APPENDIX C Geotechnical Investigation - Index - City … C Geotechnical Investigation AMEC Reference No. TP113039.6000 | Page i GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX C

Geotechnical Investigation

AMEC Reference No. TP113039.6000 Page | i

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF CONLIN ROAD EAST

FROM SIMCOE STREET NORTH TO TOWNLINE ROAD NORTH

OSHAWA, ONTARIO

CONTRACT No. C2013-003

Submitted to:

The City of Oshawa

50 Centre Street South

Oshawa, Ontario, L1H 3Z7

Canada

Submitted by:

AMEC Environment & Infrastructure,

a Division of AMEC Americas Limited

104 Crockford Boulevard

Scarborough, Ontario, M1R 3C3

Canada

17 June 2014

TP113039.6000

The City of Oshawa

Geotechnical Investigation for Class EA of Conlin Road East

From Simcoe Street North to Townline Road North, Oshawa, Ontario

17 June 2014

AMEC Reference No. TP113039.6000 (i)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................. 2 3.0 INVESTIGATION PROCEDURES................................................................................................... 2

3.1 Geotechnical Investigation .................................................................................. 2

3.2 Pavement Condition Survey ................................................................................ 6 4.0 SUB-SURFACE CONDITIONS ....................................................................................................... 8

4.1 Asphaltic Concrete .............................................................................................. 8

4.2 Fill Soils .............................................................................................................. 9

4.3 Clayey Silt ..........................................................................................................10

4.4 Sand/Silty Sand/Sandy Silt/Silt ...........................................................................11

4.5 Clayey Silt Till ....................................................................................................11

4.6 Sand/Silty Sand/Sandy Silt Till ...........................................................................11

4.7 Groundwater Conditions ....................................................................................12 5.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................. 14

5.1 Pavement Design Considerations ......................................................................14

5.1.1 Existing Pavement Structure ..................................................................14

5.1.2 Granular Base Equivalency (GBE) .........................................................15

5.1.3 Existing and Forecasted Traffic Data ......................................................16

5.1.4 Flexible Structural Pavement Design for Widening and Reconstruction ..17

5.1.5 Rehabilitation Strategies for Existing Pavement .....................................17 5.1.6 Construction Consideration ....................................................................18

5.2 Bridge Foundations ............................................................................................19

5.2.1 Shallow Foundation ................................................................................19

5.2.2 Deep Foundations ..................................................................................21

5.3 Culverts .............................................................................................................22

5.4 Road Embankment Widening.............................................................................23

5.5 Drainage ............................................................................................................24

5.6 Excavation and Dewatering ...............................................................................25 6.0 CLOSURE ...................................................................................................................................... 27 REPORT LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 28

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014

AMEC Reference No. TP113039.6000 (ii)

FIGURES

Figure No. 1 Site Location Plan

Figure Nos. 2A to 2C Borehole Location Plan

RECORD OF BOREHOLES

Explanation of Borehole Logs

Record of Boreholes (BH1 to BH30)

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Laboratory Soil Test Results

Appendix B: Results of Pavement Condition Survey

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014

AMEC Reference No. TP113039.6000 Page | 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, a Division of AMEC Americas Limited (“AMEC”) was

retained by the City of Oshawa, to conduct a geotechnical investigation for a section of Conlin

Road East from east of Simcoe Street North to Townline Road North in Oshawa, Ontario. The

investigation was required to provide geotechnical design information for completion of a

Class Environment Assessment for the improvements of Conlin Road East. The project limit

is shown on Figure No. 1.

The purpose of this geotechnical investigation was to obtain information on the subsurface

conditions along the Conlin Road East section by means of a limited number of boreholes, in-

situ tests and laboratory tests of soil samples. During the field work, the existing pavement

structure was measured in the boreholes. Based on AMEC’s interpretation of the data

obtained, recommendations are provided for possible road improvements which could include

rehabilitation / reconstruction and possible widening works of the investigated road section,

expansion of existing culverts, and installation of underground utilities.

This report contains the findings of AMEC’s geotechnical investigation, together with

recommendations and comments. These recommendations and comments are based on

factual information and are intended only for use by design engineers. The number of

boreholes may not be sufficient to determine all the factors that may affect construction

methods and costs. Subsurface and groundwater conditions between and beyond the

boreholes may differ from those encountered at the borehole locations, and conditions may

become apparent during construction, which could not be detected or anticipated at the time

of the site investigation. The anticipated construction conditions are also discussed, but only

to the extent that they may influence design decisions. Construction methods discussed,

however, express AMEC’s opinion only and are not intended to direct the contractors on how

to carry out the construction. Contractors should also be aware that the data and their

interpretation presented in this report may not be sufficient to assess all the factors that may

have an effect upon the construction.

The report is prepared with the condition that the design will be in accordance with all

applicable standards and codes, regulations of authorities having jurisdiction, and good

engineering practice. Further, the recommendations and opinions in this report are applicable

only to the proposed project as described above.

On-going liaison with AMEC during the final design and construction phase of the project is

recommended to confirm that the recommendations in this report are applicable and/or

correctly interpreted and implemented. Also, any queries concerning the geotechnical

aspects of the proposed project should be directed to AMEC for further elaboration and/or

clarification.

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The investigated section of Conlin Road East is about 4.9 km long, extending from east of

Simcoe Street North to the east city limit at Townline Road North in the City of Oshawa as

shown in Figure No. 1.

Within the project limit, Conlin Road is an east / west oriented, two lane arterial road that

intersects five (5) major streets. The intersecting streets are Ritson Road North, Wilson Road

North, Harmony Road North, Grandview Street North and Townline Road North. This section

of Conlin Road contains crossings of two branches of Oshawa Creek (east of Bridle Drive and

Wilson Road North) and crossings of two branches of Harmony Creek (west of Grandview

Street North and west of Townline Road North). At the time of investigation, Conlin Road East

was paved with asphaltic concrete in the travel lanes. Sidewalks and concrete curbs were

present in the western part between Simcoe Street North and Ritson Road North.

Based on the information provided in the Request for Proposal, various levels of

improvements, which include rehabilitation / reconstruction and possible widening of the

existing road section, are planned throughout the length of this section of Conlin Road East.

3.0 INVESTIGATION PROCEDURES

3.1 Geotechnical Investigation

The fieldwork for geotechnical investigation was carried out from July 24 to 29, 2013, and

consisted of advancing a total of 30 boreholes. The depths of boreholes ranged from 2.7 m to

16.6 m below the existing grade. The approximate locations of the boreholes are presented in

Figure Nos. 2A, 2B and 2C.

Prior to commencing the drilling work, a site plan of Conlin Road section showing a total of 30

boreholes was submitted to the City of Oshawa (“the City”) for approval. The quantity and

locations of borehole were determined in accordance with the requirements in the City’s

Request for Proposal. Upon receipt of approval from the City on the submitted investigation

program, the borehole locations were established in the field by AMEC personnel.

The borehole details are given in Table 3.1.

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


Table 3.1 - Borehole Locations

Borehole

No.

Approximate

Location

Approximate

Station (1)

(m)

NAD 83

UTM 17

Northing (N)

Easting (E)

Geodetic

Elevation

(m) (2)

Location at Conlin Road E.

Depth

(m) Distance from

Centreline

Pavement /

Shoulder

BH 1

1,420 m±

west of Ritson

Rd.

10+200 N 4868321

E 669034 160.4 3.50 m in WBL Pavement 3.5

BH 2

1,160 m±

west of Ritson

Rd.

10+460 N 4868379

E 669252 155.9 5.50 m in EBL Pavement 3.5

BH 3

West of

Oshawa

Creek west

branch

10+720 N 4868480


BH 4

East of

Oshawa

Creek west

branch

10+740 N 4868464


BH 5 620 m± west

of Ritson Rd. 11+000

N 4868558

E 669779 153.1 0 Pavement 2.7

BH 6 365 m± west

of RitsonRd. 11+255

N 4868636


BH 7 110 m± west


N 4868724


BH 8 145 m± east


N 4868808


BH 9 305 m± east


N 4868850


BH 10 455 m± east


N 4868899


BH 11

230 m± west

of Wilson Rd.

N.

12+220 N 4868946


BH 12 80 m± west of

Wilson Rd. N. 12+370

N 4868996


BH 13

East of

Oshawa

Creek east

branch

12+520 N 4869057

E 671224 175.7 4.80 m in WBL Shoulder 12.5

BH 14

West of

Oshawa

Creek east

branch

12+525 N 4869046

E 671219 175.7 4.90 m in EBL Shoulder 13.8

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


Borehole

No.

Approximate

Location

Approximate

Station (1)

(m)

NAD 83

UTM 17

Northing (N)

Easting (E)

Geodetic

Elevation

(m) (2)


Depth

(m) Distance from

Centreline

Pavement /

Shoulder

BH 15

220 m± east

of Wilson Rd.

N.

12+670 N 4869106


BH 16

370 m± east

of Wilson Rd.

N.

12+820 N 4869141


BH 17

520 m± east

of Wilson Rd.

N.

12+970 N 4869171


BH 18

520 m± east

of Wilson Rd.

N.

12+970 N 4869169


BH 19

55 m± west of

Harmony Rd.

N.

13+120 N 4869240


BH 20

150 m± east

of Harmony

Rd. N.

13+425 N 4869343


BH 21

300 m± east

of Harmony

Rd. N.

13+575 N 4869408


BH 22

450 m± east

of Harmony

Rd. N.

13+725 N 4869450


BH 23

West of

Harmony

Creek west

branch

13+865 N 4869492


BH 24

East of

Harmony

Creek west

branch

13+870 N 4869507



Grandview St. 14+070

N 4869571


BH 26

170 m± east

of Grandview

St.

14+270 N 4869608


BH 27

300 m± east

of Grandview

St.

14+470 N 4869711


BH 28 300 m± east 14+470 N 4869701


The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


Borehole

No.

Approximate

Location

Approximate

Station (1)

(m)

NAD 83

UTM 17

Northing (N)

Easting (E)

Geodetic

Elevation

(m) (2)


Depth

(m) Distance from

Centreline

Pavement /

Shoulder

of Grandview

St.

BH 29

255 m± west

of Townline

Rd.

14+670 N 4869774



Townline Rd. 14+870

N 4869823


Notes:

(1) Centerline of Conlin Road East & Simco Street North is considered as Sta. 10+000. (2) Geodetic elevations are pending as the elevations are being obtained by AMEC Environment &

Infrastructure (Burlington).

The borehole locations were established at the site using local references by AMEC’s field

personnel and subsequently their surface elevations were surveyed. The as-drilled

coordinates (NAD 83 UTM 17 reference system) were obtained by a hand-held GPS system.

All borehole locations were cleared of underground utilities and all mandatory permits were

obtained prior to commencement of drilling. Due to the presence of underground utilities, the

as-drilled locations of the boreholes were, in some instances, repositioned from the planned

locations as necessary to avoid the utility locations.

All necessary traffic control was provided, and the project’s health and safety requirements

were followed during drilling and loading/unloading of equipment.

All boreholes were advanced using solid-stem continuous-flight augers. The drilling and

sampling of boreholes were carried out under the full-time supervision of experienced

geotechnical personnel from AMEC. Soil samples were obtained at 0.75 m intervals for the

initial 3 m of the borehole and 1.5 m thereafter via the Standard Penetration Test (SPT)

method, ASTM D1586. The SPT tests consisted of freely dropping a 63.5 kg (140 lbs.)

hammer a vertical distance of 0.76 m (30 inches) to drive a 51 mm (2 inches) outer diameter

split-barrel (split spoon) sampler into the ground. The number of blows of the hammer

required to drive the sampler into the relatively undisturbed ground by a vertical distance of

0.30 m (12 inches) was recorded as the SPT ‘N’ value of the soil. These ‘N’ values were used

to indicate the consistency of cohesive soils or compactness of non-cohesive soils. The

results of the SPT are shown in the Record of Boreholes.

Groundwater conditions in the open boreholes were observed throughout the drilling

operations. Monitoring wells (51 mm diameter PVC pipes) were installed in eight (8)

boreholes for groundwater level monitoring.

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


Upon completion of drilling, the twenty-two (22) boreholes without monitoring wells were

backfilled with bentonite, in accordance with the general requirements of Ministry of the

Environment Regulation 903, and the existing asphaltic concrete surface was repaired with

‘cold patch’.

Prior to backfilling or well installation, the free standing groundwater level was measured, if

present, in all boreholes. The measured groundwater levels are shown in the Record of

Boreholes.

Soil samples collected from boreholes were transported to AMEC’s Advanced Soil Laboratory

in Scarborough for further review and laboratory testing on selected samples (i.e., water

content determination, grain size analysis and Atterberg Limit test, where applicable). The

results of the in-situ and laboratory tests are presented on the corresponding Record of

Boreholes. The results of laboratory testing are provided in Appendix A.

Soil samples obtained during the geotechnical field drilling program were field screened for

evidence of environmental impact. The field screening activities included a visual inspection

of the soil samples and measuring the combustible organic vapor (COV) in the headspace of

the soil samples with a portable hydrocarbon measuring device (Gastechtor 1238ME).

Results of the field screening are shown in the Record of Boreholes.

3.2 Pavement Condition Survey

AMEC completed a visual pavement condition survey along the investigated sections of

Conlin Road East to identify areas of distress as well as their degree of severity. The

identification and classification of the pavement distresses were in accordance with the MTO’s

Manual for Condition Rating of Flexible Pavements (SP024), August 1980. For convenience,

the project area was divided in five sections as follows:

i) Section 1: Simcoe Street to Avalona Street (about 900 m);

ii) Section 2: Avalona Street to Ritson Road (about 725 m);

iii) Section 3: Ritson Road to Wilson Road (about 900 m);

iv) Section 4: Wilson Road to Harmony Road (about 750 m); and

v) Section 5: Harmony Road to Townline Road (about 1,650 m).

The findings of the pavement condition survey are summarized in Table 3.2. The Pavement

Condition Survey sheets are included in Appendix B. The pavement condition in some

section reflects its age and probable increase in traffic loading that has resulted in the

pavement condition progressively deteriorating with time.

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


Table 3.2 - Pavement Condition Assessment of Conlin Road East

Section Predominant Distress Rating

1 - Simcoe Street to

Avalona Street

- Moderate / Frequent Ravelling & Coarse Aggregate Loss

- Very slight / Few Flushing

- Severe / Extensive Ripping & Shoving

- Moderate / Intermittent Wheel Track Rutting

- Severe / Extensive Distortion

- Moderate / Frequent Longitudinal Cracking (Single & Multiple)

- Moderate / Frequent Centreline Cracking (Single & Multiple)

- Moderate / Extensive Centreline Cracking (Midlane)

- Severe / Extensive Pavement Edge Cracking (Single & Multiple)

- Moderate / Intermittent Transverse Cracking (Single & Multiple)

Fair to Poor

Condition

(900 m ±)

2 - Avalona Street to

Ritson Road

- Moderate / Frequent Ravelling & Coarse Aggregate Loss


- Slight / Few Ripping & Shoving

- Moderate / Frequent Wheel Track Rutting

- Slight / Few Distortion

- Slight / Intermittent Longitudinal Cracking (Single & Multiple)

- Very slight / Few Longitudinal Cracking (Alligator)

- Very slight / Few Centreline Cracking (Single & Multiple)

- Sight / Few Centreline Cracking (Random)

- Slight / Few Centreline Cracking (Midlane)

- Very slight / Few Pavement Edge Cracking (Single & Multiple)

- Moderate / Frequent Transverse Cracking (Single & Multiple)

Fair

Condition

(725 m ±)

3 - Ritson Road to

Wilson Road

- Severe / Extensive Ravelling & Coarse Aggregate Loss

- Moderate / Frequent Flushing

- Moderate / Intermittent Ripping & Shoving

- Severe / Frequent Wheel Track Rutting

- Severe / Extensive Distortion

- Severe / Extensive Longitudinal Cracking (Single & Multiple)

- Moderate / Frequent Longitudinal Cracking (Alligator)

- Slight / Intermittent Centreline Cracking (Single & Multiple)

- Moderate / Frequent Centreline Cracking (Midlane)


- Moderate / Extensive Pavement Edge Cracking (Alligator)

- Moderate / Frequent Transverse Cracking (Single & Multiple)

- Slight / Frequent Transverse Cracking (Alligator)

Fair to Poor

Condition

(900 m ±)

4 - Wilson Road to

Harmony Road


- Slight / Few Flushing

- Moderate / Intermittent Ripping & Shoving

- Moderate / Frequent Wheel Track Rutting

- Moderate / Extensive Distortion

- Slight / Few Longitudinal Cracking (Single & Multiple)


- Severe / Extensive Pavement Edge Cracking (Alligator)

- Slight / Few Transverse Cracking (Single & Multiple)

- Very slight / Few Transverse Cracking (Alligator)

Fair to Poor

Condition

(750 m ±)

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


Section Predominant Distress Rating

5 - Harmony Road to

Townline Road



- Slight / Intermittent Ripping & Shoving

- Moderate / Intermittent Wheel Track Rutting

- Moderate / Frequent Distortion

- Moderate / Few Longitudinal Cracking (Single & Multiple)

- Moderate / Intermittent Centreline Cracking (Single & Multiple)

- Slight / Few Centreline Cracking (Alligator)

- Moderate / Frequent Pavement Edge Cracking (Single & Multiple)

- Moderate / Frequent Pavement Edge Cracking (Alligator)

- Very slight / Intermittent Transverse Cracking (Single & Multiple)

Fair

Condition

(1650 m ±)

Based on the visual pavement condition survey, the existing asphaltic concrete surface

ranged from “Fair to Poor” condition.

4.0 SUB-SURFACE CONDITIONS

Based on Map 2556 (Southern Sheet): ‘Quaternary Geology of Ontario’ prepared by Ministry

of Northern Development and Mines of Ontario (1991), the site is located in an area of

transition that includes various native soil types as follows: (i) Halton Till (Ontario-Erie lobe)

consisting of predominantly silt to silty clay matrix, high in matrix carbonate content and clast

poor; (ii) Glaciolacustrine deposits consisting of sand, gravelly sand and gravel, nearshore

and beach deposits; and (iii) Fluvial deposits consisting of gravel, sand, silt and clay,

deposited on abandoned flood plains, terrace remnants.

The subsurface conditions along the investigated section of Conlin Road East comprised

surficial ground surface cover (asphaltic concrete and sand and gravel/gravelly sand fill),

underlain by various fill soils (silty sand and silty clay/clayey silt fill) which were in turn

underlain by native deposits (clayey silt, sand/silty sand/sandy silt/silt, clayey silt till and/or

sand/silty sand/sandy silt till) to the depths of termination for the majority of the boreholes.

The stratigraphic units and groundwater conditions are discussed in brief in the following

sections. The Records of Boreholes are attached for detailed information.

It should be noted that the following summary is to assist the designers of the project with an

understanding of the anticipated soil conditions across the site. However, it should be noted

that the soil and groundwater conditions may vary between and beyond these locations.

4.1 Asphaltic Concrete

Asphaltic concrete, about 100 mm to 200 mm in thickness, was encountered in Boreholes

BH1 to BH12, BH16 to BH18 and BH23, drilled on the paved section of the road.

The thickness of asphaltic concrete could vary between and beyond the borehole locations.

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


4.2 Fill Soils

Fill soils comprising sand and gravel/gravelly sand, silty sand and/or silty clay/clayey silt were

encountered at different depths in all boreholes. It should be noted that the thickness and

conditions of the fill could vary significantly between and beyond the borehole locations.

Sand and Gravel/Gravelly Sand Fill

Sand and gravel/gravelly sand was encountered underlying the asphaltic concrete in BH1 to

BH12, BH16 to BH18, and BH23; at grade in Boreholes BH13 to BH15, BH19 to BH22 and

BH24 to BH30. The sand and gravel/gravelly sand fill extended to depths varying from about

0.5 m to 2.9 m below the existing ground surface.

The sand and gravel/gravelly sand fill were brown in color, and contained a trace to some silt

and trace cobbles. The SPT ‘N’ values of the sand and gravel/gravelly sand fill ranged widely

from 9 to 52 blows per 0.3 m. Higher SPT ‘N’ values might be due to the presence of cobbles.

The water content values measured in the sand and gravel/gravelly sand fill ranged from 1%

to 22%.

It should be noted that the thickness and the conditions of the sand and gravel/gravelly sand

fill could vary significantly between and beyond the borehole locations.

Grain size analyses were performed on four selected samples of sand and gravel/gravelly

sand fill from Boreholes BH1, BH10, BH18 and BH23, and the results are presented in Table

4.1.

Table 4.1 - Results of Grain size Analysis

Borehole

No.

Sample

No.

Depth

(m)

Percent Distribution (%) USCS Modified

Group Symbol Gravel Sand Fines

(Silt and Clay)

BH1 SS1 0.3 - 0.8 32 55 13 SM

BH10 SS1 0.2 - 0.6 26 55 19 SM

BH18 SS1 0.3 - 0.8 30 51 19 SM

BH23 SS1 0.2 – 0.6 48 43 9 GP-GM

The grain size distribution curves are presented in Figure No. A1 in Appendix A.

Silty Sand/Sandy Silt Fill

Silty sand/sandy silt fill was encountered below the sand and gravel/gravelly sand at

Boreholes BH2, BH3, BH5, BH13 to BH15, BH20, BH24 and BH26 to BH28; and below silty

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


clay/clayey silt fill in Boreholes BH7 and BH23. The silty sand/sandy silt fill extended to

depths varying from about 1.1 m to 6.7 m below the existing ground surface.

The silty sand/sandy silt fill was brown and grey in colour and contained trace to some clay,

trace to some gravel and cobbles/boulders. Traces of organic matter were noted in Boreholes

BH2, BH7, BH26 and BH28. The SPT ‘N’ values of the silty sand/sandy silt fill ranged from 3

to greater than 50 blows per 0.3 m. High SPT ‘N’ values were possibly due to presence of

gravel/cobbles/boulders. The water contents measured in the silty sand/sandy silt fill ranged

from 5% to 17%.

Silty Clay/Clayey Silt Fill

Silty clay/clayey silt fill was encountered underlying the sand and gravel/gravelly sand fill in

Boreholes BH7, BH9, BH17 to BH19, BH21 to BH23 and BH29 to BH30; below the silty

sand/sandy silt fill in Boreholes BH2, BH3 and BH24. The silty clay/clayey silt fill soil

extended to depths ranging from about 0.9 m to 7.0 m below the existing ground surface.

The silty clay/clayey silt fill was brown and grey in colour, and contained traces of gravel,

some sand and cobbles/boulders. A trace of organic matter was noted in several boreholes

(BH3, BH7, BH9, BH19, BH21, BH23 and BH30). The SPT ‘N’ values of the silty clay/clayey

silt fill ranged from 4 to 15 blows per 0.3 m. The water contents measured in the silty

clay/clayey silt fill ranged from 8% to 28%.

4.3 Clayey Silt

Clayey silt was encountered below the fill soils in Boreholes BH1, BH3, BH6, BH8 and BH15.

The clayey silt extended to depths ranging from 2.9 m to 8.5 m below the existing grade.

The clayey silt was brown and grey in colour and contained trace to some sand and traces of

gravel. The SPT ‘N’ values of the clayey silt ranged from 10 to 29 blows per 0.3 m, indicating

a stiff to very stiff consistency. The water contents measured in the clayey silt ranged from

9% to 16%.

Grain size analysis and Atterberg Limit test were conducted on one sample of the clayey silt

and the results are shown in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2 - Grain Size Distribution Analysis and Atterberg Limit Test Results

Borehole

No.

Sample

No.

Depth

(m)

Grain Size Distribution (%) Atterberg Limit test USCS

Modified

Group

Symbol

Gravel

Sand

Silt &

Clay

Liquid

Limit

Plastic

Limit

Plasticity

Index

BH1 SS 3 1.5 -

2.0 0 17 83 18 12 6 CL-ML

The grain size distribution curve is presented in Figure No. A2 and the plasticity chart is

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


presented in Figure No. A3 in Appendix A.

4.4 Sand/Silty Sand/Sandy Silt/Silt

Sand/silty sand/sandy silt/silt was encountered in Boreholes BH1 to BH4, BH9, BH12 to BH16

and BH23 to BH27. The sand/silty sand/sandy silt/silt extended to depths of 11.9 m and 15.8

m below the existing grade.

The sand/silty sand/sandy silt/silt was grey in colour and contained traces of clay, gravel and

cobbles/boulders. The SPT ‘N’ values of the sand/silty sand/sandy silt/silt ranged from 9 to

greater than 50 blows per 0.3 m, indicating a loose to very dense compactness condition. The

water contents measured in the silty sand/sandy silt/silt ranged from 7% to 20%.

Two samples of sand/silty sand/sandy silt/silt were selected for grain size analysis, and the

results are shown in Table 4.3.

Table 4.3 - Results of Grain Size Analysis

Borehole

No.

Sample

No.

Depth

(m)

Percent Distribution (%) USCS

Modified

Group

Symbol Gravel Sand Silt & Clay

BH3 SS 9 9.1 – 9.6 0 52 48 SM

BH23 SS 6 4.6 - 5.0 0 83 17 SM

The grain size distribution curves are presented in Figure No. A4 in Appendix A.

4.5 Clayey Silt Till

Clayey silt till was encountered in Boreholes BH13, BH14, BH17, BH18, BH20 to BH24 and

BH29 to BH30. The clayey silt till extended to depths ranging from 2.9 m to 12.5 m below the

existing grade.

The clayey silt till was brown and grey in colour and contained traces to some sand, gravel

and cobbles/boulders. The SPT ‘N’ values of the clayey silt till ranged widely from 6 to 70

blows per 0.3 m, indicating a firm to hard consistency. The water contents measured in the

clayey silt till ranged from 5% to 20%.

4.6 Sand/Silty Sand/Sandy Silt Till

Sand/silty sand/sandy silt till was encountered in Boreholes BH10, BH11, BH17, BH19 and

BH28. The sand/silty sand/sandy silt till extended to the termination depths of these

boreholes ranging from 2.7 m to 10.8 m below the existing grade.

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


The sand/silty sand/sandy silt till was brown and grey in colour and contained traces of clay,

gravel and cobbles/boulders. The SPT ‘N’ values of the sand/silty sand/sandy silt till ranged

from 24 to greater than 50 blows per 0.3 m, indicating a compact to very dense compactness

condition. The water contents measured in the sand/silty sand/sandy silt till ranged from 8%

to 9%.

Grain size analysis and Atterberg Limit tests were conducted on two samples of sand/silty

sand/sandy silt till, and the results are shown in Table 4.4.

Table 4.4 - Grain Size Distribution Analysis and Atterberg Limit Test Results

Borehole

No.

Sample

No.

Depth

(m)

Grain Size Distribution (%) Atterberg Limit test USCS

Modified

Group

Symbol

Gravel

Sand

Silt and

Clay

Liquid

Limit

Plastic

Limit

Plasticity

Index

BH17 SS 6 4.6 - 5.0 14 33 57 14 10 4 ML

BH28 SS 4 2.3 - 2.7 7 39 54 13 10 3 ML

The grain size distribution curves are presented in Figure No. A5 and the plasticity chart is

presented in Figure No. A6, Appendix A.

4.7 Groundwater Conditions

Groundwater level, if any, was measured in open boreholes upon completion of drilling.

During the investigation, free standing groundwater was measured at depths varying from

about 2.1 m to 10.8 m below the existing grade at Boreholes BH3, BH4, BH12 to BH14, BH21,

BH23, BH24 and BH28. Other boreholes were dry on completion of drilling.

Groundwater level was also measured on 15 August 2013 at depths varying from about 1.5 m

to 6.4 m below the existing grade in monitoring wells installed in Boreholes BH3, BH4, BH13,

BH14, BH17, BH23, BH24 and BH28.

The measured groundwater levels are shown in Table 4.5, and also presented on the Record

of Boreholes.

Table 4.5 - Groundwater Levels

Borehole No. Date Groundwater Level below

Existing Grade (m)

BH1 24 July 2013 dry(1)

BH2 24 July 2013 dry(1)

BH3 24 July 2013

15 August 2013

5.3(1)

6.3(2)

BH4 24 July 2013

15 August 2013

6.0(1)

6.4(2)

BH5 24 July 2013 dry(1)

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


Borehole No. Date Groundwater Level below

Existing Grade (m)

BH6 24 July 2013 dry(1)

BH7 25 July 2013 dry(1)

BH8 25 July 2013 dry(1)

BH9 25 July 2013 dry(1)

BH10 25 July 2013 dry(1)

BH11 25 July 2013 dry(1)

BH12 24 July 2013 2.6 m (1)

BH13 29 July 2013

15 August 2013

8.7 m (1)

5.8 m (2)

BH14 29 July 2013

15 August 2013

10.8 m (1)

5.3 m (2)

BH15 25 July 2013 dry (1)

BH16 25 July 2013 dry (1)

BH17 29 July 2013

15 August 2013

dry (1)

4.5 (2)

BH18 26 July 2013 dry (1)

BH19 29 July 2013 dry (1)

BH20 26 July 2013 dry (1)

BH21 26 July 2013 2.1 m (1)

BH22 26 July 2013 dry (1)

BH23

26 July 2013

29 July 2013

15 August 2013

3.8 m (1)

1.6 m (2)

1.6 m (2)

BH24

26 July 2013

29 July 2013

15 August 2013

3.5 m (1)

1.8 m (2)

1.5 m (2)

BH25 26 July 2013 dry (1)

BH26 26 July 2013 dry(1)

BH27 26 July 2013 dry(1)

BH28 26 July 2013

15 August 2013

7.8 m (1)

1.6 m (2)

BH29 26 July 2013 dry(1)

BH30 26 July 2013 dry(1)

(1)

in open boreholes on completion of drilling (2)

in monitoring wells

It should be noted that the groundwater at the site would fluctuate seasonally and can be

expected to be somewhat higher during the spring months and in response to major weather

events.

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


5.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the Request for Proposal (RFP), the investigation was required to provide

geotechnical information for Class Environmental Assessment and Preliminary Design for

improvements to Conlin Road East. The improvements would include rehabilitation /

reconstruction of the road and possible road widening.

The investigation results revealed that the subsurface soil conditions at the site comprised

different ground surface cover types (topsoil, asphaltic concrete and/or sand and

gravel/gravelly sand fill) underlain by various fill soils (silty sand/sandy silt and/or silty

clay/clayey silt). The fill soils were underlain by various native soils consisting of clayey silt,

silty sand/sandy silt/silt, clayey silt till and silty sand/sandy silt till.

At the time of writing this report, details of the proposed improvements were not available.

General discussion and recommendations are provided in the following sections. The

discussion and recommendations should be confirmed when the final road profile and cross-

sections are determined in the detail design phase. Additional geotechnical investigation may

be required for detail design.

5.1 Pavement Design Considerations

5.1.1 Existing Pavement Structure

A total of 16 boreholes (BH1 to BH12, BH16 to BH18 and BH23) were advanced on the paved

surface of Conlin Road East. The boreholes encountered difference in composition of the

existing pavement structure.

Table 5.1 summarizes the asphaltic concrete pavement structure composition encountered at

the borehole locations. The measured asphaltic concrete thickness ranged from 100 mm to

200 mm (±). A granular base/subbase fill was encountered underlying the asphaltic concrete

layer in all boreholes with the measured thickness ranging from 360 mm to 2750 mm (±).

Table 5.1 - Existing Pavement Structure at Borehole Locations

Borehole No. Station

Thickness (mm)

Asphaltic

Concrete

Sand and Gravel /Gravelly

Sand Fill

BH1 10+200 185 915

BH2 10+460 120 1280

BH3 10+720 150 1250

BH4 10+740 150 2750

BH5 11+000 140 360

BH6 11+255 110 1290

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


Borehole No. Station

Thickness (mm)

Asphaltic

Concrete

Sand and Gravel /Gravelly

Sand Fill

BH7 11+510 150 550

BH8 11+770 120 1080

BH9 11+920 120 580

BH10 12+070 100 600

BH11 12+220 100 700

BH12 12+370 100 600

BH16 12+820 110 1290

BH17 12+970 200 500

BH18 12+970 100 700

BH23 13+865 150 550

The investigation results indicated, in general, compacted base/subbase (sand and

gravel/gravelly sand fill) for the existing road with SPT ‘N’ values ranging from 9 to 52 blows

per 0.3 m, i.e., a loose to very dense compactness.

The grain size analysis results conducted on four (4) selected representative samples of sand

and gravel/gravelly sand fill (Boreholes BH1, BH10, BH18 and BH23) generally complied with

the Granular “B”- Type I specifications (Figure No. A1 in Appendix A).

The investigation also revealed that silty clay/clayey silt or silty sand/sandy silt fill or native

soils (clayey silt or silty sand/sandy silt or clayey silt till or silty sand/sandy silt till) formed the

subgrade for the existing road. Considering the subgrade soils within the upper (about) 2 m

below the road surface, the existing fill soils would generally provide competent subgrade

support for rehabilitation / reconstruction as indicated by the N-values of over 15 blows per 0.3

m. Isolated weak zones were noted in Boreholes BH2, BH9, BH13, BH15, BH17, BH19 to

BH22, BH24 and BH29, about 1.5 to 2.0 m below the existing grade as indicated by SPT N-

values ranging from 5 to 15 blows per 0.3 m (loose to compact clayey / sandy soils).

5.1.2 Granular Base Equivalency (GBE)

To assess the existing pavement structure, the in-situ Granular Base Equivalency (GBE)

values were estimated from the borehole data using the following Equivalency Factors (based

on Table 3.5 of the MTO Pavement Design and Rehabilitation Manual):

erial Material Equivalency factor

Existing HL 1.25

Existing Granular Base/Sub-base/Concrete 0.625

For GBE calculation, total granular fill material thickness, measured in the boreholes, was

considered as the granular base/subbase. The existing average GBE is summarized in

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


Table 5.2.

Table 5.2 - Existing Pavement Composition at Borehole Locations

Pavement

Condition

Length

m No. of Boreholes

Thickness (mm)

GBE (mm) HMA

Granular

Base/Subbase*

Section 1

Fair to poor 900

4 Boreholes (BH1 to

BH4)

@ MDL

Range (120-185)

Average 150 mm

Range (915-2,750)

Average 1,550 mm

Range (803-1,906)

Average 1,157 mm

Section 2

Fair 725

3 Boreholes (BH5 to

BH7)

@ MDL

Range (140-150)

Average 135 mm

Range (360-1,290)

Average 735 mm

Range (400-944)

Average 625 mm

Section 3

Fair to Poor 900

5 Boreholes (BH8 to

BH12)

@ MDL

Range (100-120)

Average 110 mm

Range (580-1,080)

Average 710 mm

Range (500-825)

Average 580 mm

Section 4

Fair to Poor 750

3 Boreholes (BH16 to

BH18)

@ MDL

Range (100-200)

Average 140 mm

Range (500-1,290)

Average 830 mm

Range (563-944)

Average 690 mm


BH15 & BH19)

@ SH

- 700 438

Section 5

Fair 1650

1 Borehole (BH23)

@ MDL 150 550 531


BH22 & BH24 to BH30)

@ SH

- Range (300-1,400)

Average 670 mm

Range (188-875)

Average 419 mm

* Combined thickness of existing Granular A and Granular B. MDL = Mid-Driving Lane SH = Shoulder

5.1.3 Existing and Forecasted Traffic Data

The traffic data represented as Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT), percent growth rate, and

percentage of commercial vehicles (%) were provided by Paradigm Transportation Solutions

Limited at three (3) directional points; East of Simcoe Street North, west of Harmony Road

North; and West of Townline Road North. Table 5.3 summarizes the design loads, in

equivalent single axle loads (ESAL’s), using the AADT for each section of Conlin Road East.

ESALs were calculated cumulatively for the next 20 year period for both sections of the road.

Table 5.3: Traffic Data and Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESALs)

AADT

(2013)

Growth Rate

(%)

Percent

Trucks (%)

Design ESALs

for 20 Years

Conlin Road / East of Simcoe Street

North 9,830 1.5% 4% 2,828,471

Conlin Road / West of Harmony Road

North 10,940 1.5% 3% 2,360,895

Conlin Road / West of Townline Road

North 3,850 1.5% 9% 2,492,536

Maximum ESAL Selected to Design Pavement Structure Traffic Category ‘B’ for ESALs 0.3 to 3 Million

Collector roads 2,828,471

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


5.1.4 Flexible Structural Pavement Design for Widening and Reconstruction

After reviewing the field data and laboratory test results, the minimum pavement structural design for widening of Conlin Road East is presented in Table 5.4, which was determined in accordance with the 1993 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (‘AASHTO’) Guide for the Design of Pavement Structures using the Darwin Software Program.

The AASHTO Pavement Design is considered to be a function of estimated future traffic in

both directions (ESALs), reliability (R), which is a function of road classification, overall

standard deviation (So), resilient modulus (Mr), as well as initial and terminal serviceability (Po,

Pt). From these parameters, the structure number (SN) is calculated. The SN is defined in

the AASHTO Guide as a number, which provides a measure of the pavement strength and

thickness needed to avoid overstressing the subgrade.

Table 5.4 - Recommended Minimum Structural Pavement Design for Widening and Reconstruction

Layers Material Description AASHTO’93 Pavement Design

for 20 years

1 Hot Mix Asphalt Concrete

HL3+HL8+HL8 (PGAC 58-28)

150 mm

40+50+60

2 Granular Base ‘A’ 150 mm

3 Granular Subbase ‘B’ 525 mm

Design Structure Number (130 mm) Calculated SN = 131 mm (ok).

Target GBE (mm) 800 mm

Total Pavement Thickness (mm) 825 mm

5.1.5 Rehabilitation Strategies for Existing Pavement

Provided that Conlin Road East would be widened from 2 to 4 lanes, the selected

rehabilitation strategy discussed in this section was based on AMEC’s geotechnical

investigation and analysis, including a visual pavement condition assessment, subgrade

condition, laboratory test results and calculated ESALs. Consideration was also given to user

delay, cost and/or disruption of traffic.

For the existing pavement, in-place pulverization of asphalt pavement to a depth of 150 mm

into an equivalent depth of granular base material (i.e., 300 mm), grade, compact and overlay

with 150 mm (40+50+60 mm) of HMA is recommended for this section of Conlin Road East as

per Table 5.4. This will increase the vertical profile by 150 mm.

5.1.5.1 Widening of Conlin Road

Pavement recommendations for widening of Conlin Road are presented in Table 5.4,

including hot mix type, lift thickness, and PGAC type, as well as the traffic category, in

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


accordance with OPSS 1151. The granular thicknesses of the widening given in the table is a

minimum thickness and should match the adjacent existing pavement granular thickness to

promote positive lateral drainage. Also, the thicknesses can be increased depending on

grading requirements.

Full depth excavation, as required and commencing from the existing edge of pavement, will

be required in widening sections to accommodate the proposed design thickness. The

excavated granular materials from the shoulder in the rural sections can be re-used as fill

material for the widening/embankment, provided it is not contaminated. New Granular B

subbase can then be added and compacted, followed by new Granular A base material. Both

base and subbase can vary in thickness to match the adjacent existing pavement granular in

order to promote positive lateral drainage. The Granular A base course should be compacted,

and overlain with 2 lifts of HL 8 or SP19.0 mm binder course and 1 lift of HL 3 or SP12.5 FC2

surface course, as per Table 5.4. Installation of subdrain is recommended, if lateral drainage

of the existing subgrade is not possible.

5.1.6 Construction Consideration

The pavement design considers that construction will be carried out during the drier time of

the year and that the subgrade is stable. If the subgrade becomes excessively wet or rutted

during construction activities, additional sub-base material may be required. The need for

additional subbase material is best determined during construction. For the pavement to

function properly, provision must be made for water to drain out of the granular course.

All of the pavement elements should satisfy the relevant OPS specifications.

• Asphaltic Concrete

The asphaltic concrete should be hot-mixed, hot-laid. The placing, spreading and rolling

should be in accordance with Ontario Provincial Standard Specifications 310.

• Reuse of Existing Granular and Soil Fill

The existing sand and gravel/gravelly sand fill and various soil fills can be re-used as fill,

provided that they are not contaminated with cohesive soils and/or organic matter during

excavation. Such materials should be evaluated and monitored on site by a geotechnical

engineer.

Tested samples of existing sand and gravel/gravelly sand fill showed that the materials did not

meet the OPSS Granular A specifications (Figure No. A1). The samples marginally did not

meet OPSS Granular B Type I specifications. The existing sand and gravel/gravelly sand fill

and various soil fills can be used as fill, provided that they are not contaminated with cohesive

soils and/or organic matter during excavation. Such materials should be evaluated and

monitored on site by a geotechnical engineer.

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


• Recycled Materials

The milled / reclaimed asphaltic concrete may be recycled and blended with granular soils to

be used on the shoulders during the new construction for widening.

• Compaction of Base and Subbase

In all areas, asphaltic concrete should be placed in maximum 50 mm lifts and compacted as

per OPSS 310 (using Maximum Relative Density, MRD), while the granular base and subbase

should be placed in 100 mm in loose lifts and compacted to at least 100% standard Proctor

maximum dry density.

5.2 Bridge Foundations

The existing Glover Bridge located over Oshawa Creek as shown in Figure No. 2A is a

concrete rigid frame structure with an asphalt wearing surface. The bridge superstructure is

supported on reinforced concrete abutments founded on steel tube piles filled with concrete.

Boreholes BH3 and BH4 were drilled on the opposite sides of the existing Glover Bridge at the

west branch of Oshawa Creek. The boreholes encountered fill soils extending to a depth of

about 7.0 m below the road surface. Stiff clayey silt and/or compact to very dense silty sand

was encountered below the fill soils.

5.2.1 Shallow Foundation

Based on the investigation results, the use of conventional spread / strip footings may be

considered for supporting the bridge widening. Footings could be founded within the native

clayey silt and/or silty sand. However, using shallow foundations could lead to significant

differential settlement between the new bridge structure supported by shallow foundations and

the existing bridge structure supported by steel tube piles.

The recommended footing depths, Geotechnical Reaction at Serviceability Limit State (SLS)

and factored Geotechnical Resistance at Ultimate Limit State (factored ULS) for spread

footings are given in Table 5.5 based on Boreholes BH3 and BH4.

For bridge widening, shallow foundations at a depth of more than 7.0 m adjacent to the

existing steel tube piles may not be practical for construction.

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


Table 5.5 - Geotechnical Reaction (SLS) and Resistance (ULS)

Borehole

Number

Foundation

Soil Strata

Approximate Depth

below Existing

Grade (m)

Geotechnical

Reaction at SLS

(kPa)

Geotechnical

Resistance at

Factored ULS (1)

(kPa)

BH3

(West

abutment)

Stiff Clayey Silt 7.0 - 8.5 m () 125 180

Compact to very dense

Silty Sand

below 8.5 m () 200 300

BH4

(East

abutment)

Compact to very dense

Silty Sand below 7.0 m () 200 300

(1) A resistance factor of Φ = 0.5 has been applied to the values provided.

Both SLS and ULS values shown on Table 5.5 are applicable for a concentrically loaded

spread footing founded on the soil type indicated. The values provided are for initial sizing of

footings. Detail foundation analysis should be carried out to confirm the ULS / SLS values

together with foundation settlement.

The geotechnical horizontal resistance (against sliding) for spread footings should be

designed using a coefficient of friction between concrete and subgrade of 0.3 which includes a

resistance factor of 0.8.

The minimum footing sizes, footing thickness, excavations and other footing requirements

should be designed in accordance to the latest edition of the Canadian Highway Bridge

Design Code.

The design frost penetration for the general area is 1.2 m. Therefore, a permanent soil cover

of 1.2 m or its thermal equivalent is required for frost protection of foundations.

For footings designed and constructed in accordance with the above SLS values, total and

differential settlements should be less than 25 mm and 20 mm, respectively. Detailed

foundation analysis should be conducted for confirmation.

The new bridge footings will have to be protected against scour and erosion by providing rip-

rap, vegetative cover, or equivalent. Scour protection should be designed by an experienced

engineer.

The excavations and dewatering for the construction of the footings should follow the

procedures provided in Section 5.6. During construction, the groundwater level should be

lowered by a minimum of 1 m below the footing founding level. Excavation adjacent to the

existing steel tube piles should be carried out without disturbing the stability of the steel tube

piles.

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


The footing subgrade should be inspected and evaluated by a geotechnical engineer prior to

concreting to confirm that the footings are founded on competent subgrade capable of

supporting the recommended design pressure.

5.2.2 Deep Foundations

According to the information provided by the City, the existing bridge is supported on

reinforced concrete abutments founded on 6.0 m to 10.5 m long steel tube piles.

Based on the soil conditions encountered in Boreholes BH3 and BH4 drilled approximately at

the potential locations of new abutments during this investigation, deep foundations, i.e., steel

‘H’ piles founded in dense to very dense silty sand may be capable for supporting the bridge

structure. The piles should be driven into the competent native soil / till strata. However,

driving H piles adjacent to the existing steel piles will likely disturb the existing bridge

foundations. Augered cast-in-place caissons should be considered if disturbance from pile

driving cannot be tolerated by the existing bridge structure.

Based on the results of Boreholes BH3 and BH4 drilled on the site, Table 5.6 summarizes the

approximate pile/caisson tip depths that should be used for design purposes.

Table 5.6 – Approximate Pile/Caisson Tip Levels

Location

(Borehole

Number)

Foundation

Soil Strata

Approximate Depth

below Existing

Grade (m)

Approximate

Geodetic

Elevation (m)

Unfactored Unit

End Bearing

Resistance of

Pile/Caisson

(kPa) (1)

West

Abutment

(BH3)

Very dense Silty Sand /

Hard clayey silt till below 16.0 () 130.8 () 1,600

East

Abutment

(BH4)

Very dense Silty Sand /

Hard clayey silt till below 12.0 () 137.1 () 1,600

Notes: (1) A geotechnical resistance factor of 0.4 should be used for the compression capacity.

The approximate pile/caisson tip levels are based on the assumption that the piles/caissons

would penetrate a minimum of 2.0 m into the competent soil stratum. The elevations shown in

Table 5.6 are approximated from the results of a limited number of boreholes drilled and

should not be considered as accurate pile/caisson tip elevations.

Cobbles and/or boulders will likely be encountered within the till strata. Hard pile driving

conditions should therefore be anticipated. The piles should be equipped with reinforced

driving shoes as per Ministry of Transportation of Ontario’s Standard requirements in order to

adequately penetrate the till strata.

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


5.3 Culverts

A total of 3 existing concrete culverts, one over Oshawa Creek and two over Harmony Creek,

are located between Simcoe Street North and Townline Road. These culverts may be

extended to accommodate the possible widening of the investigated road section. Boreholes

BH13 and BH14 were advanced at the east branch of Oshawa Creek and Boreholes BH23

and BH24 were advanced at the west branch of Harmony Creek. No boreholes were

advanced for the east branch of Harmony Creek as instructed by the City because of the

available geotechnical information from the investigation carried out by Soil Engineering Ltd.

in 2011 for the culvert replacement.

Based on the subsoil conditions encountered at Boreholes BH13, BH14, BH23 and BH24

locations, the subsoil at culvert invert would likely comprise silty sand/sandy silt and/or silty

clay/clayey silt fill in the vicinity of the existing culverts. The culvert extension should be

supported on properly prepared subgrade or competent undisturbed native soils.

Based on the borehole drilled in the vicinity of the proposed culvert extension, Ultimate Limit

States (ULS) and Serviceability Limit States (SLS) values for shallow strip/spread footings are

provided in Table 5.7.

Table 5.7 – Geotechnical Reaction (SLS) and Resistance (ULS)

Reference

Borehole Founding Stratum

Approximate

Elevation

(m)

Geotechnical

Pressure

Reaction at SLS

(kPa)

Factored Geotechnical

Pressure Resistance

at ULS(1)

(kPa)

BH-13

(north side)

Fill

Very dense silty sand/sandy silt

above 169.0 (±)

169.00 (±) and below

not recommended

300

not recommended

450

BH-14

(south side)

Fill

Very dense silty sand/sandy silt

above 169.0 (±)


not recommended

300

not recommended

450

BH-23

(south side)

Fill

Hard clayey silt till

Very dense sand/sandy silt/silt

above 193.5 (±)

190.5 (±) to 189.5 (±)


not recommended

300

300

not recommended

450

450

BH-24

(north side)

Fill

Very stiff clayey silt till

Very dense sandy silt/silt

above 191.4 (±)

191.4 (±) to 190.3 (±)


not recommended

200

300

not recommended

300

450

Engineered Fill(2) 150 225

Notes: (1) A resistance factor of Φ = 0.5 has been applied to the ULS values provided.

(2) All engineered fill compacted to at least 100% Standard Proctor Maximum Dry Density (SPMDD).

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


Both SLS and ULS values shown on Table 5.7 are applicable for a concentrically loaded

spread footing founded on the soil type indicated. Detailed foundation analysis should be

carried out to confirm the ULS / SLS values together with foundation settlement.

The new culvert footings will have to be protected against scour and erosion by providing rip-

rap, vegetative cover, or equivalent. Scour protection should be designed by an experienced

engineer.

The excavations and dewatering for the construction of the footings should follow the

procedures provided in Section 5.6. During construction, the groundwater level should be

lowered by a minimum of 1 m below the footing founding level.

The footing subgrade should be inspected and evaluated by a geotechnical engineer prior to

concreting to confirm that the footings are founded on competent subgrade capable of

supporting the recommended design pressure.

5.4 Road Embankment Widening

The proposed improvements of Conlin Road East include widening on both sides of the

existing road. It should be noted that there will be a minor widening on both sides of the road

at the west end as well as a full reconstruction with profile adjustment at the east end of this

section of the Conlin Road.

To prepare the subgrade for the road widening, the existing topsoil, vegetation any deleterious

material, soft/loose and other unsuitable soils should be stripped from the footprint area of the

road widening to a minimum depth of 0.3 m.

Based on the Record of Boreholes, the subgrade is likely to comprise various fill (sand and

gravel/gravelly sand/silty sand/sandy silt and/or silty clay/clayey silt) and/or native soils (clayey

silt and/or sand/silty sand/sandy silt/silt and/or clayey silt till and/or sand/silty sand/sandy silt

till). Isolated weak zones were encountered in Boreholes BH3, BH9, BH13, BH19, BH20,

BH23 and BH24 indicated by SPT N-values ranging from 3 blows to 13 blows per 0.3 m. If

the improved road is wider than the existing road, new fills may be constructed in areas,

where weak soils may be present. Subgrade stabilization using extra granular thickness or

engineered fill placement or similar would be required to protect the integrity of pavement

structure in the vicinity of these boreholes.

Embankment reconstruction, where implemented, should be constructed with in accordance

with OPSD 200.010 (Earth / Shale Grading, Undivided Rural) or OPSD 200.020 (Earth / Shale

Grading, Divided Rural), OPSS 206 (Construction Specification for Grading), and compacted

according to OPSS 501 (Construction Specification for Compacting). It should be noted that

all road embankments that are higher than 4.5 m (high fill) will require slope stability analysis.

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


The embankment widening should be constructed with compacted fill at 2H:1V (or flatter) side

slopes. The construction should be carried out in accordance with OPSS 206 (Construction

Specification for Grading), and compacted according to OPSS 501 (Construction Specification

for Compacting). For widening the existing road embankment, the new fill should be

constructed with benching according to OPSD – 208.010 (Benching of Earth Slopes). The

additional slope to the existing slope should be properly benched into the existing slope and

the new fill should be properly compacted. The selection, placement and compaction of the fill

should be carried out under a geotechnical control program.

For subgrade preparation, all loose / soft fill soils / deleterious materials, if exposed, should be

removed from the area of the proposed roadways. The exposed subgrade should be proof-

rolled with a heavy sheep-foot roller to identify weak areas and / or inspected by a

geotechnical engineer. Any weak or excessively wet zones identified during proof-rolling

should be sub-excavated and replaced with compacted competent material to establish stable

and uniform conditions. Fill, if required for site grading in the widening areas, should be

placed as engineered fill to provide competent subgrade. Prior to placement of engineered fill,

the subgrade should be inspected and approved by a geotechnical engineer. The fill should

be placed in lifts not exceeding 200 mm, and each lift should be uniformly compacted to at

least 95% of the material’s Standard Proctor Maximum Dry Density (SPMDD), except for the

top 0.6 m which should be compacted to at least 98% of SPMDD.

Subgrade preparation should not be done in the winter. Drainage layers and / or subdrains

should be designed and installed to prevent any water accumulation under pavement surface

at all times. The final subgrade surface should be sloped at least 3% to drain towards the

subdrain system or drainage ditches as appropriate. Drainage requirements are also

discussed in Section 5.5.

It should be noted that roadway widening may also require slope stability analyses for all

slopes higher than 2 m. Additional geotechnical investigation is recommended for the areas

where the road is to be widened.

5.5 Drainage

The investigated Conlin Road East section consisted of, at the time of investigation, 2 lanes

with mixed urban and rural setting (curbs and gutter and / or drainage ditch).

Adequate drainage should be provided both laterally and longitudinally along the length of the

road section, as part of the road widening work.

If a rural cross-section is proposed, the base granulars should extend across the full width of

the roadway and should daylight in the ditches. If drainage through granular soils underneath

pavement is considered not sufficient, subdrains should be installed.

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


Where an urban cross-section is proposed, a continuous subdrain system designed to freely

drain into catch basins will be required. The drainage system should consist of a 150 mm

diameter to be installed, below the roadbed level, along both sides to ensure effective

drainage in accordance with OPSD 216.021. The sub-drain pipes should be surrounded by

20 mm size clear stone drainage zone of minimum 150 mm thickness, which should have

non-woven geotextile with FOS of 75 - 150 μm, Class II wraparound to minimize infiltration of

fines in pipes which would reduce their effectiveness.

A minimum slope of 2% should be maintained across the paved sections to ensure proper

surface drainage.

Continuity of drainage through the granular road base and subbase layers should be

maintained between the existing and new pavement structures. In this regard, the granular

thickness for new pavement structure may have to be adjusted to match the granular fill

encountered under the existing pavement.

5.6 Excavation and Dewatering

All excavations should be carried out in accordance with the Ontario Health and Safety

Regulations. The soils to be excavated can be classified as follows:

Existing sand and gravel/gravelly sand fill Type 3

Existing silty clay/clayey silt fill Type 3

Existing silty sand/sandy silt fill Type 3

Stiff to very stiff clayey silt Type 2

Compact to very dense silty sand/sandy silt/silt Type 2

Stiff to very stiff clayey silt till Type 2

Compact to very dense silty sand/sandy silt till Type 2

Accordingly, a bank slope of 1H:1V is required in for excavations in Type 2 and Type 3 soils

accordance with the Ontario Health and Safety Regulations. For Type 2 soils, a 1.2 m high

vertical cut at the bottom of excavation may generally be constructed. However, a vertical cut

in sandy soils under groundwater table may not be stable and flatter slopes or temporary

shoring may be required. Near the ground surface, occasional 3H:1V slopes may be required

due to loose/soft surficial soils. If open cut cannot be carried out, a shoring system (e.g.

trench box) may be used to limit the extent of excavations, subject to engineering design and

approval.

For all temporary cut slopes / trenches, the stability of the temporary cut slopes / trenches will

have to be frequently monitored by the geotechnical engineer. If the cut slopes / trenches are

subject to erosion (e.g., due to rainfall, high groundwater flow, etc.), slope stabilization

measures (e.g., covering the slope / trench faces with plastic sheets, excavating flatter slope,

etc.) will have to be implemented. If open cut cannot be carried out, a properly designed

shoring system / trench box may be used to support the sides of excavations. The shoring

The City of Oshawa



17 June 2014


system design should be carried out in accordance with the Canadian Foundation Engineering

Manual, 4th Edition.

Stockpiles of excavated materials should be kept at least 3.0 m from the edge of the

excavation to avoid slope instability, subject to confirmation by the geotechnical engineer.

Care should also be taken to avoid overloading of any underground services / structures by

stockpiles.

No major excavation difficulties are foreseen in the existing soils, but allowance should always

be made for boulders and cobbles possible present in subsurface soils. The terms describing

the compactness (loose, compact, dense, and very dense) or consistency (stiff, very stiff and

hard) of soil strata give an indication of the effort needed for excavation. It should be noted

that hard/very dense soils may require additional excavation effort / equipment (e.g. impact

hammer, excavation with rippers, etc.).

Based on groundwater level observations, a series of filtered sumps and pumps or well points

may be needed to dewater groundwater seepage from the sandy soils at Borehole BH1 to

BH5, BH7, BH9 to BH 16, BH19 and BH23 to BH25 locations. Water seepage in the silty

clay/clayey silt fill and/or clayey silt and/or clayey silt till should be manageable through gravity

drainage and/or a filtered sump and pump system. However, a significant seepage is

anticipated through the gravelly sand/sand and gravel fill, silty sand/sandy silt fill, silty

sand/sandy silt/silt and/or silty sand/sandy silt till deposits. Therefore, the use of a series of

temporary filtered sumps and pumps, and probably well points, may be required during

construction. Test pits should be excavated to evaluate the appropriate method of dewatering

prior to construction.




REPORT LIMITATIONS

The conclusions and recommendations given in this report are based on information determined

at the test hole locations. The information contained herein in no way reflects on the

environmental aspects of the project, unless otherwise stated. Subsurface and groundwater

conditions between and beyond the test holes may differ from those encountered at the test

hole locations, and conditions may become apparent during construction, which could not be

detected or anticipated at the time of the site investigation. It is recommended practice that the

Geotechnical Engineer be retained during the construction to confirm that the subsurface

conditions across the site do not deviate materially from those encountered in the test holes.

The design recommendations given in this report are applicable only to the project described in

the text, and then only if constructed substantially in accordance with the details stated in this

report. Since all details of the design may not be known, AMEC recommend that AMEC be

retained during the final design stage to verify that the design is consistent with AMEC

recommendations, and that assumptions made in AMEC analysis are valid.

The comments made in this report relating to potential construction problems and possible

methods of construction are intended only for the guidance of the designer. The number of test

holes may not be sufficient to determine all the factors that may affect construction methods and

costs. For example, the thickness of surficial topsoil or fill layers may vary markedly and

unpredictably. The contractors bidding on this project or undertaking the construction should,

therefore, make their own interpretation of the factual information presented and draw their own

conclusions as to how the subsurface conditions may affect their work. This work has been

undertaken in accordance with normally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No other

warranty is expressed or implied.

The elevations mentioned in this report were obtained strictly for use by this office in the

geotechnical design of the project. They should not be used by any other party for any other

purpose.

Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on or decisions to be made

based on it, are the responsibility of such third parties. AMEC Environment & Infrastructure

accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions

made or actions based on this report.

FIGURES


SITE LOCATION PLAN

OCTOBER 2013

FIGURE No.

TP113039

1

REV. NO.:

PROJECT NO:

DATE:

A

104 Crockford Boulevard, Scarborough, Ontario, M1R 3C3

N.T.S.

-

PROJECTION:

-

DATUM:

DWN BY:

CHK'D BY:

SCALE:

SN

KW

PROJECT

TITLECLIENTCLIENT LOGO

AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, CONTRACT No.

C2013-003

THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF OSHAWA

PRELIMINARY

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

CONLIN ROAD EAST FROM SIMCOE STREET NORTH TO TOWNLINE ROAD NORTH

OSHAWA, ONTARIO

SITE

UTM Zone 17T

PROJECTION:

NAD83

DATUM:

BOREHOLE LOCATION PLAN

TITLE

PROJECT

CLIENT LOGO

FIGURE No.

104 Crockford Blvd, Scarborough, Ontario, M1R 3C3




CONTRACT. NO.:

2A

PROJECT NO:

TP113039

C2013-003

CLIENT:

DWN BY:

CHK'D BY:

OCTOBER 2013

DATE:

SCALE:

SN

AS SHOWN

KW

PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION


OSHAWA, ONTARIO

-

REV. NO.:

Glo

ve

r B

rid

ge

UTM Zone 17T

PROJECTION:

NAD83

DATUM:


TITLE

PROJECT

CLIENT LOGO

FIGURE No.





CONTRACT. NO.:

2B

PROJECT NO:

TP113039

C2013-003

CLIENT:

DWN BY:

CHK'D BY:

OCTOBER 2013

DATE:

SCALE:

SN

AS SHOWN

KW



OSHAWA, ONTARIO

-

REV. NO.:

UTM Zone 17T

PROJECTION:

NAD83

DATUM:


TITLE

PROJECT

CLIENT LOGO

FIGURE No.





CONTRACT. NO.:

2C

PROJECT NO:

TP113039

C2013-003

CLIENT:

DWN BY:

CHK'D BY:

OCTOBER 2013

DATE:

SCALE:

SN

AS SHOWN

KW



OSHAWA, ONTARIO

-

REV. NO.:

RECORD OF BOREHOLES

AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, www.amec.com a Division of AMEC Americas Limited 104 Crockford Boulevard Scarborough, ON M1R 3C3 Ph: (416) 751-6565 Fax: (416) 751-7592 Revised: October 2011

EXPLANATION OF BOREHOLE LOG This form describes some of the information provided on the borehole logs, which is based primarily on examination of the recovered samples, and the results of the field and laboratory tests. Additional description of the soil/rock encountered is given in the accompanying geotechnical report. GENERAL INFORMATION Project details, borehole number, location coordinates and type of drilling equipment used are given at the top of the borehole log. SOIL LITHOLOGY Elevation and Depth This column gives the elevation and depth of inferred geologic layers. The elevation is referred to the datum shown in the Description column. Lithology Plot This column presents a graphic depiction of the soil and rock stratigraphy encountered within the borehole. Description This column gives a description of the soil stratums, based on visual and tactile examination of the samples augmented with field and laboratory test results. Each stratum is described according to the Modified Unified Soil Classification System. The compactness condition of cohesionless soils (SPT) and the consistency of cohesive soils (undrained shear strength) are defined as follows (Ref. Canadian Foundation Engineering Manual):

* For penetration of less than 0.3 m, N-values are indicated as the number of blows for the penetration achieved (e.g. 50/25: 50 blows for 25 centimeter penetration). Soil Sampling Sample types are abbreviated as follows:

SS Split Spoon TW Thin Wall Open (Pushed) RC Rock Core GS Grab Sample AS Auger Sample TP Thin Wall Piston (Pushed) WS Washed Sample AR Air Return Sample

Additional information provided in this section includes sample numbering, sample recovery and numerical testing results. Field and Laboratory Testing Results of field testing (e.g., SPT, pocket penetrometer, and vane testing) and laboratory testing (e.g., natural moisture content, and limits) executed on the recovered samples are plotted in this section. Instrumentation Installation Instrumentation installations (monitoring wells, piezometers, inclinometers, etc.) are plotted in this section. Water levels, if measured during fieldwork, are also plotted. These water levels may or may not be representative of the static groundwater level depending on the nature of soil stratum where the piezometer tips are located, the time elapsed from installation to reading and other applicable factors. Comments

Compactness of Cohesionless

Soils SPT N-Value*

Very loose 0 to 4 Loose 4 to 10 Compact 10 to 30 Dense 30 to 50 Very Dense > 50

Consistency of Undrained Shear Strength Cohesive Soils kPa

Very soft 0 to 12 Soft 12 to 25 Firm 25 to 50 Stiff 50 to 100

Very stiff 100 to 200 Hard Over 200

GROUP SYMBOL

GW

GP

GM

GC

SW

SP

SM

SC

WL < 50% ML

WL > 50% MH

WL < 30% CL

30% < WL < 50% CI

WL > 50% CH

WL < 50% OL

WL > 50% OH

Pt

FRACTION

PASSING RETAINED PERCENT DESCRIPTOR

76 mm 19 mm

FINE 19 mm 4.75 mm

COARSE 4.75 mm 2.00 mm

MEDIUM 2.00 mm 425 µm

FINE 425 µm 75 µm

75 µm

DEFINING RANGES OF

PERCENTAGE BY WEIGHT OF

MINOR COMPONENTS

U.S STANDARD SIEVE SIZE

35-50

20-35

10-20

1-10

SOIL COMPONENTS

MODIFIED * UNIFIED CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM FOR SOILS

*The soil of each stratum is described using the Unified Soil Classification System (Technical Memorandum 36-357

prepared by Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi, Corps of Engineers, U.S Army. Vol. 1

March 1953.) modified slightly so that an inorganic clay of "medium plasticity" is recognized.

MAJOR DIVISION TYPICAL DESCRIPTION LABORATORY CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA

CLA

YS

AB

OV

E "

A"

LIN

E

NE

GLIG

IBLE

OR

GA

NIC

CO

NT

EN

T

OR

GA

NIC

SLIT

S &

CLA

YS

BE

LO

W "

A"

LIN

E

CO

AR

SE

GR

AIN

ED

SO

ILS

(M

OR

E T

HA

N H

ALF

BY

WE

IGH

T

LA

RG

ER

TH

AN

75µ

m)

GR

AV

ELS

MO

RE

TH

AN

HA

LF

TH

E C

OA

RS

E F

RA

CT

ION

LA

RG

ER

TH

AN

4.7

5m

m

CLEAN

GRAVELS

(TRACE OR NO

FINES)

WELL GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES

SA

ND

S M

OR

E T

HA

N H

ALF

TH

E

CO

AR

SE

FR

AC

TIO

N S

MA

LLE

R

TH

AN

4.7

5m

m

CLEAN SANDS

(TRACE OR NO

FINES)

WELL GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES

Cu= D60>4; CC= (D30)2

= 1 to 3

D10 D10 X D60

POORLY GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND

MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINESNOT MEETING ABOVE REQUIREMENTS

DIRTY GRAVELS

(WITH SOME OR

MORE FINES)

SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND- SILT MIXTURES ATTERBERG LIMITS BELOW "A" LINE OR P.I MORE THAN 4

CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY MIXTURES ATTERBERG LIMITS BELOW "A" LINE OR P.I MORE THAN 7

Cu= D60 >6; CC= (D30)2

= 1 to 3

D10 D10 X D60

POORLY GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL- SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES NOT MEETING ABOVE REQUIREMENTS

DIRTY SANDS

(WITH SOME OR

MORE FINES)

SILTY SANDS, SAND-SILT MIXTURES ATTERBERG LIMITS BELOW "A" LINE OR P.I MORE THAN 4

CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTURES ATTERBERG LIMITS BELOW "A" LINE OR P.I MORE THAN 7

WHENEVER THE NATURE OF THE FINES CONTENT HAS NOT

BEEN DETERMINED, IT IS DESIGNATED BY THE LETTER "F",

E.G SF IS A MIXTURE OF SAND WITH SILT OR CLAYORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY

HIGH ORGANIC SOILS PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILSSTRONG COLOUR OR ODOUR, AND OFTEN FIBROUS

TEXTURE

FIN

E-G

RA

INE

D S

OIL

S (

MO

RE

TH

AN

HA

LF

BY

WE

IGH

T S

MA

LLE

R T

HA

N

75µ

m)

INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY SANDS OF

SLIGHT PLASTICITY

CLASSIFICATION IS BASED UPON PLASTICITY CHART

(SEE BELOW)

INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS, FINE SANDY OR SILTY

SOILS

SIL

TS

BE

LO

W "

A"

LIN

E

NE

GLIG

IBLE

OR

GA

NIC

CO

NT

EN

T

INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY, SANDY OR SILTY CLAYS,

LEAN CLAYS

INORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM PLASTICITY, SILTY CLAYS

INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAYS

ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY

AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, www.amec.com


104 Crockford Boulevard

Scarborough, ON M1R 3C3

Ph: (416) 751-6565

Fax: (416) 751-7592

GR

AV

EL COARSE

SA

ND

FINES (SILT OR CLAY BASED ON

PLASTICITY)

ROUNDED OR SUBROUNDED: COBBLES 76 mm TO 200 mm

BOULDERS > 200 mm

OVERSIZED MATERIAL

AND

Y/EY

SOME

TRACE

NOT ROUNDED:

ROCK FRAGMENTS > 76 mm

ROCKS > 0.76 CUBIC METRE IN

VOLUME

Note 1: Soils are classified and described according to their engineering properties

and behaviour.

Note 2: The modifying adjectives used to define the actual or estimated percentage

range by weight of minor components are consistent with the Canadian Foundation

Engineering Manual.

WL = 30

WL = 50

CH

CL CI MH

OL OH

CL-ML ML

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Pla

sti

cit

y In

de

x,

I P

Liquid Limit, WL

Plasticity Chart for Soil Passing 425 Micron Sieve

'A' Line IP = 0.73 (WL - 20)

160.2

159.3

157.5

156.9

0.2

1.1

2.9

3.5

1

2

3

4

5

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

about 185 mm ASPHALT

brownGravelly Sand FILL

some silt trace cobblesmoist

brownCLAYEY SILT

some sand, trace gravelvery stiff

trace cobbles/boulders

greySILTY SAND / SANDY SILT

trace clay, trace gravel, trace cobbles/bouldersvery dense

moist

End of Borehole

100

100

100

100

100

(13)

(83)

55

17

3222

18

26

26

62

Drilling Method:Project Client:

Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:

150 mm Solid Stem Augers

Conlin Rd. E. from Simcoe St. N. to Townline Rd. N., Oshawa,ON

Truck Mounted Drill

0, 15/10/13Date Completed:

Reviewed by:

Revision No.:Date Started:

Class Environmental Assessment of Conlin Road East

SC

SN

City of Oshawa Compiled by:

24 Jul 13 24 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber

LITHOLOGY PROFILE FIELD TESTING

Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT

* Undrained Shear Strength (kPa)

(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact

Nilcon Vane*MTO Vane*

Geodetic Ground Surface Elevation: 160.4 m

PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values

parts per million (ppm)

Lower Explosive Limit (LEL)

PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP

a Division of AMEC Americas Limited104 Crockford BoulevardScarborough, OntarioCanada M1R 3C3Tel +1(416) 751-6565Fax +1(416) 751-7592www.amec.com


Logged by:Project Number: Drilling Location:TP113039.6000

160

159

158

157

1

2

3

E669034 N4868321

RECORD OF BOREHOLE No. BH1

Page: 1 of 1

JF

Scale: 1 : 39Borehole details as presented, do not constitute a thorough understanding of all potential conditions present and require interpretative assistance froma qualified Geotechnical Engineer. Also, borehole information should be read in conjunction with the geotechnical report for which it wascommissioned and the accompanying'Explanation of Borehole Log'.

2

14

10

9

7

No freestanding groundwater measured in open borehole on completion of drilling.

155.8

155.1

154.5

153.8

152.7

152.4

0.1

0.8

1.4

2.1

3.2

3.5

Borehole was wet at bottom.

1

2

3

4

5

AS

SS

SS

SS

SS


brownSand and Gravel FILL

some siltmoist


some siltmoist

brownSilty Sand FILL

some gravel, trace organics, tracecobbles/boulders

moist

brownSilty Clay / Clayey Silt FILL

trace sand, trace cobbles/boulders

trace organics


trace graveldense

moist to wetEnd of Borehole

100

100

100

100

6

14

13

31


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


24 Jul 13 24 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




155

154

153

1

2

3

E669252 N4868379


Page: 1 of 1

JF


25

4

15

13

14


146.6

146.1

145.4

141.3

139.8

0.2

0.7

1.4

5.5

7.0

Monitoring Well Instalation Details (50 mm diameter PVC pipe)

- Flush mount cover installed- Concrete: 0.0 - 0.3 m- Bentonite plug: 0.3 - 8.8 m- Sand pack: 8.8 - 9.1 m- Slotted pipe: 9.1 - 12.3 m

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS


brownSand and Gravel FILLsome silt, trace cobbles

moist


some silt, trace cobblesmoist

brownSilty Sand / Sandy Silt FILL

some gravel, trace cobbles/bouldersmoist


some sand, trace gravel, trace to some organics

greyCLAYEY SILT

trace to some sand, trace gravelstiff

100

100

100

100

100

78

72

22

23

17

15

3

5

6


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


24 Jul 13 24 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




Continued on Next Page

146

145

144

143

142

141

140

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

E669518 N4868480


Page: 1 of 3

JF


2

5

12

10

11

13

17

Groundwater depth observed on 15/08/2013 at a depth of: 6.3 m.

Cave in depth after removal of augers: 12.2 m. Groundwater depth on completion of drilling on 24/07/2013 at a depth of: 5.3 m.

138.3

130.9

8.5

15.8

8

9

10

11

12

13

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

greyCLAYEY SILT

trace to some sand, trace gravelstiff

greySILTY SAND

trace claycompact to very dense

moist to wet

100

100

100

100

100

100

(48)52

10

10

14

14

35

68

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact


PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP



139

138

137

136

135

134

133

132

131

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

E669518 N4868480


Page: 2 of 3

JF


12

15

14

17

16

11

130.216.6

14SS

greyCLAYEY SILT TILL

trace to some sand, trace gravelhard

End of Borehole

100 91

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact


PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP

Logged by:Project Number: Drilling Location:TP113039.6000 E669518 N4868480


Page: 3 of 3

JF


10

143.8

143.3

141.1

137.0

0.2

0.7

2.9

7.0



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS



moist



brown to greySilty Sand / Sandy Silt FILL

trace clay, trace cobblesmoist

with organics and wood pieces

greySILTY SAND

trace clay, trace cobbles/boulderscompact to very dense

moist to wet

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

25

30

32

52

32

18

9


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


24 Jul 13 24 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP





143

142

141

140

139

138

137

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

E669545 N4868464


Page: 1 of 2

JF


2

6

4

3

7

6

17



132.1

131.7

11.9

12.3

8

9

10

11

SS

SS

SS

SS

greySILTY SAND

trace clay, trace cobbles/boulderscompact to very dense

moist to wet


some sand, trace gravelhard

End of Borehole

0

17

100

100

11

30

55/15

60/15

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact


PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP


136

135

134

133

132

8

9

10

11

12

E669545 N4868464


Page: 2 of 2

JF


15

55

15

60

15

7

7

6

153.0

152.6

150.4

0.1

0.5

2.7

1

2

3

4

SS

SS

SS

SS



moistbrown

Silty Sand FILLtrace to some clay, trace gravel

moisttrace cobbles/boulders

End of Borehole

100

100

100

79

29

27

10

8


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


24 Jul 13 24 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




153

152

151

1

2

E669779 N4868558


Page: 1 of 1

JF


2

7

10

11


153.6

153.0

152.3

151.0

0.1

0.7

1.4

2.7

1

2

3

4

SS

SS

SS

SS

about 110 mm ASPHALTbrown

Sand and Gravel FILLsome silt

moist


trace cobblesmoist

brownCLAYEY SILT

some sand, trace gravelstiff

End of Borehole

100

100

100

75

25

23

12

13


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


24 Jul 13 24 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




153

152

151

1

2

E670025 N4868636


Page: 1 of 1

JF


1

3

23

25


153.7

153.2

152.5

151.0

0.2

0.7

1.4

2.9

1

2

3

4

AS

SS

SS

SS



moist


trace sand, trace gravel, trace organics


trace to some clay, some gravel, trace organicsmoist

End of Borehole

83

83

88

15

14

15


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


25 Jul 13 25 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




153

152

1

2

E670264 N4868724


Page: 1 of 1

JF


10

10

13


157.1

156.5

156.0

153.7

0.1

0.7

1.2

3.5

1

2

3

4

5

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS



moist


trace cobblesmoist

brownCLAYEY SILT

some sand, trace to some gravelstiff to very stiff

End of Borehole

92

83

75

100

100

27

14

14

19

29


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


25 Jul 13 25 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




157

156

155

154

1

2

3

E670511 N4868808


Page: 1 of 1

JF


2

13

4

13

13

16


159.9

159.3

158.2

157.1

0.1

0.7

1.8

2.9


1

2

3

4

SS

SS

SS

SS





trace sand, trace gravel, trace organics

brownSILTY SAND / SANDY SILT

some gravel, trace to some clay,compact

moist to wet

End of Borehole

100

39

100

92

17

7

5

12


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


25 Jul 13 25 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




159

158

1

2

E670641 N4868850


Page: 1 of 1

JF


2

18

34

19

13


164.5

163.9

161.9

0.1

0.7

2.7

1

2

3

4

SS

SS

SS

SS


Gravelly Sand FILLsome silt, trace cobbles

moist

brownSILTY SAND / SANDY SILT TILL

some gravelcompact to dense

moist

End of Borehole

100

100

100

92

(19)552621

27

31

35


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


25 Jul 13 25 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




164

163

162

1

2

E670792 N4868899


Page: 1 of 1

JF


7

9

8

8


172.5

171.8

169.7

0.1

0.8

2.9

1

2

3

4

SS

SS

SS

SS


Sand and Gravel FILLsome silt, trace cobbles

brownSILTY SAND / SANDY SILT TILL

trace clay, trace gravel, trace cobblesdense

moist to wet

End of Borehole

83

100

83

88

27

32

35

35


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


25 Jul 13 25 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




172

171

170

1

2

E670931 N4868946


Page: 1 of 1

JF


3

8

9

8


176.6

176.0

173.2

0.1

0.7

3.5

1

2

3

4

5

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS


Sand and Gravel FILLsome silt, trace cobbles

moist

brown SANDY SILT/SILT

trace clay, trace gravelloose to compact

moist to wet

End of Borehole

83

100

100

100

100

21

9

23

21

17


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


24 Jul 13 24 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




176

175

174

1

2

3

E671073 N4868996


Page: 1 of 1

JF


2

14

19

21

19


175.0

169.0

0.7

6.7



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS


moist


trace to some gravel, trace clay, trace cobblesmoist to wet

------grey



moist

42

100

100

100

100

100

89

13

11

9

13

17

11

2


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


29 Jul 13 29 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP





175

174

173

172

171

170

169

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

E671224 N4869057


Page: 1 of 2

JF


2

10

10

9

9

6

9

13


Groundwater depth on completion of drilling on 29/07/2013 at a depth of: 8.7 m.

163.8

163.2

11.9

12.5

8

9

10

11

SS

SS

SS

SS



moist


some sand to sandy, trace gravelhard

End of Borehole

100

67

100

100

75

85

52/15

50/13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact


PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP


168

167

166

165

164

8

9

10

11

12

E671224 N4869057


Page: 2 of 2

JF


15

52

13

50

12

11

15

10

7

175.0

169.0

0.7

6.7



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS


moist


some gravel, trace cobblesmoist

------grey


trace clay, trace gravel, trace cobbles/bouldersvery densemoist to wet

63

89

100

100

100

100

35

20

13

9

10

12

10

56/28


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


29 Jul 13 29 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP





175

174

173

172

171

170

169

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

E671219 N4869046


Page: 1 of 2

JF


28

56

9

9

9

7

11

7

9



162.7

161.9

13.0

13.8

8

9

10

11

SS

SS

SS

SS


trace clay, trace gravel, trace cobbles/bouldersvery densemoist to wet


some sand to sandy, trace gravelhard

End of Borehole

100

89

100

150

41

75

55/15

55/15

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact


PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP


168

167

166

165

164

163

162

8

9

10

11

12

13

E671219 N4869046


Page: 2 of 2

JF


15

55

15

55

18

18

10

7

179.2

178.5

177.7

176.4

0.7

1.4

2.2

3.5

1

2

3

4

5

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS


moist


some gravelmoist

brownCLAYEY SILT

some sand, some gravel, trace cobblesstiff

brownSILTY SAND / SANDY SILT

trace clay, trace gravel, trace cobbles/boulderscompact

moist

End of Borehole

83

100

75

100

100

10

10

10

23

22


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


25 Jul 13 25 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




179

178

177

1

2

3

E671358 N4869106


Page: 1 of 1

JF


4

19

10

8

18


186.2

184.9

183.4

0.1

1.4

2.9

1

2

3

4

SS

SS

SS

SS


Sand and Gravel FILLsom silt, trace cobbles


trace clay, trace gravel, trace cobblesdensemoist

End of Borehole

100

100

100

79

27

17

33

32


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


25 Jul 13 25 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




186

185

184

1

2

E671472 N4869141


Page: 1 of 1

JF


2

7

7

7


189.6

189.1

187.7

185.8

0.2

0.7

2.1

4.0


- Flush mount cover installed- Concrete: 0.0 - 0.3- Bentonite plug: 0.3 - 6.7 m- Sand pack: 6.7 - 7.0 m- Slotted pipe: 7.0 - 10.0 m

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS



moist


trace sand, trace gravel

brown to greyCLAYEY SILT TILL

some sand, trace gravelvery stiff

brown to greySILTY SAND/SANDY SILT TILL

trace to some clay, trace gravel, trace to somecobbles/boulders

very densemoist

71

100

100

100

100

100

100

(57)3310

9

8

15

18

21

88/28

55/15


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


29 Jul 13 29 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP





189

188

187

186

185

184

183

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

E671544 N4869171


Page: 1 of 2

JF


28

88

15

55

16

8

9

9

9

7

9



179.010.8


8

9

10

SS

SS

SS

brown to greySILTY SAND/SANDY SILT TILL

trace to some clay, trace gravel, trace to somecobbles/boulders

very densemoist

End of Borehole

100

17

100

55/15

56/15

50/15

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact


PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP


182

181

180

179

8

9

10

E671544 N4869171


Page: 2 of 2

JF


15

55

15

56

15

50

8

8

8

189.6

188.9

188.3

187.0

0.1

0.8

1.4

2.7

1

2

3

4

SS

SS

SS

SS


Gravelly Sand FILLsome silt, trace cobbles

moist

greySilty Clay / Clayey Silt FILL

some sand, trace gravel

brownCLAYEY SILT TILL

some sand, trace gravel, trace cobblesvery stiff

End of Borehole

100

100

100

100

(19)513023

11

18

22


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


26 Jul 13 26 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




189

188

187

1

2

E671545 N4869169


Page: 1 of 1

JF


3

9

8

9


190.8

189.1

188.6

0.7

2.4

2.9

1

2

3

4

SS

SS

SS

SS


moist


trace sand, trace gravel, trace to some organics

greySILTY SAND / SANDY SILT TILL

trace clay, trace gravel, trace cobbles/bouldersmoist

wet pocketEnd of Borehole

79

94

79

83

12

6

5

16


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


29 Jul 13 29 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




191

190

189

1

2

E671722 N4869240


Page: 1 of 1

JF


9

19

27

22

8


194.5

194.1

192.3

0.7

1.1

2.9

1

2

3

4

SS

SS

SS

SS


moist


some gravelmoist


some sand, trace gravelfirm to stiff

End of Borehole

83

100

100

83

9

6

6

10


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


26 Jul 13 26 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




195

194

193

1

2

E672041 N4869343


Page: 1 of 1

JF


6

5

16

10

10


192.7

191.6

189.9

0.7

1.8

3.5

1

2

3

4

5

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS


moist




some sand, some gravelvery stiff

End of Borehole

83

88

100

100

100

15

5

11

16

17


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


26 Jul 13 26 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




193

192

191

190

1

2

3

E672213 N4869408


Page: 1 of 1

JF


5

28

14

23

12

11


194.2

194.0

191.8

0.5

0.7

2.9

1

2

3

4

SS

SS

SS

SS


moist


some sand and gravelbrown

CLAYEY SILT TILLsome sand, trace gravel

firm to very stiff

End of Borehole

92

94

100

79

9

6

13

25


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


26 Jul 13 26 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




194

193

192

1

2

E672354 N4869450


Page: 1 of 1

JF


7

16

13

13

12


193.3

192.8

191.3

190.5

189.5

0.2

0.7

2.2

3.0

4.0



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS



moist




some gravelmoist


some sand, some gravel, trace cobbles/bouldershard

greySAND / SANDY SILT / SILTY SAND

trace gravel, trace to some cobbles/bouldersvery densemoist to wet

111

100

67

83

100

100

100

(9)

(17)

43

83

4819

6

4

27

70

82

87


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


26 Jul 13 26 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP





193

192

191

190

189

188

187

186

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

E672482 N4869492


Page: 1 of 2

JF


6

20

18

8

7

20

16



182.511.0

8

9

10

SS

SS

SS

greySAND / SANDY SILT / SILTY SAND

trace gravel, trace to some cobbles/bouldersvery densemoist to wet

End of Borehole

100

100

100

55/15

55/15

50/15

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact


PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP


185

184

183

8

9

10

E672482 N4869492


Page: 2 of 2

JF


15

55

15

55

15

50

15

12

14

193.7

193.1

191.4

190.3

0.6

1.2

2.9

4.0



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

AS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS


moist




trace sand, trace gravel


some sand, some gravelvery stiff

greySANDY SILT / SILT

trace clay, trace gravel, trace to somecobbles/boulders

very densemoist

83

0

100

100

100

100

9

4

9

25

69

80


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


26 Jul 13 26 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP





194

193

192

191

190

189

188

187

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

E672495 N4869507


Page: 1 of 2

JF


2

5

22

14

7

18

18



183.311.0

8

9

10

SS

SS

SS

greySANDY SILT / SILT

trace clay, trace gravel, trace to somecobbles/boulders

very densemoist

End of Borehole

100

100

100

52/15

55/15

52/15

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact


PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP


186

185

184

8

9

10

E672495 N4869507


Page: 2 of 2

JF


15

52

15

55

15

52

20

20

17

198.7

197.4

1.4

2.7

1

2

3

4

SS

SS

SS

SS


some silt, trace cobbles, trace to some organicsmoist

brownSANDY SILT / SILTY SAND

trace clay, trace gravelcompact

moist to wet

End of Borehole

92

733

17

100

34

6

21

22


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


26 Jul 13 26 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




200

199

198

1

2

E672680 N4869571


Page: 1 of 1

JF


22

13

14

14


207.3

206.4

204.9

0.5

1.4

2.9

1

2

3

4

SS

SS

SS

SS


some siltmoist

dark greySilty Sand FILL

some gravel, with organicsmoist

greySANDY SILT

some clay, trace gravel, trace cobbles/bouldersdense to very dense

moist

End of Borehole

83

100

100

75

16

5

43

52


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


26 Jul 13 26 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




207

206

205

1

2

E672808 N4869608


Page: 1 of 1

JF


3

13

8

6


210.0

209.5

207.1

0.6

1.1

3.5

1

2

3

4

5

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS


moist



brownSANDY SILT

some clay, trace gravelloose to compact

moist

End of Borehole

83

94

100

100

100

16

6

15

21

23


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


26 Jul 13 26 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




210

209

208

1

2

3

E673085 N4869711


Page: 1 of 1

JF


5

12

8

9

8


209.8

209.1

0.7

1.4



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

AS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS


some silt, trace cobbles/bouldersmoist

dark brownSilty Sand FILL

some clay and gravel, some organicsvery stiff

brownSAND / SANDY SILT / SILTY SAND TILL

some clay, trace gravel, trace cobbles/boulderscompact to very dense

moist

---------grey

------trace to some cobbles/boulders

79

83

100

100

100

100

(54)397

15

24

25

24

40

50/13


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


26 Jul 13 26 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP





210

209

208

207

206

205

204

203

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

E673087 N4869701


Page: 1 of 2

JF


13

50

22

10

8

8

9

5

8



199.710.8

8

9

10

SS

SS

SS

brownSAND / SANDY SILT / SILTY SAND TILL

some clay, trace gravel, trace cobbles/boulderscompact to very dense

moist

End of Borehole

100

100

100

50/10

50/13

50/13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact


PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP


202

201

200

8

9

10

E673087 N4869701


Page: 2 of 2

JF


10

50

13

50

13

50

5

6

7

202.1

201.4

199.9

0.7

1.4

2.9

1

2

3

4

SS

SS

SS

SS


moist


trace to some sand, trace to some gravel


some sand, some gravelstiff to very stiff

End of Borehole

83

78

100

79

9

6

10

18


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


26 Jul 13 26 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




202

201

200

1

2

E673284 N4869774


Page: 1 of 1

JF


5

10

14

20


205.6

205.0

202.4

0.3

0.9

3.5

1

2

3

4

5

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS


moistbrown

Silty Clay / Clayey Silt FILLtrace sand, trace gravel, trace to some organics


some sand, trace to some gravelvery stiff

End of Borehole

83

100

100

100

100

19

15

17

19

23


Project Name:

Project Location:

Drilling Machine:



Truck Mounted Drill


Reviewed by:



SC

SN


26 Jul 13 26 Jul 13

SOIL SAMPLING

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Sam

ple

Num

ber


Rec

over

y (%

)

Lith

olog

y P

lot

LAB TESTINGCOMMENTS

&GRAIN SIZE

DISTRIBUTION(%)

SP

T 'N

' / R

QD

DCPT


(m)

(m)

EL

EV

AT

IONDESCRIPTION

20 40 60 80

Intact

INS

TR

UM

EN

TA

TIO

NIN

ST

ALL

AT

ION

Remould

PenetrationTesting

DE

PT

H RemouldIntact



PPTSPT

20 40 60 80

2 4 6 8 10 12

Soil Vapour Reading

W WL

Rinse pH Values



PlasticCL

100 200 300 400

SISAGRLiquid

WP




205

204

203

1

2

3

E673407 N4869823


Page: 1 of 1

JF


17

9

9

10

12


APPENDIX A

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

MINISTRY SIEVE DESIGNATION ( Imperial )

70

80

90

PE

RC

EN

T

RE

TA

INE

D

75.0mm

" 3"

100

1 2 3 4 5 10 20 30 40 50

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION

Sand and Gravel / Gravelly Sand

SAMPLE

12

53µm

"

PE

RC

EN

T

PA

SS

ING

0

10

20

30

40

50

75µm

106µm 425µm

600µm

850µm

2" 2

LEGEND

BH

122 3 4 5 10 " 3

4" 1" 11 21

GRAIN SIZE IN MICROMETERS

CLAY & SILTCLAY & SILTSAND

Fine Medium

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

1.18mm

2.00mm

2.36mm

4.75mm

9.5mm

13.2mm

19.0mm

26.5mm

37.5mm

53.0mm

63.0mm

60

Coarse

GRAVEL

Fine Coarse

SYMBOL

150µm

250µm

300µm

20 30 40 270

SS1

SS1

SS1

SS1

200 140 100 60 50 40 30 20 16 10 8 4 38"

BH1

BH10

BH18

BH23

Granular A LimitsOPSS 1010 Table 2

Granular B Type 1 LimitsOPSS 1010 Table 2


Conlin Rd. E. from Simcoe St. N. to Townline Rd. N., Oshawa, ON

TP113039.6000 Figure No.: A 1

AM

EC

GR

AIN

SIZ

E -

OP

SS

1010

TP

1130

39.6

000.

GP

J O

NT

AR

IO M

OT

.GD

T

09/1

0/1

3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

COBBLESIZE

COARSE MEDIUM FINE

3/8"

U.S.S. Sieve size, meshes/inch

3 10 16 301/2"

SAND

SILT and CLAY

FINE GRAINED

Size of openings, inches

6" 41/4"

1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001100

40 50 60 1004" 2004

FINE

GRAVEL

COARSE

11/2" 1" 3/3" 8

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R T

HA

N

GRAIN SIZE, mm

100 10

KP

SB


Date October 2013 Prep'd

Chkd.Project TP113039.6000


FIGURE No. A2

Clayey Silt

SYMBOL BOREHOLE SAMPLE DEPTH (m) ELEVATION (m)

BH1 SS3 1.7 158.7

AM

EC

GR

AD

AT

ION

CU

RV

E T

P11

3039

.600

0.G

PJ

AM

EC

SC

AR

BO

RO

UG

H L

OG

20

09.G

DT

15

/10/

13

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

CICL MH

OHOL

ML

CL

CL-ML

ML

'A' LIN

E

CH

KP

SB

WL=50

WL=30

LIQUID LIMIT (LL)

PLA

ST

ICIT

Y IN

DE

X (

PI)

PI = 0.73 (L

L-20)

ATTERBERG LIMIT TEST RESULTS




FIGURE No. A3

Clayey Silt

SYMBOL BOREHOLE SAMPLE LL PL PIDEPTH (m) ELEVATION (m)

BH1 SS3 1.7 18 12 6158.7

AM

EC

AT

TE

RB

ER

G L

IMIT

S T

P11

3039

.600

0.G

PJ

AM

EC

SC

AR

BO

RO

UG

H L

OG

200

9.G

DT

15/

10/1

3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

COBBLESIZE

COARSE MEDIUM FINE

3/8"


3 10 16 301/2"

SAND

SILT and CLAY

FINE GRAINED


6" 41/4"

1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001100

40 50 60 1004" 2004

FINE

GRAVEL

COARSE

11/2" 1" 3/3" 8

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R T

HA

N

GRAIN SIZE, mm

100 10

KP

SB





FIGURE No. A4

Sand/Silty Sand/Sandy Silt


BH23BH3

SS6SS9

4.79.3

188.8137.5

AM

EC

GR

AD

AT

ION

CU

RV

E T

P11

3039

.600

0.G

PJ

AM

EC

SC

AR

BO

RO

UG

H L

OG

20

09.G

DT

15

/10/

13

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

COBBLESIZE

COARSE MEDIUM FINE

3/8"


3 10 16 301/2"

SAND

SILT and CLAY

FINE GRAINED


6" 41/4"

1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001100

40 50 60 1004" 2004

FINE

GRAVEL

COARSE

11/2" 1" 3/3" 8

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R T

HA

N

GRAIN SIZE, mm

100 10

KP

SB





FIGURE No. A5

Sand/Silty Sand/Sandy Silt/Silt Till


BH17BH28

SS6SS4

4.72.4

185.1208.1

AM

EC

GR

AD

AT

ION

CU

RV

E T

P11

3039

.600

0.G

PJ

AM

EC

SC

AR

BO

RO

UG

H L

OG

20

09.G

DT

15

/10/

13

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

CICL MH

OHOL

ML

CL

CL-ML

ML

'A' LIN

E

CH

KP

SB

WL=50

WL=30

LIQUID LIMIT (LL)

PLA

ST

ICIT

Y IN

DE

X (

PI)

PI = 0.73 (L

L-20)

ATTERBERG LIMIT TEST RESULTS




FIGURE No. A6

Sand/Silty Sand/Sandy Silt/Silt Till

SYMBOL BOREHOLE SAMPLE LL PL PIDEPTH (m) ELEVATION (m)

BH17BH28

SS6SS4

4.72.4

1413

1010

43

185.1208.1

AM

EC

AT

TE

RB

ER

G L

IMIT

S T

P11

3039

.600

0.G

PJ

AM

EC

SC

AR

BO

RO

UG

H L

OG

200

9.G

DT

15/

10/1

3

APPENDIX B

RESULTS OF PAVEMENT CONDITION SURVEY

The City of Oshawa Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for Class EA of Conlin Road East From Simcoe Street North to Townline Road North, Oshawa, Ontario AMEC Reference Number: TP113039.6000 October 2013

Pavement Condition Survey

Section 1: Simcoe Street North / Avalona Street

Severity of Distress Density of Distress

Ve

ry S

ligh

t

Slig

ht

Mo

de

rate

Se

ve

re

Ve

ry S

eve

re

Fe

w

Inte

rmitte

nt

Fre

qu

en

t

Exte

nsiv

e

Th

rou

gh

ou

t

<10% 10-

20

%

20-

50

%

50-

80

%

80-

100

%

Pavement 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

Surface Defects

Ravelling & Coarse Aggregate Loss 1 √ √

Flushing 2 √ √

Surface Deformation

Rippling & Shoving 3 √ √

Wheel Track Rutting 4 √ √

Distortion 5 √ √

Cra

ck

ing

Longitudinal Wheel Track

Single & Multiple 6 √ √

Alligator 7

Centreline


Alligator 9

Random Cracking 10

Midlane Cracking 11 √ √

Pavement Edge


Alligator 13

Transverse


Alligator 15



Section 2: From Avalona Street to Ritson Road


Ve

ry S

ligh

t

Slig

ht

Mo

de

rate

Se

ve

re

Ve

ry S

eve

re

Fe

w

Inte

rmitte

nt

Fre

qu

en

t

Exte

nsiv

e

Th

rou

gh

ou

t

<10% 10-

20

%

20-

50

%

50-

80

%

80-

100

%

Pavement 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

Surface Defects


Flushing 2 √ √

Surface Deformation




Cra

ck

ing



Alligator 7 √ √

Centreline


Alligator 9

Random Cracking 10 √ √


Pavement Edge


Alligator 13

Transverse


Alligator 15

At the vicinity of House No. 376 25.0 m of WBL very severe / Intermittent distortion was noted.



Section 3: From Ritson Road to Wilson Road


Ve

ry S

ligh

t

Slig

ht

Mo

de

rate

Se

ve

re

Ve

ry S

eve

re

Fe

w

Inte

rmitte

nt

Fre

qu

en

t

Exte

nsiv

e

Th

rou

gh

ou

t

<10% 10-

20

%

20-

50

%

50-

80

%

80-

100

%

Pavement 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

Surface Defects


Flushing 2 √ √

Surface Deformation




Cra

ck

ing



Alligator 7 √ √

Centreline


Alligator 9

Random Cracking 10


Pavement Edge


Alligator 13 √ √

Transverse





Section 4: From Wilson Road to Harmony Road


Ve

ry S

ligh

t

Slig

ht

Mo

de

rate

Se

ve

re

Ve

ry S

eve

re

Fe

w

Inte

rmitte

nt

Fre

qu

en

t

Exte

nsiv

e

Th

rou

gh

ou

t

<10% 10-

20

%

20-

50

%

50-

80

%

80-

100

%

Pavement 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

Surface Defects


Flushing 2 √ √

Surface Deformation




Cra

ck

ing



Alligator 7

Centreline

Single & Multiple 8

Alligator 9

Random Cracking 10

Midlane Cracking 11

Pavement Edge



Transverse





Section 5: From Harmony Road to Townline Road


Ve

ry S

ligh

t

Slig

ht

Mo

de

rate

Se

ve

re

Ve

ry S

eve

re

Fe

w

Inte

rmitte

nt

Fre

qu

en

t

Exte

nsiv

e

Th

rou

gh

ou

t

<10% 10-

20

%

20-

50

%

50-

80

%

80-

100

%

Pavement 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

Surface Defects


Flushing 2 √ √

Surface Deformation




Cra

ck

ing


Single & Multiple 6 √

Alligator 7

Centreline


Alligator 9 √ √

Random Cracking 10

Midlane Cracking 11

Pavement Edge



Transverse


Alligator 15

1

City Manager Approval

Third-Party Source

January 11, 2017

The City of Oshawa is committed to creating an accessible online experience by making web content available to everyone. The City makes it a priority to provide website documents in an accessible format, however the attached document is not accessible as the City is not the author of the document. If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact Service Oshawa; Telephone: 905-436-3311, or email: [email protected] or in person at City Hall, 50 Centre Street South, Oshawa.

Documents

APPENDIX C Geotechnical Investigation - Index - City … C Geotechnical Investigation AMEC Reference No. TP113039.6000 | Page i GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT