

    1H:2V (63o) 20 Static 50

    1H:2V (63o) 20 Seismic 50

    6.2.2 Recommended Set-back Distance from Slopes

    As part of the route selection/optimisation of the location of pipeline/structures, the following guidelines should be used for the set back distance from an existing slope (natural/man-made):

    Based on historical approach (originally recommended by T&T in 1980, later endorsed by Richards et al, 2001) used in the Tauranga Region for residential development (i.e., for a 50 year design life) any pipe/structure should be located at a minimum setback distance of 2 x ht (in full, m) + 6 (m) from the absolute base of the slope. For example, for a 5m high slope standing at 1H: 1V(45o), set back from the base of the slope should be 2 x 5 + 6 = 16m.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-3

    Based on our generic slope stability analyses (for a 100yr design life and seismic loading conditions), any pipe/structure should be located the following minimum of setback distance from the crest of the slope:

    For a 5m high slope, 8m for static and 45m under seismic loadings.

    For a 10m high slope, 26m for static and 56m under seismic loadings.

    For a 20m high slope, 50m for both static and seismic loadings.

    It should however be noted that these setback distances should be treated as preliminary, subject to detailed site-specific investigation and analysis during detailed design.

    Any slope instability caused during a large seismic event (with 0.4g horizontal seismic load), can later be repaired/remedied following the event. It is not considered cost-effective to design mitigative works for the slopes for seismic events, during the construction of the project.

    6.3 Groundwater

    The groundwater within the Tauranga regional geomorphology plays a significant role in shaping/re-shaping the landscape by initiating landslides. Historically, many landslides in Tauranga occurred during major storm events. Several slope instabilities (eg, recent slip along the Hairini Rd on-ramp to SH2) are associated with surface water seeping/ingressing into the slopes from rooftops and overland flows through existing tension cracks near steep slopes. Therefore, groundwater considerations are very important during detailed design stage following final route selection.

    During construction, groundwater potentially poses problems should the excavation extend through sandy layers, with shallow groundwater table in the area. This may lead to trench instability during excavation, requiring either temporary shoring or benching, sometimes resulting in over excavations and associated claims. Further assessment should thus be made during detailed design.

    6.4 Settlement/Floatation

    The pipeline corridors for the route options being considered traverses through sections of wetlands, stream crossings, low-lying land infilled with recent sediments and harbour crossings. Where this occurs, care should be taken to ensure any likely settlements are estimated and where necessary, piled foundations (for structures) or pipe bridges (for pipeline stream/harbour crossings) should be used.

    At low-lying or other locations where there is a shallow depth to groundwater, any buried structures (eg underground tanks) or buried pipeline will be subject to hydrostatic pressures. The structures and pipeline at these locations should thus be designed to withstand these uplift pressures. It should also be noted that during a seismic (both 1 in 500yr and 1 in 2500 yr) event, additional dynamic uplift pressures may occur.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-4

    Based on the geotechnical investigations/study to date, the locations where settlements/floatation is likely to pose geotechnical risks have been identified and listed in the tables of geotechnical summary for pipeline and structures (Section 6.7).

    6.5 Earthquake Hazards

    There are no known active faults within the pipeline route corridors. The closest active faults are some 35km distant (Kerepihi Fault to the west, Matata Fault to the east and offshore faulting). Thus the seismic hazard is governed by ground shaking from crustal faults some distance from Tauranga and from deeper subduction event earthquakes.

    The Tauranga region is located within Seismic Zone 2 (GNS 2000). A Western Bay of Plenty Lifelines Study (Brabhaharan et al, 2002) provides a detailed area specific assessment of earthquake hazard for the Tauranga region.

    The recognised earthquake hazards are: -

    Ground shaking

    Liquefaction

    Ground deformation

    The pipeline and associated structures must remain functional following an earthquake and in accordance with the Australia/New Zealand Standard for Structural Design Actions (NZS1170.5:2004) these structures are classed as importance Level 4. Based on this importance level the structures should be designed for a return period of 2500 years i.e. Ultimate Limit State. A return period of 25 years is required for a Serviceability Limit State (SLS 1) requiring avoidance of damage that prevents a structure from being used as originally intended without repair. For Importance Level 4 there is an additional more onerous Serviceability limit State (SLS2) requiring critical facilities to remain operational in 500 year return period motions.

    Using AS/NZS1170.5, the expected peak ground acceleration for the 1:2500 year event is 0.36 for strong rock to 0.4g for soft soils.

    The site-specific microzoning study for Tauranga indicates peak ground accelerations of 0.3-0.4g for rock sites to 0.4-0.5g for soft soil sites. We recommend that the site-specific assessment peak ground acceleration values be used for this project.

    Brabhaharan et al (2002) suggests that the pipeline corridor area is likely to liquefy both during a 1 in 500yr and 1 in 2500yr events.

    Liquefaction can lead to the following effects, which can cause damage:

    Ground damage subsidence, lateral spreading, flow failure, slope failure

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-5

    Buoyancy of buried services, tanks and chambers (manholes)

    Foundation failure due to reduction / loss of bearing capacity

    Settlement of structures on liquefied materials

    Of particular note to buried structures is the increased risk of buoyancy, foundation failures, loss of bearing pressures and settlements. Areas of localised liquefaction can expect ground subsidence varying from none to small i.e. < 100 mm. The areas of extensive liquefaction will generate ground subsidence > 300 mm and possibly over 1000 mm in places.

    Lateral spreading can occur along river / stream banks and coastal areas, where the liquefied ground could displace towards the free surface. Any embankments or bridge abutments built on liquefiable ground are also likely to be affected.

    The following is a summary of liquefaction potential assessment based on geology:

    Estuarine Deposits: Even when the liquefaction of very soft fine-grained soils does not occur, these soft soils can undergo severe loss of strength during ground shaking and give rise to ground strains and lateral spreading.

    Volcanic Ash Deposits: The ash deposits are generally considered resistant to liquefaction due to fine-grained plastic nature and the presence of some welding effects. However, some localised liquefaction is likely to occur during strong ground shaking.

    Coastal Sand Deposits: Coastal sands are generally medium dense to dense, only localised liquefaction is likely to occur

    Ignimbrite Areas: Liquefaction of the Ignimbrites soils is unlikely.

    Where the pipeline traverses through non-liquefiable to liquefiable soils (eg through Ignimbrite areas to estuarine deposits, differential settlements of the pipe are likely and may even result in pipe bursting during a strong ground shake.

    The earthquakes are also known to trigger landslides. Often, relic slips can be re-mobilised following a strong earthquake and /or coupled with a significant rainfall event.

    6.6 Constructability

    6.6.1 Excavatability

    URS experience at sites around the Tauranga region indicates that the volcanic air fall deposits and their weathering products, weathered ignimbrite materials, or alluvial soils derived from the volcanic deposits are expected to be to excavated with ease.

    Very stiff soils have moderate difficulty to excavate and can take longer excavation time. In addition, welded sands and ash deposits are relatively the most difficult to excavate.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-6

    The ignimbrite deposits often form a hard weathered crust (0.5m maximum thickness). It is expected that both the case hardened crust and the underlying materials can be excavated with a toothed bucket.

    6.6.2 Pipeline Trench Stability

    Based on observations made during other work in the Tauranga region, we would make the following comments on pipeline trench stability.

    Any pipeline trench in the volcanic ash sequence or ignimbrite materials, where no ground water is encountered, is expected to be stable.

    The stability of the trenches in the volcanic soils may be significantly compromised if the soils are exposed to excessive rain, or if the trench develops a standing water level

    Any pipeline trench excavated to or below the ground water level is expected to be unstable. Support and dewatering will be required.

    Soft alluvial soils are expected to be unstable.

    6.6.3 Seepage and groundwater effects

    Groundwater and seepages have a considerable detrimental impact on the behaviour of the soils in the Tauranga region. Perched higher ground water levels and wetter soils should be anticipated if construction takes place during or shortly after wet winter months or periods of high rainfall.

    Construction difficulties can be expected along the sections of the route with high ground water and alluvial soils, specifically:

    Unstable trenches (as discussed above);

    Ground water levels above the pipeline;

    Placement of sensitive soil backfills will require particular specifications, which apply restrictions to the water content of the materials to be used as backfill.

    The groundwater encountered at locations within or close to the estuary will be tidal. This will only have an impact if the pipeline placement is by open trenching. However, any structures should be designed for the highest potential water level.

    Dewatering along the portions of the pipeline and for pumping station structures where the water table is high is recommended. Well pointing may be the most appropriate technique.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-7

    6.6.4 Reuse of excavated soils

    Bedding Material

    The bedding material will be required to conform to Australian/New Zealand AS/NZS 2566.1:198 and AS/NZ 2566.2:2002.

    None of the materials to be excavated along the pipe trench route are suitable as bedding material. It will be necessary to import bedding material.

    Backfill Material

    The volcanic soils are sensitive soils. As a result, they can lose strength when reworked.

    However, under certain conditions they are suitable for reuse as trench backfill. URS experience is such that backfill will achieve adequate strength and void ratios if the natural moisture content is preserved. A dramatic strength loss is observed if the soil becomes wet during remoulding.

    The following backfilling requirements are recommended:

    The open trench should be free of water prior to backfilling;

    The stockpile of excavated soils should be managed to preclude increase in moisture content;

    Alluvium and slope debris is not suitable as backfill.

    6.7 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations for the Pipeline & Structures

    Based on the preliminary geotechnical study/investigations carried out to date, tables of geotechnical summary were prepared with the key geotechnical issues for the pipeline and associated structures.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-8

    Table 6-3: Preliminary Geotechnical Appraisal for the Proposed Structures

    Earthquake Hazards Route Structure Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    Central Route (A)

    Maleme Street Pump Station

    Tauranga Group alluvium comprising soft to firm organic rich silts & clays.

    Available sub-soil information indicates at least 3m of soft organic rich silsts

    Groundwater level @ 2m below ground level (close to stream water level).

    Stream level & groundwater are tidal influenced

    Flooding hazard due to stream. 100 year flood levels should be assessed

    Critical structures to be designed to withstand 100yr flooding potential

    Minor instability along the stream bank was noted during the site visit.

    Any structure located close to the stream bank should be adequately designed

    Settlement of the structures should be assessed during detailed design.

    Piled foundations may be required for pump and any underground storage tanks.

    Due to high groundwater table, proximity of a stream and flood hazard, structures would need to be designed against any floatation / uplift pressures

    Localised liquefaction likely with minor subsidence (up to 100mm)

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur.

    Provided any structures are set-back enough distance from stream banks, risk is minimal

    Feasible to construct the pump station and associated structures provided adequately engineered.

    Settlement, liquefaction and flooding hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-9

    Earthquake Hazards Route Structure Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    Ila Pump Station

    Tauranga Group alluvium comprising soft to firm organic rich silts & clays

    No data available. However, the topography and the proximity of the stream indicate a shallow depth to groundwater table.

    Groundwater table and stream water levels could be tidal influenced

    Given the topography of the area (Ila Park is low lying), flood hazard may be present.

    No significant issues, provided the structures are set-back enough distance from the stream banks

    Settlement of the structures should be assessed during detailed design.

    piled foundations may be required for pump and any underground storage tanks.

    Due to high groundwater table, proximity of a stream and flood hazard, structures would need to be designed against any floatation / uplift pressures

    Localised to widespread liquefaction is expected (up to 300mm subsidence).

    Investigation and assessment should be made to quantify the risk during detailed design stage, so as to locate the pump station in a low risk area, if possible.

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur during an earthquake

    Provided any structures are set-back enough distance from stream banks, risk is minimal

    Feasible to construct the pump station and associated structures provided adequately engineered.

    Settlement, liquefaction and flooding hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered. Central

    Route (A)

    Receiving Chamber 1 Stephens Place

    Pumiceous gravels, sands and silts.

    No data available.

    SH2 cut embankments appeared dry during Nov/Dec visits.

    No issues

    Existing SH2 road cuttings are standing at 2V:1H batter showing no obvious signs of instability.

    Any structures, including pipe should be setback at least 20m from the slope.

    No significant issues expected

    No issues

    Localised liquefaction likely with minor subsidence (up to 100mm)

    No significant issues expected

    No issues, provided the structure is located well away from the SH2 cut.

    Feasible to construct the receiving chamber.

    Slope stability hazard to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-10

    Earthquake Hazards Route Structure Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    Siphon Structure 1 Maungatapu Road

    Pumiceous gravels, sands and silts.

    No data available. No issues No issues

    No significant issues expected

    No issues

    Moderate liquefaction expected with some localised subsidence (100 to 300mm)

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure.

    Liquefaction hazard to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

    Siphon Structure 2 Puwhairiki Road

    Pumiceous gravels, sands and silts.

    No data available. No issues

    Proximity of the headscarp feature of the ancient landslide to be noted

    No significant issues expected

    No issues

    Moderate liquefaction expected with some localised subsidence (100 to 300mm)

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure.

    Slope stability and liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

    Central Route (A)

    Siphon Structure 3 Matapihi

    Pumiceous gravels, sands and silts.

    No data available. No issues

    No significant issues.

    Proximity of the existing retaining wall in private properties to be noted

    No significant issues expected

    No issues

    Moderate liquefaction expected with some localised subsidence (100 to 300mm)

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure.

    Slope stability and liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-11

    Earthquake Hazards Route Structure Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    Siphon Structure 4 East of Phoenix Heights (between Railway line & SH2)

    Published geology indicated Pumiceous gravels, sands and silts.

    The topography of the location indicates soft estuarine sediments

    No data available. Given the elevation (RL2m) of the ground, groundwater table would be tidal affected.

    Due to the area being low-lying (RL2m), flood risk should be assessed.

    Minor instability noted during site visit.

    Proximity of Rail embankment and SH2 corridor warrants careful engineering.

    Settlement risk should be quantified and the structure should be adequately engineered

    If high groundwater table is present, flotation of structures might occur

    Significant lateral spreading and moderate to extensive subsidence (>300mm)

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur during an earthquake

    Slope instability hazards should be assessed during an earthquake

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure, provided adequately engineered.

    Slope stability, settlement, flooding and liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Physical constraints (rail and SH2 road corridor) to be noted.

    Structure to be located well away from any steep slopes and rail embankment.

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

    Central Route (A)

    Siphon Structure 5 Te Maunga WWTP

    Fixed foredune sands

    Shallow depth to groundwater table can be expected, effected by tides

    Any flooding is likely to result from a possible breach of treatment pond embankments

    No significant issues

    Settlement risk should be quantified and the structure should be adequately engineered

    No significant issues expected

    Widespread liquefaction is expected

    Uplift pressures might occur during an earthquake

    Widespread lateral spreading may initiate some instability

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure.

    Settlement and liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-12

    Earthquake Hazards Route Structure Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    Maleme Street Pump Station

    Tauranga Group alluvium comprising soft to firm organic rich silts & clays.

    Available sub-soil information indicates at least 3m of soft organic rich silsts

    Groundwater level @ 2m below ground level (close to stream water level).

    Stream level & groundwater are tidal influenced

    Flooding hazard due to stream. 100 year flood levels should be assessed

    Critical structures to be designed to withstand 100yr flooding potential

    Minor instability along the stream bank was noted during the site visit.

    Any structure located close to the stream bank should be adequately designed

    Settlement of the structures should be assessed during detailed design.

    Piled foundations may be required for pump and any underground storage tanks.

    Due to high groundwater table, proximity of a stream and flood hazard, structures would need to be designed against any floatation / uplift pressures

    Localised liquefaction likely with minor subsidence (up to 100mm)

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur.

    Provided any structures are set-back enough distance from stream banks, risk is minimal

    Feasible to construct the pump station and associated structures provided adequately engineered.

    Settlement, liquefaction and flooding hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

    Eastern Route (B)

    Receiving Chamber 1 Poike Road

    Pumiceous gravel, sand, silts and peat

    Exposed soils within the toe of the existing landslides in Poike Rd church land are stiff, silts with some sands

    Springs noted within the centre of toe of the failed slope

    Soils 3m below road level are saturated

    No data available at the road level

    No issues

    Proximity of the old slips along the northern edge of the road to be noted.

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Localised liquefaction likely with minor subsidence (up to 100mm)

    No significant issues expected

    Proximity of the existing landslides to be noted.

    Slope instability could be re-initiated during an earthquake event

    Feasible to construct the receiving chamber provided adequately engineered.

    Slope stability hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-13

    Earthquake Hazards Route Structure Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    Ila Pump Station

    Tauranga Group alluvium comprising soft to firm organic rich silts & clays

    No data available. However, the topography and the proximity of the stream indicate a shallow depth to groundwater table.

    Groundwater table and stream water levels could be tidal influenced

    Given the topography of the area (Ila park is low lying), flood hazard may be present.

    No significant issues, provided the structures are set-back enough distance from the stream banks

    Settlement of the structures should be assessed during detailed design.

    piled foundations may be required for pump and any underground storage tanks.

    Due to high groundwater table, proximity of a stream and flood hazard, structures would need to be designed against any floatation / uplift pressures

    Localised to widespread liquefaction is expected (up to 300mm subsidence).

    Investigation and assessment should be made to quantify the risk during detailed design stage, so as to locate the pump station in a low risk area, if possible.

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur during an earthquake

    Provided any structures are set-back enough distance from stream banks, risk is minimal

    Feasible to construct the pump station and associated structures provided adequately engineered.

    Settlement, liquefaction and flooding hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

    Eastern Route (B)

    Receiving Chamber 2 Ohauiti Road

    Pumiceous gravels, silts and sands

    No data available No issues

    Proximity of the old slip to the west of the road to be noted.

    Preferred location is on the eastern side of the road

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Localised liquefaction likely with minor subsidence (up to 100mm)

    No significant issues expected

    Proximity of the existing landslide to be noted.

    Slope instability could be re-initiated during an earthquake event

    Feasible to construct the receiving chamber provided adequately engineered.

    Slope stability hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-14

    Earthquake Hazards Route Structure Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    Siphon Structure 1 Welcome Bay Road

    Pumiceous gravels, silts and sands

    Part of the road is engineered fill embankment

    Exposure of natural soils along the Kaitemako stream bridge abutment indicates very stiff, friable silty sands to a depth of 3m below road level.

    Springs noted within the toe of the existing landslide on Maori burial ground

    No data available at road level

    No significant issues expected

    Proximity to existing active landslide north of the road to be noted

    Preferred location is along the southern edge of the road as headscarp is only 2m from the kerb line

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Minor liquefaction zone, bordering with widespread zone (through the Kaitemako stream)

    Subsidence ranging from 100mm to > 300mm

    Dependant upon the groundwater levels, some uplift pressures might occur during an earthquake

    Proximity of the landslide to be noted

    Slope instability might be re-initiated during an earthquake

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure provided adequately engineered.

    Slope stability and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

    Kaitemako Road Pump Station & Siphon Structure

    Pumiceous gravels, silts and sands

    No data available

    No significant issues expected

    Proximity of the existing cut embankment for the sports field to be noted

    Retaining walls may be required

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Moderate liquefaction with subsidence up to 300mm

    Additional uplift pressures might occur during an earthquake event

    Proximity of cut slopes to be noted. Engineering design may be required to stabilise during an earthquake event

    Feasible to construct the pump station and associated structures provided adequately engineered.

    Slope stability and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

    Eastern Route (B)

    Waitaha Road Pump Station

    Tauranga Group alluvium comprising soft to firm organic rich silts & clays

    No data available.

    Given the alluvial group soils, shallow depth to groundwater can be expected

    Flooding potential to be assessed

    Proximity of the existing slope along the eastern side of the Waitaha Road to be noted

    Preferred location for structures is at least 20m away from the top of the slope

    Settlement issues expected given alluvial soils

    Some floatation problems could be expected

    Widespread liquefaction resulting in significant lateral spreading and large subsidence

    Additional uplift pressures could result during an earthquake event

    Proximity of the slope east of Waitaha road to be noted

    Feasible to construct the pump station and associated structures provided adequately engineered.

    Settlement, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-15

    Earthquake Hazards Route Structure Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    Receiving Chamber 3 Welcome Bay Road

    Waiteariki Ignimbrite

    Exposure along road cuts indicate up to 4m ash cover over very stiff pumiceous silt and sand (Ignimbrite)

    Springs noted on the filled gully east of the structure location.

    No groundwater observed along road cuttings west of structure location

    Flooding potential to be assessed

    Proximity of the filled gully to the east to be noted.

    MSE wall may exist on the northern face of the filled slope

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Localised liquefaction likely with minor subsidence (up to 100mm)

    No significant issues expected

    Proximity of the filled embankment to be noted

    Feasible to construct the receiving chamber provided adequately engineered.

    Slope stability hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

    Siphon Structure 2 Welcome Bay Road

    Waiteariki Ignimbrite (very stiff pumiceous sandy silts)

    No data available

    No significant issues expected

    Proximity of the natural slope west of Welcome Bay road to be noted

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Localised liquefaction likely with minor subsidence (up to 100mm)

    No significant issues expected

    Proximity of the filled embankment to be noted

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure provided adequately engineered.

    Slope stability hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

    Siphon Structure 3 Welcome Bay Road

    Terrace deposits comprising ash (silts and sands)

    Geotechnical information available indicates ashes (very stiff silts with varying contents of sands)

    Groundwater deeper than at least 3m

    Flooding potential to be assessed

    Proximity of the head gully northeast of the structure location to be noted

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Moderate liquefaction with subsidence up to 300mm

    Additional uplift pressures could result during an earthquake event

    No significant issues expected

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure provided adequately engineered.

    Slope stability hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-16

    Earthquake Hazards Route Structure Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    Eastern Route (B)

    Siphon Structure 4 - Te Maunga WWTP

    Fixed foredune sands

    Shallow depth to groundwater table can be expected, effected by tides

    Any flooding is likely to result from a possible breach of treatment pond embankments

    No significant issues

    Settlement risk should be quantified and the structure should be adequately engineered

    No significant issues expected

    Widespread liquefaction is expected

    Uplift pressures might occur during an earthquake

    Widespread lateral spreading may initiate some instability

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure provided adequately engineered.

    Settlement, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered

    Western Route (E)

    Maleme Street Pump Station

    Tauranga Group alluvium comprising soft to firm organic rich silts & clays.

    Available sub-soil information indicates at least 3m of soft organic rich silsts

    Groundwater level @ 2m below ground level (close to stream water level).

    Stream level & groundwater are tidal influenced

    Flooding hazard due to stream. 100 year flood levels should be assessed

    Critical structures to be designed to withstand 100yr flooding potential

    Minor instability along the stream bank was noted during the site visit.

    Any structure located close to the stream bank should be adequately designed

    Settlement of the structures should be assessed during detailed design.

    Piled foundations may be required for pump and any underground storage tanks.

    Due to high groundwater table, proximity of a stream and flood hazard, structures would need to be designed against any floatation / uplift pressures

    Localised liquefaction likely with minor subsidence (up to 100mm)

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur.

    Provided any structures are set-back enough distance from stream banks, risk is minimal

    Feasible to construct the pump station and associated structures provided adequately engineered.

    Settlement, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-17

    Earthquake Hazards Route Structure Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    Receiving Chamber 1 Oropi Road

    Unwelded Ignimbrite

    Soil exposure within the walkway through an existing slip indicates stiff to very stiff sandy silts

    Springs noted within the toe of the old landslide

    No data available for the road levels

    No issues

    Oropi Rd is built with sidling cut to partial fill operation alongside the headscarp of an existing landslide to the west of the road.

    Currently, there are no obvious signs of instability

    Preferable location for the structure is at least 20m away from this headscarp (eg, in front of 11 Oropi rd)

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Localised liquefaction likely with minor subsidence (up to 100mm)

    No significant issues expected

    The existing old landslide may be re-initiated during an earthquake event

    Feasible to construct the receiving chamber provided adequately engineered.

    Slope stability hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered

    Western Route (E)

    Siphon Structure 1 Fraser Street / Harrier Street Intersection

    Unwelded Ignimbrite No data available No issues

    Relic landslide along Fraser St, bordering Esk St.

    Fully developed, currently inactive

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Localised liquefaction likely with minor subsidence (up to 100mm)

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure provided adequately engineered.

    Minor slope stability hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-18

    Earthquake Hazards Route Structure Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    Siphon Structure 2 Fraser Street / Eighteenth Avenue Intersection

    Unwelded Ignimbrite No data available No issues

    Relic landslide south of the structure location, along the Fraser St

    Fully developed, currently inactive

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Localised liquefaction likely with minor subsidence (up to 100mm)

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure provided adequately engineered.

    Minor slope stability hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered

    Memorial Park Pump Station

    Recent sediments of Tauranga Group alluvium comprising organic rich silts and clays

    Likely shallow groundwater table, effected by tides

    Flooding risk to be assessed

    Proposed pump station is located next to a 13m high cliff, standing at 1H:1V.

    No obvious signs of instability noted. Well-established trees protecting the slope.

    Settlement hazard to be assessed in detail.

    Piled foundations may be required for some structures

    Floatation of structures under hydro-static conditions could occur

    Localised liquefaction likely with minor subsidence (up to 100mm)

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure provided adequately engineered.

    Settlement, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered

    Western Route (E)

    Receiving Chamber 2 Matapihi Road

    Pumiceous gravels, sands and silts.

    No data available. No issues

    No significant issues.

    Proximity of the existing retaining wall in private properties to be noted

    No significant issues expected

    No issues

    Moderate liquefaction expected with some localised subsidence (100 to 300mm)

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure.

    Liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-19

    Earthquake Hazards Route Structure Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    Siphon Structure 3 - East of Phoenix Heights (between Railway line & SH2)

    Published geology indicated Pumiceous gravels, sands and silts.

    The topography of the location indicates soft estuarine sediments

    No data available. Given the elevation (RL2m) of the ground, groundwater table would be tidal affected.

    Due to the area being low-lying (RL2m), flood risk should be assessed.

    Minor instability noted during site visit.

    Proximity of Rail embankment and SH2 corridor warrants careful engineering.

    Settlement risk should be quantified and the structure should be adequately engineered

    If high groundwater table is present, flotation of structures might occur

    Significant lateral spreading and moderate to extensive subsidence (>300mm)

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur during an earthquake

    Slope instability hazards should be assessed during an earthquake

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure, provided adequately engineered.

    Settlement, slope stability, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Physical constraints (rail and SH2 road corridor) to be noted.

    Structure to be located well away from any steep slopes and rail embankment.

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

    Western Route (E)

    Siphon Structure 4 - Te Maunga WWTP

    Fixed foredune sands

    Shallow depth to groundwater table can be expected, effected by tides

    Any flooding is likely to result from a possible breach of treatment pond embankments

    No significant issues

    Settlement risk should be quantified and the structure should be adequately engineered

    No significant issues expected

    Widespread liquefaction is expected

    Uplift pressures might occur during an earthquake

    Widespread lateral spreading may initiate some instability

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure provided adequately engineered.

    Settlement, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-20

    Earthquake Hazards Route Structure Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    Maleme Street Pump Station

    Tauranga Group alluvium comprising soft to firm organic rich silts & clays.

    Available sub-soil information indicates at least 3m of soft organic rich silts

    Groundwater level @ 2m below ground level (close to stream water level).

    Stream level & groundwater are tidal influenced

    Flooding hazard due to stream. 100 year flood levels should be assessed

    Critical structures to be designed to withstand 100yr flooding potential

    Minor instability along the stream bank was noted during the site visit.

    Any structure located close to the stream bank should be adequately designed

    Settlement of the structures should be assessed during detailed design.

    Piled foundations may be required for pump and any underground storage tanks.

    Due to high groundwater table, proximity of a stream and flood hazard, structures would need to be designed against any floatation / uplift pressures

    Localised liquefaction likely with minor subsidence (up to 100mm)

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur.

    Provided any structures are set-back enough distance from stream banks, risk is minimal

    Feasible to construct the pump station and associated structures provided adequately engineered.

    Settlement, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

    Receiving Chamber 1 Marshall Avenue

    4m of Younger Ash (firm to stiff clayey silts)

    Overlying 6m of Older Ash (dense sands)

    Overlying Waiteariki Ignimbrite (loose to medium dense silty sands)

    No data available No issues

    Proximity of the road cutting should be noted

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Moderate liquefaction with up to 300mm subsidence

    Dynamic uplift pressures may occur during an earthquake

    Adjacent road cutting stability may be affected

    Feasible to construct the receiving chamber provided adequately engineered.

    Slope stability and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered

    Road Route (K)

    Seventeenth Avenue Pump Station

    Recent deposits of Tauranga Group alluvium, comprising soft to firm organic rich silts and clays

    Pump station located close to Koporererua Stream.

    Very shallow groundwater, tidal affected

    Flood risk due to Koporererua Stream.

    Pump station located within the flood risk zone

    No significant issues, provided structures located well away from stream banks

    Significant settlement issues expected given soft soils.

    Piled foundations may be required.

    Given the shallow depth to groundwater all underground structures should be designed for hydro-static pressures

    Widespread liquefaction expected with extensive lateral spreading and large (>300mm subsidence)

    Dynamic uplift pressures will occur during an earthquake event

    No significant issues expected

    Feasible to construct the pump station and associated structures provided adequately engineered.

    Settlement, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-21

    Earthquake Hazards Route Structure Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    Receiving Chamber 2 Matapihi Road

    Pumiceous gravels, sands and silts.

    No data available. No issues

    No significant issues.

    Proximity of the existing retaining wall in private properties to be noted

    No significant issues expected

    No issues

    Moderate liquefaction expected with some localised subsidence (100 to 300mm)

    No significant issues expected

    No significant issues expected

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure.

    Liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

    Siphon Structure 1 East of Phoenix Heights (between Railway line & SH2)

    Published geology indicated Pumiceous gravels, sands and silts.

    The topography of the location indicates soft estuarine sediments

    No data available. Given the elevation (RL2m) of the ground, groundwater table would be tidal affected.

    Due to the area being low-lying (RL2m), flood risk should be assessed.

    Minor instability noted during site visit.

    Proximity of Rail embankment and SH2 corridor warrants careful engineering.

    Settlement risk should be quantified and the structure should be adequately engineered

    If high groundwater table is present, flotation of structures might occur

    Significant lateral spreading and moderate to extensive subsidence (>300mm)

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur during an earthquake

    Slope instability hazards should be assessed during an earthquake

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure, provided adequately engineered.

    Settlement, slope stability, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Physical constraints (rail and SH2 road corridor) to be noted.

    Structure to be located well away from any steep slopes and rail embankment.

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

    Road Route (K)

    Siphon Structure 4 - Te Maunga WWTP

    Fixed foredune sands

    Shallow depth to groundwater table can be expected, effected by tides

    Any flooding is likely to result from a possible breach of treatment pond embankments

    No significant issues

    Settlement risk should be quantified and the structure should be adequately engineered

    No significant issues expected

    Widespread liquefaction is expected

    Uplift pressures might occur during an earthquake

    Widespread lateral spreading may initiate some instability

    Feasible to construct the siphon structure

    Settlement, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed.

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-22

    Table 6-4: Preliminary Geotechnical Appraisal Along Pipeline Routes

    Earthquake Hazards Route Approximate Chainage

    (m)

    Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    0-100 Maleme Street (includes the Maleme Pump station site)

    Tauranga Group alluvium comprising soft to firm organic rich silts & clays.

    Available sub-soil information indicates at least 3m of soft organic rich silts

    Groundwater level @ 2m below ground level (close to stream water level).

    Stream level & groundwater are tidal influenced

    Flooding hazard due to stream. 100 year flood levels should be assessed

    Pipe to be designed to withstand 100yr flooding potential

    Minor instability along the stream bank was noted during the site visit.

    Any pipe located close to the stream bank should be adequately designed

    Not expected to be an issue.

    Differential settlements expected at stream bank crossings and changes in geological units.

    Due to high groundwater table, proximity of a stream and flood hazard, pipeline should be designed against any floatation / uplift pressures

    Widespread liquefaction is likely.

    Ground damage is expected to be moderate (i.e. subsidence > 300mm) to major (significant lateral spreading and subsidence)

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur. This will only impact the pipeline if the pipe is below the ground water table.

    Provided any pipelines are set-back enough distance from stream banks, risk is minimal

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Settlement, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and pipeline is adequately engineered.

    Central Route (A)

    (all chainages from figure 1A of Hydraulic Design Report Rev D)

    100-300

    Maleme Street

    Volcanic Ash sequence of unknown thickness overlying Te Ranga unwelded Ignimbrite

    No local soils information is available for this area

    Not known

    Expect a relatively deep ground water level at the contact between the volcanic ashes and the Te Ranga unwelded Ignimbrite.

    Localised high level perched water tables may exist

    Not expected to be an issue

    Relic head scarp for old landslide has been identified.

    Pipeline should be located to avoid this feature.

    Not expected to be an issue

    Not expected to be an issue

    Liquefaction is unlikely except for localised areas in a large earthquake.

    Ground damage is expected to be localised minor subsidence.

    Localised effects if any due to perched water tables.

    Relic slips may be reactivated in a large earthquake. pipeline Set back distances from known head scarps should be considered

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Slope stability hazards to be assessed

    Pipeline should be located away from known slope instability. Use set back distances.

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and pipeline is adequately engineered

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-23

    Earthquake Hazards Route Approximate Chainage

    (m)

    Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    300- 1000

    Oropi & Poike Rd

    Tauranga Group alluvium comprising soft to firm organic rich silts & clays.

    No local soils information is available for this area

    Not known

    Expect groundwater level @ 2m below ground level (close to stream water level).

    Stream level & groundwater may be tidal influenced

    Flooding hazard due to stream. 100 year flood levels should be assessed

    Pipe to be designed to withstand 100yr flooding potential

    Any pipe located close to the stream bank should be adequately designed

    Settlement of the pipe is not expected to be an issue.

    Differential settlements expected at stream bank crossings and changes in geological units.

    Due to high groundwater table, proximity of a stream and flood hazard, pipeline should be designed against any floatation / uplift pressures

    Widespread liquefaction is likely.

    Ground damage is expected to be moderate (i.e. subsidence > 300mm) to major (significant lateral spreading and subsidence)

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur.

    Provided any pipelines are set-back enough distance from stream banks, risk is minimal

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Settlement, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and pipeline is adequately engineered. Central

    Route (A)

    (all chainages from figure 1A of Hydraulic Design Report Rev D)

    1000-2400

    SH29

    Volcanic Ash sequence of silts and clays including Rotoehu Ash (Pumice Sands) and Hamilton Ash.

    Overlying Matua Subgroup of fluvial origin. Pumiceous sands, silts and gravels,

    No local soils information is available for this area

    Not known.

    Expect a relatively deep ground water level at the contact between the volcanic ashes and the Matua Subgroup.

    Localised high level perched water tables may exist

    Not expected

    No relic landslide head scarps identified along this section of the route.

    However, potential for slope failure exists on steep slopes in very wet conditions.

    Risk to be minimised by locating pipeline on other side of the road.

    Not expected to be an issue

    Not expected to be an issue

    Liquefaction is unlikely except for localised areas in a large earthquake.

    Ground damage is expected to be localised minor subsidence.

    Localised effects only due to perched water tables.

    Existing slope failures may be reactivated by large earthquake event.

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Slope stability hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and pipeline is adequately engineered.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-24

    Earthquake Hazards Route Approximate Chainage

    (m)

    Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    2400-2900

    SH29 (includes the Ila pump station)

    Tauranga Group alluvium comprising soft to firm organic rich silts & clays

    No data available. However, the topography and the proximity of the stream indicate a shallow depth to groundwater table.

    Groundwater table and stream water levels could be tidal influenced

    Given the topography of the area (Ila park is low lying), flood hazard may be present.

    No significant issues, provided the structures are set-back enough distance from the stream banks

    Settlement potential to be assessed

    Differential settlements expected at stream bank crossings and changes in geological units

    Due to high groundwater table, proximity of a stream and flood hazard, pipeline may need to be designed against any floatation / uplift pressures

    Localised to widespread liquefaction is expected (up to 300mm subsidence).

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur during an earthquake

    Provided the pipeline is set-back enough distance from stream banks, risk is minimal

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Settlement, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

    2900-6100

    Sh29, Stephens Place, Hairini St, Maungatapu Rd

    Volcanic Ash sequence of silts and clays including Rotoehu Ash (Pumice Sands) and Hamilton Ash.

    Overlying Matua Subgroup, fluvial origin pumiceous sands, silts and gravels, medium dense.

    Not known.

    Expect a relatively deep ground water level at the contact between the volcanic ashes and the Matua Subgroup.

    Localised high level perched water tables may exist

    Not expected

    Relic landslide head scarps identified on along pipeline route.

    Risk to be minimised by locating pipeline on other side of the road

    Not expected to be an issue

    Not expected to be an issue

    Minor to widespread liquefaction is expected.

    Ground damage is expected to be minor to moderate subsidence i.e. up to 300mm.

    Localised effects if any due to perched water tables.

    Existing slope failures may be reactivated by large earthquake event.

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Slope stability and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and structures adequately engineered.

    Central Route (A)

    (all chainages from figure 1A of Hydraulic Design Report Rev D)

    6100-6400

    SH2/29

    Engineered Fill (causeway fill comprising of rock boulders and possible ash fill) overlying soft estuarine sediments

    Tidal waves influenced

    Marine environment. If built on causeway/bridge abutments, adequate erosion protection required.

    Erosion controlled.

    Likely settlement hazards to be assessed during detailed design

    Floatation risks to be assessed.

    Widespread liquefaction is expected in exposed sediments.

    Ground damage is expected to be subsidence up to 300mm

    Uplift pressures due to earthquake will only be a problem if uplift pressures exceed overburden pressures. i.e. pipeline is too shallow.

    Not an issue

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Settlement, flooding, erosion and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Pipeline design and depth needs to mitigate potential hazards.

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and pipeline is adequately engineered

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-25

    Earthquake Hazards Route Approximate Chainage

    (m)

    Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    6400-6900

    SH29/2

    Soft Estuarine sediments

    Available data from the Maungatapu bridge foundations indicates 8-14m of silt sands, overlying pumiceous sand and silts to a depth of 22m (only one data point). Below this are further estuarine muds. Hard ground was not encountered.

    Paleo-channels exist within the sediments

    Sea Level.

    Shallow portions of the estuary near the coast are exposed at low tide.

    Flooding may result in higher water levels in the estuary. Not expected to impact the buried pipeline.

    Not expected to be an issue

    Settlement potential to be assessed

    However, differential settlements within the paleo-channel and at the coast should be examined at detailed design stage.

    May be a problem if pipeline is shallow

    Widespread liquefaction is expected in exposed sediments.

    Ground damage is expected to be subsidence up to 300mm

    Uplift pressures due to earthquake will only be a problem if uplift pressures exceed overburden pressures. i.e. pipeline is too shallow.

    Not an issue

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Settlement, flooding, erosion and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Pipeline design and depth needs to mitigate potential hazards.

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and pipeline is adequately engineered

    6900-10,500

    Matapihi Rd, Paper Rd,SH2

    Volcanic Ash sequence of silts and clays including Rotoehu Ash (Pumice Sands) and Hamilton Ash.

    Overlying Matua Subgroup, fluvial origin pumiceous sands, silts and gravels, medium dense.

    Not known.

    Expect a relatively deep ground water level at the contact between the volcanic ashes and the Matua Subgroup.

    Localised high level perched water tables may exist

    Not expected

    Large relic head scarp identified at approx chainage 7000-7300.

    Pipeline should be located using an appropriate set back distance fro the head scarp.

    Not expected to be an issue

    Not expected to be an issue

    Moderate liquefaction is expected.

    Ground damage is expected to be limited with subsidence of 100-300mm.

    Localised effects if any due to perched water tables.

    Existing slope failures may be reactivated by large earthquake event.

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Slope stability, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and pipeline is adequately engineered.

    Central Route (A)

    (all chainages from figure 1A of Hydraulic Design Report Rev D)

    10,500-12,600 TeMaunga wetlands

    Fixed foredune sands

    Shallow depth to groundwater table can be expected, effected by tides

    Any flooding is likely to result from a possible breach of treatment pond embankments

    Typically flat low-lying land in this area. Not expected to be an issue.

    Settlement of the pipe should be assessed during detailed design.

    Differential settlements expected at stream bank crossings and changes in geological units.

    Due to high groundwater table, proximity of a stream and flood hazard, pipeline should be designed against any floatation / uplift pressures

    Widespread liquefaction is expected.

    Ground damage is expected to be moderate to major with significant lateral spreading and subsidence.

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur

    Not expected to be an issue

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Settlement, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and pipeline is adequately engineered.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-26

    Earthquake Hazards Route Approximate Chainage

    (m)

    Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    0-100 Maleme Street (includes the Maleme Pump station site)

    Tauranga Group alluvium comprising soft to firm organic rich silts & clays.

    Available sub-soil information indicates at least 3m of soft organic rich silts

    Groundwater level @ 2m below ground level (close to stream water level).

    Stream level & groundwater are tidal influenced

    Flooding hazard due to stream. 100 year flood levels should be assessed

    Pipe to be designed to withstand 100yr flooding potential

    Minor instability along the stream bank was noted during the site visit.

    Any pipe located close to the stream bank should be adequately designed

    Not expected to be an issue.

    Differential settlements expected at stream bank crossings and changes in geological units.

    Due to high groundwater table, proximity of a stream and flood hazard, pipeline should be designed against any floatation / uplift pressures

    Widespread liquefaction is likely.

    Ground damage is expected to be moderate (i.e. subsidence > 300mm) to major (significant lateral spreading and subsidence)

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur. This will only impact the pipeline if the pipe is below the ground water table.

    Provided any pipelines are set-back enough distance from stream banks, risk is minimal

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Settlement, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and pipeline is adequately engineered.

    Eastern Route (B)

    (all chainages from figure 2A of Hydraulic Design Report Rev D)

    100-300

    Maleme Street

    Volcanic Ash sequence of unknown thickness overlying Te Ranga unwelded Ignimbrite

    No local soils information is available for this area

    Not known

    Expect a relatively deep ground water level at the contact between the volcanic ashes and the Te Ranga unwelded Ignimbrite.

    Localised high level perched water tables may exist

    Not expected to be an issue

    Relic head scarp for old landslide has been identified.

    Pipeline should be located to avoid this feature.

    Not expected to be an issue

    Not expected to be an issue

    Liquefaction is unlikely except for localised areas in a large earthquake.

    Ground damage is expected to be localised minor subsidence.

    Localised effects if any due to perched water tables.

    Relic slips may be reactivated in a large earthquake. pipeline Set back distances from known head scarps should be considered

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Slope stability hazards to be assessed

    Pipeline should be located away from known slope instability. Use set back distances.

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and pipeline is adequately engineered

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-27

    Earthquake Hazards Route Approximate Chainage

    (m)

    Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    300- 1000

    Oropi & Poike Rd

    Tauranga Group alluvium comprising soft to firm organic rich silts & clays.

    No local soils information is available for this area

    Not known

    Expect groundwater level @ 2m below ground level (close to stream water level).

    Stream level & groundwater may be tidal influenced

    Flooding hazard due to stream. 100 year flood levels should be assessed

    Pipe to be designed to withstand 100yr flooding potential

    Any pipe located close to the stream bank should be adequately designed

    Settlement of the pipe is not expected to be an issue.

    Differential settlements expected at stream bank crossings and changes in geological units.

    Due to high groundwater table, proximity of a stream and flood hazard, pipeline should be designed against any floatation / uplift pressures

    Widespread liquefaction is likely.

    Ground damage is expected to be moderate (i.e. subsidence > 300mm) to major (significant lateral spreading and subsidence)

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur.

    Provided any pipelines are set-back enough distance from stream banks, risk is minimal

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Settlement, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and pipeline is adequately engineered.

    Eastern Route (B)

    (all chainages from figure 2A of Hydraulic Design Report Rev D)

    1000-4200

    Poike Rd, Ohauiti Rd, and Welcome Bay Rd

    Volcanic Ash sequence of silts and clays including Rotoehu Ash (Pumice Sands) and Hamilton Ash.

    Overlying Matua Subgroup, fluvial origin pumiceous sands, silts and gravels, medium dense.

    Not known.

    Expect a relatively deep ground water level at the contact between the volcanic ashes and the Matua Subgroup.

    Springs are observed at the Church property on Poike Road about 8-10m below road level.

    Localised high level perched water tables may exist

    Not expected

    Two active landslide headscarps identified at Poike Road.

    Essential that the pipeline be placed on other side of the road from the headscarps.

    Other relic head scarps identified along the route, e.g., Maori burial ground

    Risk minimisation by avoidance.

    Not expected to be an issue

    Not expected to be an issue

    Moderate liquefaction is expected.

    Ground damage is expected to be limited with subsidence of 100-300mm.

    Localised effects only due to perched water tables.

    Existing slope instability may be reactivated in the event of a large earthquake.

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Slope stability and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and pipeline is adequately engineered.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-28

    Earthquake Hazards Route Approximate Chainage

    (m)

    Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    4200-4300

    Welcome Bay Rd-Kaitemako Stream crossing

    Tauranga Group alluvium comprising soft to firm organic rich silts & clays.

    No local soils information is available for this area

    Not known

    Expect groundwater level @ 2m below ground level (close to stream water level).

    Stream level & groundwater are tidal influenced

    Flooding hazard due to stream. 100 year flood levels should be assessed

    Pipe to be designed to withstand 100yr flooding potential

    Any pipe located close to the stream bank should be adequately designed

    Settlement of the pipe is not expected to be an issue.

    Differential settlements expected at stream bank crossings and changes in geological units.

    Due to high groundwater table, proximity of a stream and flood hazard, pipeline should be designed against any floatation / uplift pressures

    Widespread liquefaction is likely.

    Ground damage is expected to be major to extensive (significant to extensive lateral spreading and subsidence)

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur.

    Provided any pipelines are set-back enough distance from stream banks, risk is minimal

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Settlement, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and pipeline is adequately engineered.

    4300-5100

    Kaitemako Rd, Waipuna Park

    Volcanic Ash sequence of silts and clays including Rotoehu Ash (Pumice Sands) and Hamilton Ash.

    Overlying Matua Subgroup, fluvial origin pumiceous sands, silts and gravels, medium dense.

    Not known.

    Expect a relatively deep ground water level at the contact between the volcanic ashes and the Matua Subgroup.

    Localised high level perched water tables may exist

    Not expected

    No relic landslide head scarps identified along this section of the route.

    However, potential for slope failure exists on steep slopes in very wet conditions.

    Not expected to be an issue

    Not expected to be an issue

    Moderate liquefaction is expected.

    Ground damage is expected to be limited with subsidence of 100-300mm.

    Localised effects only due to perched water tables.

    Slips may be reactivated or formed in a large earthquake.

    Set back distances from known head scarps should be considered

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Settlement, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and pipeline is adequately engineered.

    Eastern Route (B)

    (all chainages from figure 2A of Hydraulic Design Report Rev D)

    5100-5300

    Welcome Bay Rd - Otumanaga Stream crossing

    Tauranga Group alluvium comprising soft to firm organic rich silts & clays.

    No local soils information is available for this area

    Not known

    Expect groundwater level @ 2m below ground level (close to stream water level).

    Stream level & groundwater are tidal influenced

    Flooding hazard due to stream. 100 year flood levels should be assessed

    Pipe to be designed to withstand 100yr flooding potential

    Any pipe located close to the stream bank should be adequately designed

    Settlement of the pipe is not expected to be an issue.

    Differential settlements expected at stream bank crossings and changes in geological units.

    Due to high groundwater table, proximity of a stream and flood hazard, pipeline should be designed against any floatation / uplift pressures

    Widespread liquefaction is likely.

    Ground damage is expected to be major (significant lateral spreading and subsidence)

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur.

    Provided any pipelines are set-back enough distance from stream banks, risk is minimal

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Settlement, flooding and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and pipeline is adequately engineered.

  • SECTION 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Considerations

    J:\JOBS\42066678\6000 REPORTS\GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS\R031 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT_FINAL.DOC\27-JAN-06

    6-29

    Earthquake Hazards Route Approximate Chainage

    (m)

    Geology Groundwater Flooding Slope Stability

    Settlement Floatation

    Liquefaction Uplift Pressures

    Slope Instability

    Comments / Recommendations

    5300-5900

    James Cook Dr

    Volcanic Ash sequence of silts and clays including Rotoehu Ash (Pumice Sands) and Hamilton Ash.

    Overlying Matua Subgroup, fluvial origin pumiceous sands, silts and gravels, medium dense.

    Not known.

    Expect a relatively deep ground water level at the contact between the volcanic ashes and the Matua Subgroup.

    Localised high level perched water tables may exist

    Not expected

    No relic landslide head scarps identified along this section of the route.

    However, potential for slope failure exists on steep slopes in very wet conditions

    Not expected to be an issue

    Not expected to be an issue

    Localised liquefaction is expected.

    Ground damage is expected to be localised to minor with subsidence of less than 100mm.

    Localised effects if any due to perched water tables.

    Slips may be reactivated or formed in a large earthquake.

    Set back distances from known head scarps should be considered

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Slope stability hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and pipeline is adequately engineered.

    5900-6300

    Waitaha Rd & Welcome Bay Rd

    Tauranga Group alluvium comprising soft to firm organic rich silts & clays.

    No local soils information is available for this area

    Not known

    Expect groundwater level @ 2m below ground level (close to stream water level).

    Stream level & groundwater are tidal influenced

    Flooding hazard due to stream. 100 year flood levels should be assessed

    Pipe to be designed to withstand 100yr flooding potential

    Any pipe located close to the stream bank should be adequately designed

    Settlement of the pipe is not expected to be an issue.

    Differential settlements expected at stream bank crossings and changes in geological units.

    Due to high groundwater table, proximity of a stream and flood hazard, pipeline should be designed against any floatation / uplift pressures

    Widespread liquefaction is likely.

    Ground damage is expected to be moderate (subsidence greater than 300mm)

    Due to high groundwater levels some additional uplift pressures might occur.

    Provided any pipelines are set-back enough distance from stream banks, risk is minimal

    Feasible to construct the pipeline.

    Settlement, slope stability and, liquefaction hazards to be assessed

    Detailed geotechnical investigations required prior to detailed design to ensure all hazards are quantified and pipeline is adequately engineered.

    Eastern Route (B)

    (all chainages from figure 2A of Hydraulic Design Report Rev D)

    6300-6500

    Welcome Bay Rd

    Volcanic Ash sequence of silts and clays including Rotoehu Ash (Pumice Sands) and Hamilton Ash.

    Overlying Matua Subgroup, fluvial origin pumiceous sands, silts and gravels, medium dense.

    Not known.

    Expect a relatively deep ground water level at the contact between the