#18-3275 McCallum Road Abbotsford, BC, V2S 7W8 T. 1.888 ... · PDF filesubsurface soil investigation included excavation of a ... protect the excavated sub-grade; Any water-softened

#18-3275 McCallum Road

Abbotsford, BC, V2S 7W8

T. 1.888.855.9733

F. 1.604.855.7378

www.geomediaeng.com

GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS

CONSULTING ENGINEERING • INSPECTION & TESTING • MATERIALS TECHNOLOGY

Offices: Abbotsford, Burnaby, Dawson Creek, Fort St. John, Kelowna, Salmon Arm, Squamish

(Sea to Sky), Sechelt (Sunshine Coast), Surrey, Victoria, and Red Deer (AB)

Serving British Columbia’s Construction Industry Since 1987

October 5, 2012 Project No.: G-2265

0932692 BC Ltd c/o

CitiWest Consulting Ltd.

10701 - 133rd

Street

Surrey, BC V3T 3Z3

Attention: Harbhajan Parhar c/o Ron Hung, P.Eng.

Regarding GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION & REPORT

Proposed 33-Unit & 13-Unit Townhouse Projects

19728, 19738, 19754, 19764, and 19770 - 55A Avenue, City of Langley (33 Unit)

19765 & 19773 – 55A Avenue, City of Langley (13 Unit)

1.0. INTRODUCTION

In accordance with your recent authorization, GeoMedia Engineering Ltd. (GME) has completed a

geotechnical investigation, a Benkelman Beam test, and an infiltration test at the above referenced

properties. The purpose of the investigation was to identify subsurface soil conditions including

infiltration rates in order to provide recommendations for site development and foundation design.

This report summarizes the findings and provides geotechnical recommendations for the proposed

development. This report has been prepared in accordance with current geotechnical engineering

principles and practices in British Columbia. This report may be used by the City of Langley for

development and building planning purposes.

2.0. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

GME understands that it is planned to rezone the seven (7) single-family residential lots to medium

density residential parcels. The proposed developments are a 33 Unit Townhouse development on the

Geotechnical Investigation and Report October 5, 2012

Proposed 33 Unit & 13 Unit Townhouse Developments Project No.: G-2265

19728, 19738, 19754, 19764, & 19770 - 55A Ave; and 19765 & 19773 – 55A Ave, City of Langley

Copyright 2012 GeoMedia Engineering Ltd. Page 2 of 10

south side of 55A Avenue and a 13 Unit Townhouse development on the north side of 55A Avenue. It is

proposed to construct three (3) level slab-on-grade buildings. Various units will front 55A whereas the

remaining units will front the back lane north of 55A Avenue and south of 55A Avenue. 55A Avenue

will be upgraded to a 12.2m wide road to accommodate street parking. Access to the townhouse units

will be from the proposed lane to the south and the existing lane to the north. Two proposed

development plan concept for the north and south side of 55A Avenue are attached respectively as

Figure 1 and 2.

3.0. SCOPE OF WORK

GME scope of work was to conduct a test pit exploration program, soil infiltration tests, and a

Benkelman Beam test in order to compile this geotechnical report to provide comments and

recommendations for:

• Depth to competent sub-grade for the proposed roads and building foundations,

• Minimum required pavement structure for:

• 55A Avenue, and

• Laneway,

• excavation slopes and fill slopes gradients,

• infiltration rates,

• permissible soil bearing capacity for building foundations, and

• seismic considerations for the development.

Other geotechnical considerations and recommendations pertinent to the development of the site and

building foundations are also provided in this report. It is to be noted that this report does not address

any environmental issues related to the development.

4.0. FIELD WORK

A member of GME’s technical staff visited the site on September 10, 2012 and October 1, 2012 to

complete a site reconnaissance and a subsurface soil investigation for the south and north side

respectively. The site reconnaissance included a review of the site and surrounding properties. The

subsurface soil investigation included excavation of a total of seven (7) test pits with the assistance of a

a subcontracted mid-sized track-mounted excavator. GME’s staff visually logged and classified the soil

excavated from the test pits.

5.0. SITE DESCRIPTION

The site here on will be described as the proposed amalgamated north and south parcel. The sites are

located on the north and south side of 55A Street in the City of Langley, BC. The south property is

rectangular in shape, and has a dimension of about 100m (E-W) by 50m (N-S). The area of the south





site is approximately 5000m2. The north property is also rectangular in shape with dimensions of about

40m (E-W) by 50m (N-S). The area of the north parcel is about 2000m2.

The properties are surrounded by single family and multi-family sites.

5.1 Surface Conditions

The overall site is flat. As taken from the City of Langley online maps, the site elevations are about

10m geodetic.

Currently single family residential dwellings preside on the single family lots with the exception of

civic lot of 19764, which was recently demolished and cleared. Accesses to the properties are

served by driveways from 55A Avenue. The laneway to the south is unpaved and has not been

maintained for vehicular access, whereas, the north laneway is paved and moderately used.

Coniferous and deciduous trees are scattered throughout the two sites.

5.2 Subsurface Conditions

The following soil condition describes the specific test pits and is representative of the general soil

condition in the immediate vicinity of each respective test pits. Interpretation of soil conditions

between the test pits is based on an assumed continuity of the subsurface conditions. The soil

conditions described are generalized and are based on the available test pit information. Variation

in stratigraphy can occur between test pit locations, and in the areas not investigated. The soil logs

should only be referenced for soil and groundwater conditions at the specific test pit locations.

5.2.1 Soil Conditions

As previously noted, seven (7) test pits were excavated with the assistance of a midsized track-

mounted excavator. The location and logs of the individual test pits are attached.

Based on the conditions observed in the test pits and the general characterizations of the

geological maps, the stratigraphy in order from the surface consists of:

• loose to compact , organic silt/fill, underlain by

• very stiff clayey silt to the investigative depth.

5.2.2 Groundwater and Infiltration Conditions

Seepage was not encountered in any of the test pits. Based on our judgment and observations,

it appears that groundwater would be perched above the clayey silt later. Two percolation tests

were conducted in the clayey silt layer to evaluate the infiltration rate. The percolation rates





conducted onsite indicates that the infiltration rate of the clayey silt is in the order of 1X10-

7cm/s. The infiltration rate of this level indicates that the stratum is considered relatively

impermeable.

6.0. DISCUSSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the site reconnaissance and subsurface investigation, it is considered that the site has

satisfactory soil conditions for the townhouse development to be supported on conventional footings.

Based on the observations and findings, the following recommendations are made for the proposed

development.

6.1 Subdivision Construction

The following recommendations are provided for site preparation and development.

6.1.1 Site Preparation

The native soils underlying the site are sensitive to moisture conditions. During construction

activity, to minimize disturbance of the excavated sub-grade, the following recommendations

should be followed:

� Site preparation should be conducted during extended periods of dry weather;

� Excavated sub-grades should be kept dry. The excavated surface may be need to be sloped

in combination with a series of shallow swales to collect and divert seepage and/or surface

runoff away from excavated areas;

� Any loose or deleterious material should be stripped from all load bearing surfaces from an

offset distance of at least the depth of loose or deleterious material.

� A bedding of at least 100mm of 19mm clear crush gravel, or approved equivalent, should

be placed directly on the excavated surface to protect the excavated sub-grade;

� Any water-softened or disturbed soils should be over-excavated and removed.

� Test pits were excavated during the geotechnical investigation and were backfilled with

loose soil. Where test pits are located within building areas (buildings, sidewalks, roads,

etc), these areas should be re-excavated and backfilled with approved engineered fill and

compacted adequately to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical Engineer.

6.1.2 Cuts and Fills

Final excavation should remove any loose, saturated, and/or disturbed soil prior to construction

of footings, concrete slabs, and/or placement of engineered fill. This includes area of the

building envelope, lanes, sidewalks, decks/pools, and driveways. The stripped areas should





extend past the edge of footings, slabs and pavement areas equal to the depth of engineered fill

to be placed below these areas. Stripped sub-grade should be reviewed and approved by GME

prior to placement of engineered fill or footings to confirm the soil bearing capacity.

6.1.3 Trench Excavations

Where excavation is required and exceeds a depth of 1.2m, Work Safe BC guidelines for stable

excavations should be followed to ensure a safe working area. Unsupported temporary

excavated slopes in the native soils may be excavated to ¾(H):1(V) to depths not exceeding

1.2m. For greater depths of excavation and where seepage is encountered, the temporary

perimeter slopes should be flattened and/or shored, to the requirements of the Geotechnical

Engineer.

Dewatering by conventional sump and pump systems for trenches is feasible up to depths of

2.0m below grade, however, it is suggested that recommendations for dewatering be reassessed

once the construction commences to ensure that the depths of excavation and the exposed

ground conditions will not pose a problem with respect to excessive ground water.

The toe of any stockpiled excavated soil should be placed no closer than 1.5m to the edge of the

top of the excavation and be sloped at least 1.5H:1.0V. Machines above the excavation will need

to operate at a horizontal distance from the edge of cut at least twice the depth of excavation,

unless approved by the Geotechnical Engineer.

6.1.4 Structural Fills

All structural and/or site-grading fill should be properly selected and placed/compacted in

accordance with the requirements set-out by the Geotechnical Engineer. This includes the

following requirements, but is not limited to:

• monitoring placement and compaction of all load bearing surfaces and settlement

sensitive areas to:

• fill placement lifts of no more than 300mm thick, and

• at least 95% of the materials,

• Standard Proctor Maximum Dry Density (SPMDD) for buildings, and

• Modified Proctor Maximum Dry Density (MPMDD) for road structures.

• approving proof rolling the excavated sub-grade, and

• reviewing of the excavated sub-grades by the Geotechnical Engineer.

Structural Fill should consist of approved clean granular fill, such as a well-graded 75mm minus

Pit Run Sand and Gravel with less than 8% passing the 0.075mm (#200) sieve and free of any

deleterious material.





6.1.4 Roads Pavement Structure

A statistical analysis of the Benkelman Beam rebound readings of 55A exhibited a most probable

spring rebound (MPSR) of 2.83mm. The road also exhibited widespread alligator cracking. Test

pits along the edge of asphalt reveal inadequate sub-base material and thicknesses.

Reconstruction from competent sub-grade is recommended for 55A Avenue. Ditches along the

road and lane will require approved sub-grade fill to bring grades up to sub-base level.

The sub-grade preparation for the 55A and the lane should follow the recommendations

previously noted. The minimum pavement sections conforming to various classifications for the

City of Langley are provided below.

Road Designation Minimum Road Structure

55A Avenue

Limited Local

85mm of Asphalt Concrete

*35mm of Upper Course #2 Mix

*50mm of Lower Course #2 Mix

100mm of 19mm minus Crushed Granular Base

450mm of 100mm minus Pit Run Sand and Gravel

Approved Sub-grade Fill or Approved Sub-grade

Lane 75mm of Asphalt Concrete

100mm of 19mm minus Crushed Granular Base

450mm of 100mm minus Pit Run Sand and Gravel

Approved Sub-grade Fill or Approved Sub-grade

All road structure materials should meet the Master Municipal Construction Documents

(MMCD). The granular base and sub-base materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95%

MPMDD (ASTM D-1557) of the material. The clayey silt sub-grade should be excavated neat and

should not be compacted unless directed otherwise by a geotechnical engineer. The sub-grade is

susceptible to disturbances and being water-softened, hence the sub-grade soils should be

cleaned out just prior to placing engineered fill or the sub-base layer.





6.2 Building Design

The following recommendations are provided for building design.

6.2.1 Building Foundations

The buildings are considered to be near ground level, therefore, the foundations of the building

will likely bear on native clayey silt underlying the surficial soils at the site. In accordance with

the building code, the soil conditions can be taken as "Class D". For the design of footings and

with respect to Limit States Design, the following table illustrates the allowable serviceability and

ultimate soil bearing pressures associated with the soil stratum.

Soil Unit SLS

Serviceability Limits States

Soil Bearing Capacity

ULS

Ultimate Limit States

Soil Bearing Capacity

Clayey Silt 100kPa (2.0ksf) 150kPa (3.0ksf)

The bearing capacities listed above must be confirmed by the Geotechnical Engineer upon

excavation.

Strip footings should be no less than 450mm (18”) in width, whereas, the dimensions for pad

footings should be no less than 900mm (36”). For frost protection, footings should be placed at

least 450mm (18”) below the finished grade.

6.2.2 Building Slabs

For slabs-on-grade, a 150mm (6-inch) layer of compacted 19mm clear crushed gravel, or an

approved equivalent, should be placed as bedding. A vapor barrier consisting of minimum

0.15mm (6mil) thick polyethylene sheeting should be placed between the bedding and the

underside of the slab-on-grade.

6.2.3 Perimeter Drains

Perimeter drains are recommended and required under the BC Building Code. Perimeter drains

should be properly designed and installed. Roof drains should not be discharged into the

perimeter drain system and be discharged away from the building. Water collected in the

perimeter and roof drains should be properly collected and discharged to the city storm sewer

system.





6.3 Commitments for Field Reviews

GME should be notified in advance during the construction stage in order to facilitate and complete

necessary field reviews. As a minimum, the following field reviews are necessary at the following

stages:

• excavation and trench works, prior to placement of fill,

• placement of fill, prior to construction of footings and slabs, and backfilling, and

• structural load bearing surfaces including buildings and road structures.

Upon request, GME can issue Schedule B for geotechnical aspects of the Building Permit Application

for the individual buildings constructed for this project. To ensure commitment to field reviews,

GME must be notified when the work commences to conduct the necessary field reviews during

construction.

7.0. LIMITATIONS

The recommendations in this report are provided on the assumption that the contractor will be

suitably qualified and experienced. In the event of report revisions, additional funds may be required.

The subsurface conditions may vary between test pits and with time. The interpretation of subsurface

conditions provided is an opinion and not a certification. Stratigraphic variations in ground conditions

are expected due to its historic nature. As such, all explorations involve an inherent risk that some

conditions will not be detected.

Environmental considerations are outside the scope of this geotechnical report. Our

recommendations do not constitute a design of any proposed structural element. Incorporation of

our recommendations into the design does not constitute us as designers. The designers of such

elements must consider the appropriateness of our recommendations.

Samples obtained from site will be retained in our laboratory for 60 days. Should no instructions be

received to the contrary, these samples will then be discarded.

No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. If the project does not start with 2 years of the

report date, the report may become invalid and further review may be required. This report has been

prepared for the exclusive use of 0932692 c/o CityWest Consulting Ltd, the City of Langley and their

“Approved Users” for specific application to the development mentioned in the report. GME and its

employees accept no responsibility to another party for loss or liability incurred as a result of use of

this report. Any use of this report for purposes other than the intended, should be approved in writing

by GME. Contractors should rely upon their own explorations for costing purposes.

The above referenced report “the Report” may be relied upon by The City as if the Report was directly

issued to The City, subject to the following conditions:





• The City will only use the Report for the specific project that is the recipient and subject of

the Report.

• To the extent required by law and subject to the Freedom of Information and Protection of

Privacy Act, R.S.B.C., 1996, c. 165, as amended, The City agrees not to disclose or distribute

the Report furnished hereunder to any third party unless The City on the first page of the

Report places a prominent statement that “THIS REPORT MAY NOT BE RELIED UPON

WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE AUTHOR OF THE REPORT”.

• The City’s use of and reliance on the Report is subject to the qualifications and limitations

contained within the Report and The City has no greater rights or conditions of use than as

specified within the Report

• Notwithstanding the above, should a third party recover damages from The City through a

Court of competent jurisdiction, for loss or damage caused to the third party based upon the

third party’s reliance on the Report, and, provided that The City gave reasonable notice of

the third party claim when it was served on The City to GME and consented to GME

becoming a party to the lawsuit in order for it to undertake its own defense, if and when

requested by the GME, GME will indemnify the City if the Court of competent jurisdiction

found that GME committed a negligent act, error, or omission in the preparation of, or

conclusions in, the Report, and that this was the proximate cause of the third party’s loss or

damage.

Electronic media is susceptible to unauthorized modification/alteration, and the Client should not rely

on electronic versions of report/documents. All documents should be obtained directly from GME.

This report is based on the information provided by the client and/or the client’s consultant. GME

relied in good faith upon the information. GME cannot accept responsibility for inaccuracies,

misstatements, omissions or deficiencies in this report resulting from the sources of this information.

This report assumes that GME will be retained to review the soil conditions during construction.



T. 1.888.855.9733

F. 1.604.855.7378

www.geomediaeng.com

Test Pit Location Plan

Proposed 33-Unit & 13-Unit Townhouse Projects

19728, 19738, 19754, 19764, and 19770 - 55A Avenue, City of Langley (33 Unit)

19765 & 19773 – 55A Avenue, City of Langley (13 Unit)

Percolation Tests were completed in TP2 and TP4

0

2

CLA

SS

IFIC

ATI

ON

W WLWPSA

MP

LE T

YP

E

20 40 60 80

MOISTURE CONTENT& ATTERBERG LIMITS

ST- Shelby Tube PT- Piston Tube VT- Shear Vane Test

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 100 175 250 325

SO

IL S

YM

BO

L POCKETPENTROMETER

(kPa)

0

5

GS- Grab Sample SPT- Standard Penetration TestSample Type:

SP

T (N

)

ELE

VA

TIO

N

ELEVATION

TP1SOIL LOGPROJECT No G2265CLIENT 0932692 BC Ltd c/o Citiwest Consulting

DATE TESTED September 10, 2012

20 40 60 80

PROJECT Proposed 33 Unit Townhouse Development DATUM

EASTING ---

NORTHING ---

METHOD Tracked Excavator

LOCATION 19728 - 19770 55 A Avenue Langley

TOPSOIL, ORGANICS, SILT, loose, dark brown, moist

DE

PTH

(ft)

SO

IL L

OG

(2 L

OG

S P

ER

PA

GE

) G

2265

LO

GS

.GP

J M

ETR

O T

ES

TIN

G L

AB

.GD

T 9

/20/

12

SPT N VALUE

0.3m: CLAYEY SILT, very stiff, dessicated, rusty brown,moist

DE

PTH

(m)

0.5m: CLAYEY SILT, very stiff, till-like, brown, moist,difficult to dig

No seepage encounteredEnd of hole at 2.4 m.

20 40 60 80


0

5

SOIL LOG

0

2

DE

PTH

(m)

20 40 60 80

SPT N VALUE DE

PTH

(ft)

ELE

VA

TIO

N


POCKETPENTROMETER

(kPa)

SP

T (N

)

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

CLA

SS

IFIC

ATI

ON

W WLWP

TP2

Thanh

PROJECT No G2265


Geo Media Engineering ltd.


LOGGED BY:

(Continued Next Page)

CLIENT 0932692 BC Ltd c/o Citiwest Consulting


ELEVATION


EASTING ---

NORTHING ---





SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

CLA

SS

IFIC

ATI

ON

W WLWP

ELE

VA

TIO

N

20 40 60 80

POCKETPENTROMETER

(kPa)

SO

IL L

OG

(2 L

OG

S P

ER

PA

GE

) G

2265

LO

GS

.GP

J M

ETR

O T

ES

TIN

G L

AB

.GD

T 9

/20/

12

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

ST- Shelby Tube PT- Piston Tube VT- Shear Vane TestGS- Grab Sample SPT- Standard Penetration TestSample Type:

SP

T (N

)

100 175 250 325


SPT N VALUE

TP3SOIL LOGPROJECT No G2265CLIENT 0932692 BC Ltd c/o Citiwest Consulting


ELEVATION


EASTING ---

NORTHING ---



ASPHALT 0

5

DE

PTH

(ft)

20 40 60 80

0.13m: SAND AND GRAVEL, compact, rusty brown, dry

0

2

DE

PTH

(m)


20 40 60 80


0

5

DE

PTH

(ft)

0

2

DE

PTH

(m)

20 40 60 80

SPT N VALUEELE

VA

TIO

N


POCKETPENTROMETER

(kPa)

SP

T (N

)

TP4

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

CLA

SS

IFIC

ATI

ON

W WLWP


SOIL LOG




ThanhLOGGED BY:

(Continued Next Page)

PROJECT No G2265CLIENT 0932692 BC Ltd c/o Citiwest Consulting


ELEVATION


EASTING ---

NORTHING ---




PROJECT No G2265

SOIL LOG TP5

SPT N VALUE

20 40 60 80

ELEVATION

0

2

DE

PTH

(ft)

DE

PTH

(m)

ASPHALT 80mm thick0.13m: SAND AND GRAVEL, compact, rusty brown, dry


CLIENT 0932692 BC Ltd c/o Citiwest Consulting




NORTHING ---

EASTING ---

DATUMPROJECT Proposed 33 Unit Townhouse Development

SO

IL L

OG

(2 L

OG

S P

ER

PA

GE

) G

2265

LO

GS

.GP

J M

ETR

O T

ES

TIN

G L

AB

.GD

T 9

/20/

12

0

5

POCKETPENTROMETER

(kPa)100 175 250 325MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

GS- Grab Sample SPT- Standard Penetration Test LOGGED BY:Thanh

WL



20 40 60 80

ST- Shelby Tube PT- Piston Tube VT- Shear Vane Test

WP

Sample Type:

WCLA

SS

IFIC

ATI

ON

SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

ELE

VA

TIO

N

SP

T (N

)



T. 1.888.855.9733

F. 1.604.855.7378

www.geomediaeng.com

TEST HOLE LOGS

Date of Investigation: October 1, 2012

Type of Investigation: Hand Dug Test Pits

Test Pit Depth (m) Soil Description

TP6

0.0 - 0.3

0.3 - 0.4

Fill, Sand & Gravel, compact, rusty brown, dry

Clayey Silt/Silt, very stiff, dessicated, rusty

brown, moist

No seepage encountered

End of hole at 0.4m

TP7

0.0 - 0.5

0.5 - 0.6

Fill, Sand & Gravel, compact, rusty brown, dry

Clayey Silt/Silt, very stiff, dessicated, rusty

brown, moist

No seepage encountered

End of hole at 0.6m

Client : 0932692 BC Ltd c/o Citiwest Consulting Ltd Surface : Asphalt Pavement

File : G2265 Surface Temperature : 79 ºF 26.1 ºC

Project : Benkelman Beam Testing Truck Rear Axle Weight : 18000 lb

19728, 19738, 19764, 19770 55A Avenue Date Tested : 5-Sep-12

City of Langley, BC

GeoMedia Engineering Ltd.

Combined

OWP(East) IWP(West) IWP (North) OWP (South)

Number of Tests 13 13 0 13

Average Rebound (mm) 1.41 1.12 - 1.27

Standard Deviation (mm) 0.71 0.46 - 0.61

Most Probable Rebound (mm) 2.82 2.04 - 2.50

Spring Rebound Factor (Aug/Sept 1.15) 1.15 1.15 1.15

Most Probable Spring Rebound Value (mm) 3.24 2.34 - 2.87

Number of Tests 39

Average Rebound (mm) 1.27

Standard Deviation (mm) 0.60

Most Probable Rebound (mm) 2.46

Spring Rebound Factor 1.15

Most Probable Spring Rebound Value (mm) 2.83

Comments

LP Longitudinal (Utility) Patch ACL

OWP Outside Wheel Path TP Transverse (Utility) Patch AXM

IWP Inside Wheel Path PD Poor drainage LC

OJ Open jointed. TC

1.15 1.15

55A Avenue (E-W)

55A Avenue (E-W)

0.60 0.61

2.47 2.50

Westbound Lane (North Side)

26 13

1.26

STATISTICAL SUMMARY

Beam Rebound - Field Data

Alligator cracking, low severity

Alligator cracking, high severity

Longitudinal crack

Transverse crack

2.84 2.87

1.27

Eastbound Lane (South Side)

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

0+

00

0+

05

0+

10

0+

15

0+

20

0+

25

0+

30

0+

35

0+

40

0+

45

0+

50

0+

55

0+

60

0+

65

0+

70

0+

75

0+

80

0+

85

0+

90

0+

95

Re

bo

un

d (

mm

)

Station

Beam Rebound - Summary GraphEastbound Lane (South Side) - OWP(East) Eastbound Lane (South Side) - IWP(West)

Westbound Lane (North Side) - OWP (South) Westbound Lane (North Side) - IWP (North)

Station Remarks Remarks

OWP(East) IWP(West) IWP (North) OWP (South)

0+00 AXM (Driveway of 19728) 1.81

0+05 AXM 0.51 1.55

0+10 AXM 1.49

0+15 AXM 1.61 0.59

0+20 AXM 1.39

0+25 AXM 1.95 1.01

0+30 AXM 0.25

0+35 AXM 2.21 1.55

0+40 AXM 1.69

0+45 AXM 2.03 1.59

0+50 AXM 1.35

0+55 AXM 2.71 1.63

0+60 AXM 1.17

0+65 AX 0.53 0.47

0+70 AX 0.77

0+75 AX 1.21 0.91

0+80 AX 1.05

0+85 AX 1.53 0.25

0+90 AX 1.37

0+95 AX 0.33 2.05

1+00 AX 0.57

1+05 AX 1.19 1.51

1+10 AX 0.77

1+15 AX 1.15 2.31

1+20 AX 0.83

1+25 AX (10m west of Stop Sign at 198) 1.27 1.05

Westbound Lane (North Side)Eastbound Lane (South Side)

55A Avenue (E-W)