Drawings Archive for the Project Team
1. Drawings about Limestone Retaining wall - Zone 1L
| D5.pdf |
| 8._retaining_wall_rules_at_62_calley_as4678-2002_design_criteria_for_retaining_walls.pdf |
| trial_orders_20-8-2021.jpg |
| D1.pdf |
| D2_r4.pdf |
| D3.pdf |
2. Drawings about Removing 1986 Natural limestone retaining wall and installing post and panel retaining wall
Zones 1l, 2l, 3l, 4l [11m long]
Zones 1l, 2l, 3l, 4l [11m long]
| D6.pdf |
| structural_engineers_pack_ls_p_p_retaining_walls_19-1-2022.pdf |
| zone_1 L Drawings.pdf |
| zones_2 L_3 L_Drawings.pdf |
| zone_4 L_Drawing.pdf |
3. Drawings about Cost Management: TWO OWNERS' BOUNDARY FEATURES AND LEVEL HEIGHTS AND PERCENTAGE OF CHANGE IN nATURAL GROUND LEVEL - Slide show of Zones along the boundary
Location of Zones 1L to 10L referred in many Affidavits, many emails and at the phone for simplification of Boundary #62 & #64 complexities in communication between stakeholders:
| D18.pdf |
SECTION A-A OF ZONE 1L - SCREEN WALL #62:
| D11.jpg |
| D5_dr2.pdf |
| D8.pdf |
RIGHT VIEWS OF LS1 - RETAINING WALL 2008 #64:
| D14.jpg |
| D9.pdf |
RIGHT VIEW OF LS2 - RETAINING WALL 2008 #64:
| D10.pdf |
| DR13_zone_8L.jpg |
Left View of the retaining walls and surfaces in boundary #64 & #62 using many points from Licensed surveyor's two drawings, to see which owner has changed the natural ground level and whether that owner has a retaining wall next to the boundary or not?:
| D3_r4.pdf |
Left View of the Contour of the proposed Dividing Fence Line for hilly boundary 64 & 62, Using many points from licensed surveyor's two drawings:
| D4_r2.pdf |
| D12.pdf |
Slide show of Zone 1L
Slides of Zones 2L, 3L: The Rock Limestone retaining wall of 1986 at #64. On trial date 20/8/2021 magistrate ordered the structural engineer report be used for judgement of the following disputes:
a. Whether the retaining wall is needed?
b. If retaining wall is needed, why type?
The structural engineer first report states the owner #62 has piled 400mm sand behind the white brick screen wall [Zone 7L] which is joint to their house. Therefore the term Screen brick wall is used in report of structural engineer [it is not a boundary wall nor it is a dividing fence line].
a. Whether the retaining wall is needed?
b. If retaining wall is needed, why type?
The structural engineer first report states the owner #62 has piled 400mm sand behind the white brick screen wall [Zone 7L] which is joint to their house. Therefore the term Screen brick wall is used in report of structural engineer [it is not a boundary wall nor it is a dividing fence line].
Zone 4L Slides and LS1 Retaining wall, LS2 Retaining wall, at #64. These two zones on 1/8/2005 did not have retaining wall but sand on #64 was high enough to expect a retaining wall from past there. Extra sand at #64 were removed in 2008 to make the bent dividing fence stable.
Slide show of Zone 8L: In this Zone which is located between the front of 60 cm high brick retaining wall #62 [holding their rear terrace sand, and front of garden brick wall of #62. You face to front door of #64 for your sides names [front, left, right, back]
4. Orders requested based on engineer's report about #62 barriers to dividing fence installation for #64
| b2.pdf_extract.pdf |
This file b2.pdf_extract.pdf is extracted from attachment B2 of the form 32a of the defendant. You can also find B2 in litigation files web-page. The extracted file only includes pages 4-15 of the attachment B2. The content is written by Engineer Afsaneh Cooper a Mechanical engineer. This file lists the orders which are required for boundary of #62 & #64, so the dividing fence be installed correctly. Since the two storms 29/8/2019 and 6/5/2020 have removed all the dividing fence in Zones 2L, 3L, 4L, 8L, 9L and 10L, it is important that same problems of the past does not add to the future cost of the dividing fence.
| s1045375_-_report_certified_certified.pdf |
File s1045375...is from Engineer Ahmad who is a structural engineer at Structerre. He attended boundary #62 & #64 and based on order of magistrate and defendant's lawyer prepared an engineer's report. What is important in his report:
a. Zone 1L at #62 is piled by sand. The recorded 400mm for height of piled sand is not relevant to the orders made my the magistrate on trial 20/8/2021, therefore engineer Cooper of #64 drew all files in this web page specially DR2 in file D5. See pleat 1 in this accordion and open file D5.PDF. Then see Drawing DR2 in that file. This way you can see a more accurate figure for sand height at #62 Zone 1L, Maximum pile of sand above natural ground level which is coincident with sand height next to boundary at #64 in Zone 1L in same section A-A. Engineer Ahmad stated in his report that each party who is going to do the work for a retaining wall can approach Structerre for further advise and his report is not for drawing it is for determining whether the retaining wall is needed, if yes, what type, only. The claimant's conception of the structural engineer's report is misconception because they want quickly build the same type Aluminum plinth, which prevents the sand of being washed into neighbor's land. The rules of the Minister for commerce is retaining wall design needs to be based on Australian standard codes and it should be designed by a structural engineer. Fence quote for aluminum plinth of colorbond is not enough. Therefore the draft 1 of mechanical engineer's drawings as the following sets were drawn by Engineer A. Cooper, M.F.Gordon [2 drawings]licensed surveyor], also Structerre [1 drawing]:
a. Zone 1L at #62 is piled by sand. The recorded 400mm for height of piled sand is not relevant to the orders made my the magistrate on trial 20/8/2021, therefore engineer Cooper of #64 drew all files in this web page specially DR2 in file D5. See pleat 1 in this accordion and open file D5.PDF. Then see Drawing DR2 in that file. This way you can see a more accurate figure for sand height at #62 Zone 1L, Maximum pile of sand above natural ground level which is coincident with sand height next to boundary at #64 in Zone 1L in same section A-A. Engineer Ahmad stated in his report that each party who is going to do the work for a retaining wall can approach Structerre for further advise and his report is not for drawing it is for determining whether the retaining wall is needed, if yes, what type, only. The claimant's conception of the structural engineer's report is misconception because they want quickly build the same type Aluminum plinth, which prevents the sand of being washed into neighbor's land. The rules of the Minister for commerce is retaining wall design needs to be based on Australian standard codes and it should be designed by a structural engineer. Fence quote for aluminum plinth of colorbond is not enough. Therefore the draft 1 of mechanical engineer's drawings as the following sets were drawn by Engineer A. Cooper, M.F.Gordon [2 drawings]licensed surveyor], also Structerre [1 drawing]:
5. Contents of the Drawing Files in this Accordion: d1 - d25
D1 |
Surveyor's certificate |
D2 |
Feature and level survey, South West Boundary of 64 Calley Drive, Leeming |
D3 |
Change in Natural ground level Drawing |
D4 |
Contour of the dividing fence line |
D5 |
Zone 1L, Limestone retaining wall |
D6 |
Zones: 1L, 2L, 3L, 4L post & Panel retaining wall and ground level heights (2005-2021) in boundary #64 & #62. |
D7 |
Precast concrete retaining wall - Wall Section by Structerre/Wonderwall |
D8 |
DR2 Drawing sketched in D5 Drawing. Section A-A before retaining wall was built. Location: Zone 1L [10/8/2020] |
D9 |
DR12 Drawing: Limestone Retaining wall - KLB - 2008 in Zone 4L. |
D10 |
DR13: Change in Natural ground level in Zone 8L - LS2 Retaining wall at #64 and Brick wall 440mm high at #62. |
D11 |
Extract of Zone 1L domain from drawing D2 of M.F.Gordon licensed surveyor. |
D12 |
Attachment to D4 Drawing. Data analysis - Contour of dividing fence line on the hill of #64 & #64 |
D13 |
Project management chart_2005-2009-r2 |
D14 |
Drawing Details_BA-2007-1687_17-8-2007 |
D15 |
Boundaries details_BA-2007-1687_17-8-2007 |
D16 |
Framed views of building license 2007 KLB limestone retaining wall. |
D17 |
Email of James Woodford to court about 13 reasons claimant’s form 23 should be dismissed |
D18 |
Boundary Zones #62 |
D19 |
Zone 5G: Undermining of Fence into #64 in 2014 by an encroaching Post of a crossing Retaining wall [at #62] - Undermining Fence by lowering ground level - Refusing to pay for Retaining cost by Fraud |
D20 |
- Zones 2G - 3G Retaining wall made of limestone Rocks built about 1986 at #64 Calley Dr. - Zone 4G - Reticulated garden at #64 Calley, back yard. - Present "South View" of Zones 2G, 3G, 4G from #64 Calley. |
D21 |
Drawings for number of limestone blocks used in KLB Retaining wall [built in 2008 with license BL2-BL3] is in process to calculate exact number of blocks used in this wall in 3 neighbors' boundary by defendant [#64]. |
D22 |
Licensed Surveyor 2008 and KLB Costs Percentage. from a CD dated 2011. In Process. |
D23 |
|
D24 |
|
D25 |
|
D26 |
|
D27 |
title 5
title 8
title 18