Information Note 01/2009 March 2009

Dangerous Hillside Order

Key Messages: The Geotechnical Engineering Office performs a regulatory function of
safety-screening of selected private slopes. The main objective of the Study
is to confirm whether prima facie evidence on a private slope can be
established for serving a Dangerous Hillside Order, requiring the owners to
rectify any dangerous situation. The Study is not a detailed investigation to
confirm whether or not the slope meets current safety standards.

Introduction

Lot owners are responsible for slope repair/upgrading works, slope inspection and
slope maintenance. This responsibility covers slopes within the private lot, plus slopes and
adjoining land formed as part of the development and other areas specified in the lease or
other land title documents.

Under section 27A of the Buildings Ordinance, a Dangerous Hillside (DH) Order may
be served on the responsible slope owners requiring them to investigate and carry out
necessary slope works to rectify the dangerous or liable to become dangerous situation.

Reasons Why Dangerous Hillside Orders May Be Needed

Slope owners should maintain their slopes in good condition in accordance with
Geoguide 5 Guide to Slope Maintenance to safeguard the public safety. However, some
owners may not fulfill such obligation and their slopes may become dangerous or liable to
become dangerous for the following reasons:
deterioration of slope condition with time without proper maintenance;
change in environmental factors (e.g. blockage of surface channels or buried drains by
unplanned vegetation, refuse or stockpile of materials; or blockage to water flow due to
failure of slopes in the vicinity) which may give rise to concentration of surface water
flow, and/or change in loading in surroundings;
critical combination of duration and intensity of rainfall and antecedent rainfall may not
have been previously experienced;
deterioration and leakage or bursting of buried water-carrying services or services which
act as conduits for water;
progressive undetected movement, which may take place over a period of years.

The GEO performs a regulatory function of safety-screening of selected private

slopes under the Landslip Preventive Measures Programme. The main objective of the
safety-screening study (i.e. Stage 2 Study) is to confirm whether prima facie evidence on a
private slope can be established for serving a DH Order. Stage 2 Study is not a detailed
stability investigation to confirm whether or not the slope meets current safety standards.
Once a prima facie case can be established that a private slope is liable to become dangerous,
a DH Order will be served to require the responsible owners to carry out an investigation to
confirm the stability condition of the slope and, if found necessary, to carry out upgrading
works.
 -2-

In addition to the systematic safety-screening study programme, a DHO may also be

served if a landslide has occurred or significant signs of distress are found on a private slope.

Technical Criteria Which Warrant a DH Order

When considering the service of a DH Order, the GEO uses at least one of seven
technical criteria to determine if prima facie evidence exists that a situation is dangerous or
liable to become dangerous. These are documented in GEO Circular No. 24 for the
guidance of professional staff and their consultants, and are summarised in Appendix A.

Recommendations for the service of a DH Order are made only after very careful
consideration. All DH Order recommendations are reviewed by GEOs senior management
before they are passed to the BD to ensure that DH Orders are issued only when there is
sound justification.

What to Do When You Receive a Dangerous Hillside Order

The GEO has published a guide entitled What to do when you receive a Dangerous
Hillside Order for private slope owners who receive a DH Order requiring investigation or
repair of slopes. The guide provides information on how to select a geotechnical consultant
and includes examples to illustrate the approximate costs of works. The guide is available
free of charge from the GEO and District Offices.

Lands Department maintains a Slope Maintenance Responsibility Information System

(SMRIS) to provide a quick and convenient preliminary reference to the public for the
purpose of assisting them to identify the parties who are responsible for the maintenance of
particular slopes registered in the Catalogue of Slopes. The public can access the SMRIS from
the internet web site (http://www.slope.landsd.gov.hk/smris). As the SMRIS only provides a
preliminary determination of maintenance responsibility, the enquirers should inspect the
relevant documents (e.g. lease documents) and, if necessary, consult their own advisers (e.g.
lawyers or surveyors) for independent advice and opinion in order to confirm the maintenance
parties of the slopes.

The GEO has set up a Community Advisory Unit (CAU) to assist and advise private
slope owners on how to proceed with slope maintenance, investigation, improvement and
upgrading works. If owners encounter difficulties in dealing with a DH Order or require
assistance and further information, they can contact the CAU at telephone number 2760 5800
or by electronic mail at cau@cedd.gov.hk.

Non-Compliance of a Dangerous Hillside Order

If owners do not carry out the investigation of their slopes by the date specified in the
DH Order, the BD may carry out the investigation and any subsequent works as default works
and will seek to recover the costs plus supervision charges from the owners, under sections
32A & 33 of the Buildings Ordinance. The Building Authority is also legally empowered to
prosecute any person who fails to comply with the Order under section 40(1B) of the
Buildings Ordinance.
 -3-

Slope Safety Division

Geotechnical Engineering Office
Civil Engineering and Development Department
March 2009
 -4-

Appendix A
Circumstances which Warrant a DH Order

A recommendation to the BD for the service of a DH Order should be made where a

situation is dangerous or liable to become dangerous, involving a significant
consequence-to-life or damage to property, as defined by one of the following criteria:

Criterion A - There are significant signs of distress, or visual or documented

evidence of continuing hazardous movement, of a slope, excavation,
retaining structure, boulder or rock fragment, or in the case of a rock
slope, the presence of adversely dipping and kinematically admissible
sets of discontinuities together with a credible trigger that would likely
cause instability.

Criterion B - For a slope, a mechanism exists by which failure can occur, and the
factor of safety, calculated in accordance with the standards prescribed
in the Geotechnical Manual for Slopes (1984), including a site-specific
ground investigation, is less than 1.1. For an inadequately compacted
fill slope, a mechanism exists by which liquefaction can occur.

Criterion C - For a concrete retaining wall (excluding sheet walls), the factor of
safety, calculated in accordance with the standards prescribed in the
Geotechnical Manual for Slopes, including a site-specific ground
investigation, is less than 1.1 for sliding or less than 1.2 for
overturning.

For an old masonry retaining wall, the criterion is defined in

accordance with the guidelines given in GEO Circular No. 33.

Criterion D - For a soil cut slope located within the areas shown as comprising
saprolitic soils of Kau Sai Chau Volcanic Group, Lantau Volcanic
Group and Trachytic Tuff (Eutaxite) of Repulse Bay Volcanic Group or
of granitic origin in Hong Kong Geological Survey - Geological Map
of Hong Kong, Series HGM100 and having an effective height and
mean slope inclination (at the critical section) falling within the shaded
zone shown in Figure 1. Effective height is defined as the difference
in elevation between the crest and the lowest daylighting point of
realistic slip surfaces.

Criterion E - For a landslip case where emergency works have been undertaken, for
example, by owners or by BDs term contractors, but geotechnical
study and/or extensive permanent works to rectify the long-term
stability of the feature are required.

Criterion F - For a slope, a mechanism exists by which failure can occur, and the
factor of safety, calculated from a stability assessment based on
generalised or typical parameters without site-specific ground
investigation (e.g. Stage 2 Studies), is less than 1.2. However,
judgement should be exercised in each case and due consideration must
be given to the results of sensitivity analyses which cover factors of
safety ranging from 1.1 to 1.2.
 -5-

Criterion G - For a concrete retaining wall (excluding sheet walls), for which a
reliable documentary record of the wall dimensions is available, the
factor of safety, calculated in accordance with the standards prescribed
in the Geotechnical Manual for Slopes, based on generalised or typical
parameters without site-specific ground investigation, is less than 1.2
for sliding or less than 1.5 for overturning.

The above criteria apply to both dangerous and liable to become dangerous situations.
The danger defined by Criterion A is obviously more immediate than that defined by the other
criteria.
 -6-

50

40
(43, 38.5m)

30
Effective Height (m) .
()

20

10
(62, 10m)

0
30 40 50 60 70 80 90
()
Average Slope Angle (Degrees)

Legend : D-Notice Advisory Letter File Closed

:
Note : Effective height is the difference in elevation between the crest and the lowest daylighting point
of realistic slip surfaces (at the critical section)
:

Figure 1 - GEO Action Taken as a Result of Stage 2 Studies on Soil Cut Slopes
-