GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT - Ohio EPA …web.epa.ohio.gov/dsw/401Applications/EuclidPIVB/Item 6 1f - Geotech... · geotechnical engineering report lake erie shores/slope stabilization

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

LAKE ERIE SHORES/SLOPE STABILIZATIONEAST 233RD TO EAST 246TH STREET

EUCLID, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO

CTL PROJECT NO. 130050030CLE

PREPARED FOR:

SMITH GROUP, JJR44 EAST MIFFLIN STREET, SUITE 500

MADISON, WI. 53703

PREPARED BY:

CTL ENGINEERING, INC.3085 INTERSTATE PARKWAY

BRUNSWICK, OHIO [email protected]

May 19, 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................... 4II. SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION ............................................................................. 4III. FINDINGS...................................................................................................................... 5

A. Visual Observations ................................................................................................ 5B. Site Geology............................................................................................................ 7C. Subsurface Soil/Rock Conditions ........................................................................... 8

IV. ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................... 9A. Slope Stability Analysis:......................................................................................... 9B. Site Preparation and Earthwork: ........................................................................... 11C. Bin Walls or Sheet Pile Walls:.............................................................................. 12D. Groundwater Control: ........................................................................................... 13

V. CHANGED CONDITIONS ........................................................................................ 14VI. TESTING AND OBSERVATION.............................................................................. 14VII. CLOSURE .................................................................................................................... 14

APPENDIX A - BORING LOCATION PLANS- SHORELINE PROFILE ZONES- SOIL PROFILE

APPENDIX B - TEST BORING RECORDS

APPENDIX C - LABORATORY TESTS RESULTS

APPENDIX D- SLOPE SECTIONS PLAN- SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS

Geotechnical Engineering Report May 19, 2014Lake Erie Shoreline Protection – Euclid, OhioCTL Project No. 13050030CLE Page 4

I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

This report presents the results of a subsurface investigation, slope stability analysis, andpreliminary recommendations for slope stabilization and improvement along the LakeErie shoreline between East 233rd and East 246th Street in Euclid, Cuyahoga County,Ohio.

The shoreline within the project limits is divided into 6 zones. The zones are identified Ato F and are shown on the enclosed Shoreline Profile Zones by Smith Group dated March2014 in Appendix A.

II. SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION

Per Smith Group JJR’s request, six (6) soil test borings, identified as B-1 to B-6, weredrilled for the investigation as follows:

Boring No. Boring Depth (ft)Location

Latitude LongitudeB-1 40.0 41ο 37' 01.9" N 81ο 31' 12.3" WB-2 40.0 41ο 37' 03.8" N 81ο 30' 58.0" WB-3 45.0 41ο 37' 04.8" N 81ο 30' 53.8" WB-4 30.0 41ο 37' 06.7" N 81ο 30' 49.9" WB-5 30.0 41ο 37' 06.3" N 81ο 30' 50.0" WB-6 45.0 41ο 37' 08.7" N 81ο 30' 42.5" W

The boring locations are also shown on the Boring Location Plan found in Appendix A ofthis report. The borings were drilled to depths ranging from 30 to 45 feet below existinggrades.

The test borings were advanced utilizing hollow-stem augers with ATV and truckmounted drill rigs. Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were conducted in each boringdrilled using an automatic, 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches to drive a 2-inch O.D.split barrel sampler for 18 inches. The energy ratios of the two different drill rig’sautomatic hammers were 81.7 % for borings B-1, B-2, and B-6; and 80.2 % for boringsB-3, B-4 and B-5. The SPT values were obtained at 2.5-foot intervals in upper 10 feetand at 5-foot intervals thereafter.

Drilling, sampling, and field testing have been performed according to standardgeotechnical engineering practices and current ASTM procedures. Laboratory testingwas performed in our accredited laboratories by trained technicians. Results from fieldand laboratory tests are shown on the enclosed test boring records found in the AppendixB of this report.

The ground surface elevations at test boring locations were interpolated using atopographic survey provided to CTL from The Smith Group.


All soil samples obtained from drilling operations were preserved in glass jars. Soilsamples were subject to visual classification in the field and were delivered to CTLEngineering for laboratory testing and analysis. Soil/rock samples were subjected tolaboratory testing as follows:

58 Soil and Rock Classifications. 50 Moisture Contents. 39 Pocket Penetrometer Tests. 8 Sieve and Hydrometers 8 Atterberg Limits

Boring logs, including the soil’s moisture content, Atterberg Limits, and pocketpenetrometer results are enclosed in appendix B of this report. The sieve and hydrometertests results are included in Appendix C of this report.

III. FINDINGS

A. Visual Observations

The Lake Erie Shoreline within the project limits is located along the backyard ofsingle homes, high rise, and apartment complex for residential units. Theshoreline consists of wooded and vegetation covered steep slopes. The backyardsof the residential properties consisted of relatively leveled mowed lawn withisolated trees, or parking lots for the high rise complex.

Based on our site reconnaissance, it is our opinion that the ongoing slope failuresare mostly due to shoreline erosion. The slope failures consist mostly of shallowslough mass or erosion. Evidence of random material dumping was noted alongthe slopes especially in the areas of Borings B-2 to B-5. The following photosdepict site conditions witnessed during our field investigation.

Photo 1: Evidence of Material Dumping –Zone E. Looking E. Area of Borings B-4 & B-5.


Photo 2: Evidence of tilted trees – Looking W. to Zone D Area of Borings B-4 & B-5.

Photo 3: Evidence of tilted trees & Dumping – Zone E/F. looking W.


Photo 4: Evidence of tilted trees & Dumping – Zone C looking W.

B. Site Geology

The project site lies within the Huron-Erie Lake Plains section of the CentralLowland Physiographic Province of Ohio. This section is characterized as theedge of a very low relief Ice Age lake basin and is separated from modern dayLake Erie by shoreline cliffs. The section contains major streams which cut intodeep gorges. (Physiographic Regions of Ohio, Brockman, Scott C., ODNRDivision of Geological Survey, 1998)

In general, the project area is characterized by the hydro-geologic setting 7F,Glacial Lake Deposits. This setting is marked by a relatively flat topography andcontains varying thicknesses of fine-grained materials overlying fracturedsedimentary rocks. The fine grained material consists of silts and clays that areinter-layered with fine sands. (Ground Water Pollution Potential of CuyahogaCounty, Ohio, Barber, Douglas J., ODNR Division of Water, April 1994)

The bedrock underlying the project area is comprised of the Devonian System,dating from 359 to 407 million years before present as defined in Ohio Divisionof Geological Survey, 2006, Bedrock geologic map of Ohio: Ohio Department ofNatural Resources, Division of Geologic Survey Map BG-1. The main unitunderlying the project area is known as the Ohio Shale. This consists of brownishblack to greenish gray shale that weathers to a brown color. The shale can becarbonaceous to clayey and can be laminated to thinly bedded. (Geologic Units of


Cuyahoga County, 2012, Ohio, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. GeologicalSurvey)

In review of Topographic Map of the East Cleveland Quadrangle (7.5 MinuteSeries), dated 2013, surface elevations across the project site appear to beapproximately at 600 feet.

Maps of underground mines in the vicinity of the project site were obtained fromOhio Department of Natural Resources - Division of Mineral Resources website(www.ohiodnr.com/mineral). According to the ODNR website, there are not anymines listed in the immediate vicinity of the project area.

C. Subsurface Soil/Rock Conditions

Surface materials at boring locations B-1, B-3, and B-6 consist of about 8 to 13inches of topsoil. The surface materials at the remaining borings were part ofrandom fills.

The subsurface material at test boring locations B-2 to B-5 consisted of 12 to 28feet of random fill containing concrete, rock fragments, clay, gravel and sand.The deepest fill of 28 feet was noted in the area of Boring B-4, the fill depths atthe other borings (B-2, B-3 and B-5) was on the order of 12 to 14 feet deep.

The subsurface materials at borings B-1 and B-6 consisted of very stiff to hardnatural lean clay with varying amount of silt, sand and gravel. A 10-foot thickpocket of loose to medium dense sand was encountered at 13 feet below existinggrades within the lean clay deposits at boring B-5.

Very weak severely weathered gray shale was encountered below the fill andnatural clay deposits at all borings at depths ranging from 28 to 44 feet belowexisting grades (about elevations 571 to 563 feet).

The Standard Penetration Test (SPT, N60) and moisture content of the overburdennatural clay and sand deposits ranged from 7 to 37 (but mostly from mid teens tolow 20’s) blows per foot (bpf) and 10 to 25 % respectively.

The Standard Penetration Test (SPT, N60) and moisture content of the fill materialranged from 4 to 27 blows per foot (bpf) and 14 to 25 % respectively.

The SPT of the weathered rock was over 50 bpf.

Laboratory testing for Atterberg Limits and grain-size analysis was performed oneight cohesive samples obtained from the borings drilled. Laboratory test resultsare tabulated below.


Table 1 - Laboratory Test Results - Atterberg Limits and Grain-Size Analysis

Boring Sample Depth (ft) USCS LL PIPercentFines*

Silt ClayB-01 SS-6 18.5 – 20.0 CL 32 15 56 42B-02 SS-7 23.5 – 25.0 CL-ML 24 6 73 14B-03 SS-4 8.5 – 10.0 CL 33 14 50 28B-03 SS-7 23.5 – 25.0 CL 48 25 29 66B-04 SS-5 13.5 – 15.0 CL 36 16 54 24B-05 SS-3 6.0 -7.5 CL 33 14 39 14B-06 SS-2 3.5 – 5.0 CL 38 19 44 31B-06 SS-6 18.5 – 20.0 CL 31 13 54 33

* Clay is defined as material particle size smaller than 0.005 mm.

For detailed subsurface conditions refer to the boring logs included in Appendix Bof this Report.

Groundwater

Groundwater was encountered during drilling only in boring B-4 at 23 feet belowexisting grades (elevation 570 feet). It should be noted that fluctuations ingroundwater levels should be expected over time due to variations inprecipitation. Static groundwater level can only be determined throughobservations made in cased holes over a long period of time. However, boringsindicate that there is an increasing chance of encountering ground water withinmore permeable granular soils and along the shale/soil interface. Groundwaterlevels typically are the highest during the spring months.

IV. ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS

A. Slope Stability Analysis:

The shoreline within the project limits is divided into 6 zones. The zones are identified Ato F and are shown on the enclosed Shoreline Profile Zones by Smith Group dated March2014 in Appendix A. Based on this zoning profile, Zones B and E top of slope mustremain in current locations. Zones A and F can be cut back. Zones C and D requiresoptimum solution or a best approach for stabilization, we believe these zones can be cutback to a limit.

Global slope stability analysis was performed for each zone at sections noted on the planview also provide by Smith Group and are included in Appendix A of this report. Theslope stability analysis was performed with Slope/W computer software. This program isbased on two-dimensional limiting equilibrium methods in which the calculation of thefactor of safety against instability of a slope is performed by the method of slices. TheBishop method of analysis was used in analyzing over 100 surfaces of a circular shapefor each section.


The results of the slope stability analysis in term of minimum safety factors, andproposed stabilization sections are included in Appendix D of this report and aresummarized in Table 2 below:

Table 2: Summary of Slope Stability Analysis.

Zone SectionSafety Factor

CommentsExisting Modified

A L 101-4 0.3 2.7

Adequately Stable with 10 feet cut back attop of slope, and removal of surfacesloughed material, and provision forRevetment to Elevation 577 feet.

B L 102-1 0.8 1.1

Still not quite adequately stable withRevetment to Elevation 577, and with morethan 50% in place random fill improvement.Consider similar section to Zone E.

C&D L 103-1 0.7 1.1

Surface material still not quite adequatelystable with Revetment to Elevation 580, and30 feet top of slope cut back. Considersimilar section to Zone E.

E L 103-4 0.5-1.1 1.6Adequately stable with Revetment toelevation 585.

F L 104-4 3.0 N/A

Adequately stable as is, requires onlyerosion control using Revetment at the toe,and deep root vegetation with erosion tensarmat along the face of slopes.

The subsurface information was limited to borings B-1 to B-6 which are located at thetop of the existing slopes. There were no borings taking in Zone B, we assumed boringB-2 to be representative of the subsurface material of this zone. The subsurfaceconditions over the slopes and at the toe are not known, we made certain assumptionbased on visual observation when developing the soil profile along each analyzed crosssection.

The proposed fill material for the revetments is also not identified at this time. For thepurpose of our analysis we have assumed that the revetment will consists of armored faceand large well graded material of cobble and gravel size ranging from 3 to 12 inches orlarger within the wave zone, and coarse aggregate above the wave zone with assumedand angle of internal friction of 38ο . Once the revetment material is identified, and if notfound to be within the limit of our assumptions, then CTL should be notified and giventhe opportunity to revise our recommendations.

We anticipate the revetment to be constructed per project specifications at a slope of2H:1V. Steeper sloped revetments at 1H:1V or 1.5H:1V can be considered but withGeogrid reinforcement. Vertical or Tapered Bin Walls or sheet piles with tie backs can


also be considered as substitute to revetments. Recommendations for the design of theseretaining structures are provided in Section C below.

B. Site Preparation and Earthwork:

The site preparation and fill placement should be accomplished in accordance withour outlined recommendations as follows:

1. All vegetative matter, trees, tree stumps, and topsoil and organically contaminatedmaterial encountered within the proposed construction limits should be removedfrom the site. Topsoil may be stockpiled off the site to be reused as the toppinglayer.

2. All sloughed material should be removed and conditioned to be reused orincorporated into the new fill or hauled off the site. Based on visual observation,the exposed grades of sloughed areas after topsoil removal are expected to be softto medium stiff and above optimum moisture content. Large concrete slabs orconcrete blocks should be processed and should not be incorporated within theengineered fill portion, such material may be reused in conjunction with therevetment armor units.

3. During earthwork operations, care should be taken to provide adequate drainageon the surface of exposed soils. Absorption of heavy rainfall, accumulations ofwater and heavy construction traffic may result in softening of these soils, hence,severely weakening the strength of the subgrade soils. Seepage zones should beintercepted and allowed to freely drain without compromising the stability of theslopes/new fill.

4. Temporary excavations in excess of 4 feet in depth should be sloped, benched orshored in accordance with OHSA regulations. Excavation sidewalls for anyunderground utility placements or incidental retaining walls, should be laid backat a slope rate no steeper than 1.5:1 (Horizontal to Vertical).

5. Following acceptance of the exposed surfaces, all fill materials required to buildthe slope and revetments should consist of clean, on-site, inorganic, non-frozensoils. Topsoil, frozen and/or organically contaminated soils are not consideredsuitable for use as fill. All fill materials should be observed, tested and approvedby the Soils Engineering Technician under the direction of the GeotechnicalEngineer.

6. Engineered fill should be placed in layers not to exceed 8 inches in loosethickness, with each layer compacted to 98 percent of the maximum dry densityas determined by ASTM D-698 Standard Proctor method (AASHTO T-99) and at3% of its optimum moisture content.

7. All exposed soil slopes should not be steeper than 2H:1V and be vegetated toprevent erosion. Steeper slopes can be considered but requires geogrid


reinforcements. Surface runoff and drainage should be designed to limit erosionof surface grades. Rock channels or similar items are recommended in areas ofexpected high volume runoff.

8. Provide filter fabric as separator between open graded or large size material andfine to coarse graded material to prevent migration of particle. Separating fabricplaced directly on large size (cobble) may be subject to tear, therefore the largesize material should be gradually transitioned to smaller size aggregate so toestablish a uniform contact with the separating fabric.

9. Where new embankment fill materials will be placed on or adjacent to existingslopes that are steeper than 8H:1V should be continuously benched or benched asdeemed practical over those areas. Benching should be of sufficient width topermit operations of placing and compacting equipment. Bench the slope as theembankment is placed and compact each layer. Begin each bench at theintersection of the existing slope and the vertical cut of the previous bench. Re-compact the cut materials along with the embankment.

Figure 1. - Diagram of Soil Bench

10. Provide tensar erosion mat and erosion protection consisting of deep rooted planton all exposed slopes of fine grained material

C. Bin Walls or Sheet Pile Walls:

It is understood that two types of walls, Bin walls or sheet pile walls with tie backsmay be considered as a substitute to revetments or where space is limited and mayprohibit the construction of revetments.

The walls are expected to be positioned at the toes near the Lake Erie water level.The subsurface conditions at the toe of slopes are not known. Based on visualobservation, we anticipate either shale outcrops, sediments, concrete debris/slabs, ormedium stiff to very stiff natural soil overburden material. The bin walls should beextended to bear into stiff to very stiff natural deposits or weathered shale. The binwalls bearing material surfaces should be firm; free of loose sediment materials,water, and frost; and inspected and approved by the Geotechnical Engineer. Thesheet pile walls should be driven into the shale with tie backs also anchored into theshale.


For the purpose of preliminary design and budgeting we suggest using the designparameters summarized in Table 3 below.

Table 3. Bin or Sheet Pile Walls - Design parameters

Soil ParametersRetained Medium Bearing Medium

Onsite Clay Onsite Fill Stiff Clay Shale

Average Cohesion, (c, psf) Ignore Ignore 1,500 5,500

Angle of Internal Friction (фο) 18 27 22 14

Total Unit Weight, pcf 125 120 125 145

At Rest Earth Pressure Coefficient (K0) 0.64 0.55 0.64 N/A

Active Earth Pressure Coefficient (Ka) 0.53 0.38 0.46 N/A

Passive Earth Pressure Coefficient (Kp) N/A N/A Ignore 1.64

Allowable Bearing Pressure, psf N/A N/A 2,500 16,000

The at rest earth pressure parameters for clay was based on the soils Plasticity Indexassuming normally consolidated clay. The active and passive earth pressure parametersprovided above are based on Rankine assuming horizontal backfill. In order to account forsloped backfill above the wall, we recommend adding 1/2 of the slope above the wall to thewall height. Passive resistance within shale should take into account the cohesion term perRankine’s procedure. The tie backs into the shale should be designed based on an averageadhesion of 2,500 psf. Passive resistance in the upper 5 feet or within erodible zones abovethe shale should be ignored.

D. Groundwater Control:

Depending upon the time of year and the precipitation rates preceding construction,seepage water could be encountered. Groundwater seepage is generally associatedwith water trapped within granular layers interbedded within a mostly cohesive soilprofile or along the rock/soil interface. These layers are typically discontinuous andare recharged by precipitation events. Excavations that encounter these layers willlikely encounter at least some groundwater. Temporary dewatering in areas ofseepage water may be accomplished by placing localized sumps within theexcavation or in sumps beyond the excavation. Permanent dewatering where requiredshould be accomplished by perforated drains, drainage blankets or chimney drains.Seepage rates are difficult to predict and flow from sand seams could be significantand may or may not diminish with time. Care should be taken to avoid over pumpingand removal of fines.

Backfill placed directly behind walls should consist of free draining granular material.The backfill should be compacted using compaction techniques and equipmentapproved by the Geotechnical Engineer. Perforated pipe drains should be installedalong the base of the walls where applicable slightly above the Lake Erie Water Levelto prevent the accumulation of water which would increase lateral loads. Analternative to perforated drain is the use of weep holes.


V. CHANGED CONDITIONS

The evaluations, conclusions, and recommendations in this report are based on ourinterpretation of the field and laboratory data obtained during the exploration, ourunderstanding of the project and our experience with similar sites and subsurfaceconditions using generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. Althoughindividual test borings are representative of the subsurface conditions at the boringlocations on the dates drilled, they are not necessarily representative of the subsurfaceconditions between boring locations or subsurface conditions during other seasons of theyear.

In the event that changes in the project are proposed, additional information becomesavailable, or if it is apparent that subsurface conditions are different from those providedin this report, CTL Engineering should be notified so that our recommendations can bemodified, if required.

VI. TESTING AND OBSERVATION

During the design process, it is recommended that CTL Engineering work with theproject designers to confirm that the geotechnical recommendations are properlyincorporated into the final plans and specifications, and to assist with establishing criteriafor the construction observation and testing.

CTL Engineering is not responsible for independent conclusions, opinions andrecommendations made by others based on the data and recommendations provided inthis report. It is recommended that CTL be retained to provide construction qualitycontrol services on this project. If CTL Engineering is not retained for these services,CTL shall assume no responsibility for compliance with the design concepts orrecommendations provided.

VII. CLOSURE

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Smith Group for use only on thisproject. Our services have been performed in accordance with generally acceptedGeotechnical Engineering principles and practices. No warranty is either expressed orimplied.

The report addresses only the geotechnical issues and therefore, does not includeenvironmental issues such as the presence or absence of hazardous or toxic materials atthe project site.

Recommendations provided herein were developed from information obtained from fieldinvestigations, laboratory testing, information provided by client and/or theirrepresentatives or consultants, as well as analysis by CTL Engineering personnel.


Specific design and construction recommendations have been provided in varioussections of the report. Therefore, the report should be used in its entirety.

Thank you for the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have anyquestions regarding our services, please contact our office.

Respectfully Submitted,CTL ENGINEERING, INC.

Matthew Kairouz, P.E.Project Engineer

APPENDIX A

BORING LOCATION PLAN SHORELINE PROFILE ZONES SOIL PROFILE

Date

5/19/2014

CTL ENGINEERING, INC. Scale

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS None

TESTING * INSPECTION Drawn By Reviewed By Page Project No.

LABORATORY SERVICES MK 1 of 1 13050030CLE

Euclid, Cuyahoga County, Ohio

BORING LOCATION MAPSmith Group

Lake Erie - Euclid Shoreline

Between E. 233rd & E. 246th Streets

MARCH, 2014

1

SHORELINE PROFILE ZONESEUCLID PHASE IV SHORELINE ENHANCEMENTS

SIMS PARK

200’1000’ 400’

E 242nd

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

AB

C

DE

F

LEGEND

BORING LOCATION

SHORELINE ZONES: TOP OF BANK CONSTRAINTS

CAN BE CUT BACK

MUST REMAIN IN CURRENT LOCATION

DETERMINE BEST APPROACH

560

565

570

575

580

585

590

595

600

605

610

560

565

570

575

580

585

590

595

600

605

610

50/2"

50/3.5"

26

20

16

17

15

19

22

18

11

4

12

22

25

15

14

15

15

B-01

50/1"

35

15

15

18

17

18

9

15

19

18

27

19

22

26

18

33

B-02

50/3"

19

14

15

21

22

2516

18

13

11

9

15

20

20

11

11

17

17

23

23

32

B-03

50/5.5"

50/5.75"

13

25

24

13

20

15

20

4

7

35

B-04

50/6"

17

12

15

15

9

7

11

25

24

13

9

7

25

24

B-05

50/3"

21

20

15

15

14

16

10

12

10

10

8

8

12

18

23

20

30

37

26

37

B-06

SW-SMASPHALT

GW

GP-GC

GC-GM

GP-GM

Brunswick, Ohio 44212

GW-GC

SW-SC ML

SC

SC-SM

SOIL PLAN/PROFILEDATE

5/13/2014

PAGE

1 OF 1 13050030CLEPROJECT NUMBER

CTL ENGINEERING, INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERSTOPSOIL

N STANDARD PENETRATION INBLOWS PER FOOT (N)

DRAWN BY

MOISTURE CONTENT INPERCENT (w)

GROUND WATER DURINGDRILLING

Euclid, OHGROUND WATER AT "N"HOURS AFTER COMPLETION

Smith Group JJRGP CL

OL

B-01

CL-ML SHALE

SP-SM

LIMESTONE

GW-GM

GM

SP

SP-SC

SMMK

GROUND WATER ATCOMPLETION OF DRILLING Lakeshore Stabilization

W

LEGEND

SCALEAS SHOWN

FILL

CH

MH

OH

PTGC

SW

3085 Interstate Parkway

SILTSTONE

APPENDIX B

TEST BORING RECORDS

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

�

SOIL DESCRIPTION

NON-COHESIVE STANDARD PENETRATION

SOIL DESCRIPTION BLOWCOUNTS PER FOOT (bpf)

Very Loose 0 – 4

Loose 5 – 10

Medium Dense 11 – 30

Dense 31 – 50

Very Dense Over 50

COHESIVE SOIL STANDARD PENETRATION

DESCRIPTION BLOWCOUNTS PER FOOT (bpf)

Very Soft 0 – 1

Soft 2 – 4

Medium Stiff 5 – 8

Stiff 9 – 15

Very Stiff 16 – 30

Hard Over 30

GRADATION

COMPONENT SIZE

Boulders Larger Than 8”

Cobbles 8” – 3”

Coarse Gravel Passing 3” Retained on ¾”

Fine Gravel Passing ¾” Retained on #10

Coarse Sand Passing #10 Retained #40

Fine Sand Passing #40 Retained on #200

Silt 0.074 mm to 0.005 mm

Clay Smaller Than 0.005 mm

COMPONENT

MODIFIERS SIZE

Trace > 0 – 10%

Little 11 – 20%

Some 21 – 35%

And 36 – 50%

MOISTURE

TERMS DESCRIPTION

Dry Powdery

Damp Below Plastic Limit

Moist Above Plastic Limit, Below Liquid Limit

Wet Above Liquid Limit

32 17 15

8" TOPSOIL

@ 1'; Slightly organic.

Stiff to very stiff, light brown to mottled gray andlight brown, LEAN CLAY, some silt, trace roots,moist.

@ 8.5'; Trace rock fragments.

Hard, grayish brown, LEAN CLAY, some silt,moist.

Hard to very stiff, gray, LEAN CLAY, "and" silt,damp to moist.

0.5

6.0

13.5

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

SS-6

1124

345

379

6711

765

346

100

100

83

100

100

100

2.5*

5.5*

9.0*

9.0*

9.0*

4.0*

26

20

16

17

15

19

602.5

597.0

589.5

4

12

22

25

15

14

DATE STARTED

DATE COMPLETED

03-06-14

03-06-14

:

:

ELEVATION

STATION

OFFSET

DEPTH

BORING METHOD

603.0 Feet

N/A

N/A

40.0 Feet

HSA

:

:

:

:

:

MK

N/A

N/A

RIG TYPE

CASING DIA.

CORE SIZE

HAMMER

ENERGY RATIO

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Euclid, OH

13050030CLE

DRILLER

TEMPERATURE

WEATHER

LOCATION

PROJECT NO.

:

:

BORING D-50 Red Truck

3.25

N/A

AUTO

81.7

GROUNDWATER: Encountered at NONE At completion NONE Caved in at 31.0'

SP

Tpe

r 6"

N

B-01

5

10

15

20

------60

*LLPLPISPTN

Continued on next page

2

Normalized to 60% Drill Rod ER

OF

BORING NO.:

SHEETS

TR

AT

UM

ELE

VA

TIO

N

SA

MP

LED

EP

TH

SOIL/MATERIAL DESCRIPTION MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

TO

TA

L U

NIT

WE

IGH

Tpc

f

UN

CO

NF

.C

OM

P.,

ksf

LL PL PI

ATTERBERGLIMITS

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%)

ST

RA

TU

MD

EP

TH

SA

MP

LEN

UM

BE

R

60

TEST BORING RECORDCLIENT

PROJECT

:

:

Smith Group JJR

Lakeshore Stabilization

HSASFARCMDWDHA

------

BORING METHODSSSTCRBS

----

Hollow Stem AugerSolid Flight AugerRock CoringMud DrillingWash DrillingHand Auger

SAMPLING METHOD ABBREVIATIONS

1

Split Spoon SampleShelby Tube SampleRock Core SampleBag Sample

Hand PenetrometerLiquid LimitPlastic LimitPlasticity IndexStandard Penetration TestStandard Penetration



Telephone: 330-220-8900

Fax: 330-220-8944

Email: [email protected]

TE

ST

BO

RIN

G/P

IT R

EC

OR

D 1

305

0030

CLE

.GP

J C

TL

CO

RP

OR

AT

E.G

DT

5/1

3/14

Hard to very stiff, gray, LEAN CLAY, "and" silt,damp to moist.

@ 24'; 2" sand seam.

Medium dense, gray, SILTY CLAY, little sand,moist.

Very stiff, gray, LEAN CLAY, some silt, tracerock fragments, sand, moist.

Hard, gray, LEAN CLAY with SAND, "and" silt,trace rock fragments, damp.

Very weak, severely weathered, gray, SHALE,damp.

End of boring at 40 feet.

23.5

26.8

31.8

34.0

40.0

SS-7

SS-8

SS-9

SS-10

456

456

650/2"

50/3.5"

100

100

62

21

6.0*

9.0*

22

18

11

579.5

576.3

571.3

569.0

563.0

15

15

SP

Tpe

r 6"

N

B-01

25

30

35

40

45

------60

*LLPLPISPTN

2


OF

BORING NO.:

SHEETS

TR

AT

UM

ELE

VA

TIO

N

SA

MP

LED

EP

TH


IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

TO

TA

L U

NIT

WE

IGH

Tpc

f

UN

CO

NF

.C

OM

P.,

ksf

LL PL PI

ATTERBERGLIMITS

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%)

ST

RA

TU

MD

EP

TH

SA

MP

LEN

UM

BE

R

60


PROJECT

:

:

Smith Group JJR


HSASFARCMDWDHA

------


----



2





Telephone: 330-220-8900

Fax: 330-220-8944


TE

ST

BO

RIN

G/P

IT R

EC

OR

D 1

305

0030

CLE

.GP

J C

TL

CO

RP

OR

AT

E.G

DT

5/1

3/14

Medium stiff, black, SILTY SAND, some brick,glass, wood, little gravel, slightly organic, (FILL),moist.

Layered concrete, (FILL).

Very stiff, grayish brown, SILTY CLAY, "and"concrete fragments, (FILL), damp.

Very stiff to hard, gray, LEAN CLAY, some silt,trace rock fragments, sand, damp to moist.

3.3

8.5

14.0

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

SS-6

10564

568

467

14128

468

679

44

6

6

6

100

100

7.0*

9.0*

35

15

15

18

601.8

596.5

591.0

15

19

18

27

19

22

DATE STARTED

DATE COMPLETED

03-06-14

03-06-14

:

:

ELEVATION

STATION

OFFSET

DEPTH

BORING METHOD

605.0 Feet

N/A

N/A

40.0 Feet

HSA

:

:

:

:

:

MK

N/A

N/A

RIG TYPE

CASING DIA.

CORE SIZE

HAMMER

ENERGY RATIO

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Euclid, OH

13050030CLE

DRILLER

TEMPERATURE

WEATHER

LOCATION

PROJECT NO.

:

:


3.25

N/A

AUTO

81.7


SP

Tpe

r 6"

N

B-02

5

10

15

20

------60

*LLPLPISPTN


2


OF

BORING NO.:

SHEETS

TR

AT

UM

ELE

VA

TIO

N

SA

MP

LED

EP

TH


IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

TO

TA

L U

NIT

WE

IGH

Tpc

f

UN

CO

NF

.C

OM

P.,

ksf

LL PL PI

ATTERBERGLIMITS

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%)

ST

RA

TU

MD

EP

TH

SA

MP

LEN

UM

BE

R

60


PROJECT

:

:

Smith Group JJR


HSASFARCMDWDHA

------


----



1





Telephone: 330-220-8900

Fax: 330-220-8944


TE

ST

BO

RIN

G/P

IT R

EC

OR

D 1

305

0030

CLE

.GP

J C

TL

CO

RP

OR

AT

E.G

DT

5/1

3/14

24 18 6

Very stiff to hard, gray, LEAN CLAY, some silt,trace rock fragments, sand, damp to moist.

Medium dense, gray, SILTY CLAY, little sand,moist.

Hard, gray, LEAN CLAY, "and" silt, moist.

Hard gray, LEAN CLAY with SAND, some silt,trace rock fragments, damp.

Very weak, severely weathered, gray, SHALE,some clay, silt, damp.


23.5

28.5

31.8

34.0

40.0

SS-7

SS-8

SS-9

SS-10

12109

467

61212

1650/1"

100

100

100

56

8.5*

9.0*

17

18

9

581.5

576.5

573.3

571.0

565.0

26

18

33

SP

Tpe

r 6"

N

B-02

25

30

35

40

45

------60

*LLPLPISPTN

2


OF

BORING NO.:

SHEETS

TR

AT

UM

ELE

VA

TIO

N

SA

MP

LED

EP

TH


IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

TO

TA

L U

NIT

WE

IGH

Tpc

f

UN

CO

NF

.C

OM

P.,

ksf

LL PL PI

ATTERBERGLIMITS

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%)

ST

RA

TU

MD

EP

TH

SA

MP

LEN

UM

BE

R

60


PROJECT

:

:

Smith Group JJR


HSASFARCMDWDHA

------


----



2





Telephone: 330-220-8900

Fax: 330-220-8944


TE

ST

BO

RIN

G/P

IT R

EC

OR

D 1

305

0030

CLE

.GP

J C

TL

CO

RP

OR

AT

E.G

DT

5/1

3/14

33 19 14

10" TOPSOIL

Very stiff, grayish brown, LEAN CLAY, somesilt, trace sand, root hairs, (FILL), moist.

@ 6.0'; Cobble, petroleum odor

Very stiff, gray, LEAN CLAY with SAND, "and"silt, (FILL), damp to moist.

Very stiff, mottled gray and brown, LEAN CLAY,"and" silt, trace sand, moist.

Stiff, dark gray, LEAN CLAY with SAND, somesilt, trace root hairs, moderately organic, moist.SS-6A LOI = 7.2%

Very stiff, gray, LEAN CLAY, some silt, woodfragments, damp.Very stiff, gray, LEAN CLAY, some silt, traceroot hairs, moist.

0.8

3.5

11.8

16.8

19.3

20.0

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

SS-6

347

569

778

335

344

467

89

83

17

67

78

100

7.0*

7.0*

5.0*

5.0*

6.0*

3.0*6.0*

19

14

15

21

22

2516

605.7

603.0

594.7

589.7

587.2

586.5

15

20

20

11

11

17

DATE STARTED

DATE COMPLETED

03-06-14

03-06-14

:

:

ELEVATION

STATION

OFFSET

DEPTH

BORING METHOD

606.5 Feet

N/A

N/A

45.0 Feet

HSA

:

:

:

:

:

MK

N/A

N/A

RIG TYPE

CASING DIA.

CORE SIZE

HAMMER

ENERGY RATIO

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Euclid, OH

13050030CLE

DRILLER

TEMPERATURE

WEATHER

LOCATION

PROJECT NO.

:

:

BORING D-50 Green

3.25

N/A

AUTO

80.2


SP

Tpe

r 6"

N

B-03

5

10

15

20

------60

*LLPLPISPTN


2


OF

BORING NO.:

SHEETS

TR

AT

UM

ELE

VA

TIO

N

SA

MP

LED

EP

TH


IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

TO

TA

L U

NIT

WE

IGH

Tpc

f

UN

CO

NF

.C

OM

P.,

ksf

LL PL PI

ATTERBERGLIMITS

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%)

ST

RA

TU

MD

EP

TH

SA

MP

LEN

UM

BE

R

60


PROJECT

:

:

Smith Group JJR


HSASFARCMDWDHA

------


----



1





Telephone: 330-220-8900

Fax: 330-220-8944


TE

ST

BO

RIN

G/P

IT R

EC

OR

D 1

305

0030

CLE

.GP

J C

TL

CO

RP

OR

AT

E.G

DT

5/1

3/14

48 23 25Very stiff, gray, LEAN CLAY, some silt, traceroot hairs, moist.

Very stiff to hard, gray, LEAN CLAY with SAND,some silt, little rock fragments, damp.

@ 38.5'; some rock fragments.

Very weak, severely weathered, gray, SHALE.


28.5

43.5

45.0

SS-7

SS-8

SS-9

SS-10

SS-11

358

6710

689

61014

50/3"

100

100

100

100

25

6.5*

7.5*

9.0*

9.0*

18

13

11

9

578.0

563.0

561.5

17

23

23

32

SP

Tpe

r 6"

N

B-03

25

30

35

40

45

------60

*LLPLPISPTN

2


OF

BORING NO.:

SHEETS

TR

AT

UM

ELE

VA

TIO

N

SA

MP

LED

EP

TH


IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

TO

TA

L U

NIT

WE

IGH

Tpc

f

UN

CO

NF

.C

OM

P.,

ksf

LL PL PI

ATTERBERGLIMITS

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%)

ST

RA

TU

MD

EP

TH

SA

MP

LEN

UM

BE

R

60


PROJECT

:

:

Smith Group JJR


HSASFARCMDWDHA

------


----



2





Telephone: 330-220-8900

Fax: 330-220-8944


TE

ST

BO

RIN

G/P

IT R

EC

OR

D 1

305

0030

CLE

.GP

J C

TL

CO

RP

OR

AT

E.G

DT

5/1

3/14

36 20 16

Medium dense, brown, POORLY GRADEDGRAVEL, little clay, sand, silt, (FILL), damp.

Medium dense, gray, CONCRETE fragments,(FILL).

@5'-6' concrete slab.

Medium stiff, SANDY LEAN CLAY withGRAVEL, some silt, (FILL), moist.

Medium stiff, mottled gray and brown, LEANCLAY with SAND, "and" silt, (FILL), moist.

Very dense, gray, SLAG, some brick, sand,(FILL), damp.

3.5

8.5

11.8

18.5

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

SS-6

6510

1183

19114

212

232

2850/5.5"

28

28

22

67

72

52

1.5*

13

25

24

589.0

584.0

580.8

574.0

20

15

20

4

7

DATE STARTED

DATE COMPLETED

03-06-14

03-06-14

:

:

ELEVATION

STATION

OFFSET

DEPTH

BORING METHOD

592.5 Feet

N/A

N/A

30.0 Feet

HSA

:

:

:

:

:

MK

N/A

N/A

RIG TYPE

CASING DIA.

CORE SIZE

HAMMER

ENERGY RATIO

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Euclid, OH

13050030CLE

DRILLER

TEMPERATURE

WEATHER

LOCATION

PROJECT NO.

:

:

BORING D-50 Green

3.25

N/A

AUTO

80.2

GROUNDWATER: Encountered at 23.5' At completion 23.0' Caved in at 25.0'

SP

Tpe

r 6"

N

B-04

5

10

15

20

------60

*LLPLPISPTN


2


OF

BORING NO.:

SHEETS

TR

AT

UM

ELE

VA

TIO

N

SA

MP

LED

EP

TH


IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

TO

TA

L U

NIT

WE

IGH

Tpc

f

UN

CO

NF

.C

OM

P.,

ksf

LL PL PI

ATTERBERGLIMITS

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%)

ST

RA

TU

MD

EP

TH

SA

MP

LEN

UM

BE

R

60


PROJECT

:

:

Smith Group JJR


HSASFARCMDWDHA

------


----



1





Telephone: 330-220-8900

Fax: 330-220-8944


TE

ST

BO

RIN

G/P

IT R

EC

OR

D 1

305

0030

CLE

.GP

J C

TL

CO

RP

OR

AT

E.G

DT

5/1

3/14

Dense, grey, POORLY GRADED GRAVEL withsand, (FILL), damp.

Very weak, severely weathered, gray, SHALE,some clay, silt, damp.


21.8

28.5

30.0

SS-7

SS-8

81511

1050/5.75"

56

63

13

570.8

564.0

562.5

35

SP

Tpe

r 6"

N

B-04

25

30

35

40

45

------60

*LLPLPISPTN

2


OF

BORING NO.:

SHEETS

TR

AT

UM

ELE

VA

TIO

N

SA

MP

LED

EP

TH


IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

TO

TA

L U

NIT

WE

IGH

Tpc

f

UN

CO

NF

.C

OM

P.,

ksf

LL PL PI

ATTERBERGLIMITS

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%)

ST

RA

TU

MD

EP

TH

SA

MP

LEN

UM

BE

R

60


PROJECT

:

:

Smith Group JJR


HSASFARCMDWDHA

------


----



2





Telephone: 330-220-8900

Fax: 330-220-8944


TE

ST

BO

RIN

G/P

IT R

EC

OR

D 1

305

0030

CLE

.GP

J C

TL

CO

RP

OR

AT

E.G

DT

5/1

3/14

33 19 14

Very stiff, gray to brown, LEAN CLAY withSAND, little rock fragments, silt, (FILL), damp.

@ 6'; trace roots.

Hard, gray to brownish gray, SANDY LEANCLAY, "and" silt, trace rock fragments,(POSSIBLE FILL), moist.

Loose to medium dense, brown to red brown,POORLY GRADED SAND, little silt, damp.

@ 18.5'; trace gravel.

3.0

13.5

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

SS-6

5811

7810

546

334

223

6811

94

100

94

89

89

72

7.0*

9.0*

7.0*

8.0*

17

12

15

15

9

7

590.5

580.0

25

24

13

9

7

25

DATE STARTED

DATE COMPLETED

03-06-14

03-06-14

:

:

ELEVATION

STATION

OFFSET

DEPTH

BORING METHOD

593.5 Feet

N/A

N/A

30.0 Feet

HSA

:

:

:

:

:

MK

N/A

N/A

RIG TYPE

CASING DIA.

CORE SIZE

HAMMER

ENERGY RATIO

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Euclid, OH

13050030CLE

DRILLER

TEMPERATURE

WEATHER

LOCATION

PROJECT NO.

:

:

BORING D-50 Green

3.25

N/A

AUTO

80.2


SP

Tpe

r 6"

N

B-05

5

10

15

20

------60

*LLPLPISPTN


2


OF

BORING NO.:

SHEETS

TR

AT

UM

ELE

VA

TIO

N

SA

MP

LED

EP

TH


IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

TO

TA

L U

NIT

WE

IGH

Tpc

f

UN

CO

NF

.C

OM

P.,

ksf

LL PL PI

ATTERBERGLIMITS

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%)

ST

RA

TU

MD

EP

TH

SA

MP

LEN

UM

BE

R

60


PROJECT

:

:

Smith Group JJR


HSASFARCMDWDHA

------


----



1





Telephone: 330-220-8900

Fax: 330-220-8944


TE

ST

BO

RIN

G/P

IT R

EC

OR

D 1

305

0030

CLE

.GP

J C

TL

CO

RP

OR

AT

E.G

DT

5/1

3/14

Loose to medium dense, brown to red brown,POORLY GRADED SAND, little silt, damp.

Hard, gray, LEAN CLAY with SAND, some silt,little rock fragments, damp.



23.5

28.5

30.0

SS-7

SS-8

8810

50/6"

100

100

9.0*11

570.0

565.0

563.5

24

SP

Tpe

r 6"

N

B-05

25

30

35

40

45

------60

*LLPLPISPTN

2


OF

BORING NO.:

SHEETS

TR

AT

UM

ELE

VA

TIO

N

SA

MP

LED

EP

TH


IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

TO

TA

L U

NIT

WE

IGH

Tpc

f

UN

CO

NF

.C

OM

P.,

ksf

LL PL PI

ATTERBERGLIMITS

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%)

ST

RA

TU

MD

EP

TH

SA

MP

LEN

UM

BE

R

60


PROJECT

:

:

Smith Group JJR


HSASFARCMDWDHA

------


----



2





Telephone: 330-220-8900

Fax: 330-220-8944


TE

ST

BO

RIN

G/P

IT R

EC

OR

D 1

305

0030

CLE

.GP

J C

TL

CO

RP

OR

AT

E.G

DT

5/1

3/14

38

31

19

18

19

13

13" TOPSOIL.

Very stiff, mottled gray and brown, LEAN CLAYwith SAND, "and" silt, (POSSIBLE FILL), moist.

Hard, brownish gray, LEAN CLAY, some silt,trace sand, damp.

Hard, gray, LEAN CLAY, "and" silt, trace sand,damp.

1.0

6.0

13.5

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

SS-6

233

333

345

567

4710

469

67

56

67

83

78

100

5.0*

5.0*

9.0*

9.0*

9.0*

9.0*

21

20

15

15

14

16

606.0

601.0

593.5

8

8

12

18

23

20

DATE STARTED

DATE COMPLETED

03-06-14

03-06-14

:

:

ELEVATION

STATION

OFFSET

DEPTH

BORING METHOD

607.0 Feet

N/A

N/A

45.0 Feet

HSA

:

:

:

:

:

MK

N/A

N/A

RIG TYPE

CASING DIA.

CORE SIZE

HAMMER

ENERGY RATIO

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Euclid, OH

13050030CLE

DRILLER

TEMPERATURE

WEATHER

LOCATION

PROJECT NO.

:

:


3.25

N/A

AUTO

81.7


SP

Tpe

r 6"

N

B-06

5

10

15

20

------60

*LLPLPISPTN


2


OF

BORING NO.:

SHEETS

TR

AT

UM

ELE

VA

TIO

N

SA

MP

LED

EP

TH


IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

TO

TA

L U

NIT

WE

IGH

Tpc

f

UN

CO

NF

.C

OM

P.,

ksf

LL PL PI

ATTERBERGLIMITS

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%)

ST

RA

TU

MD

EP

TH

SA

MP

LEN

UM

BE

R

60


PROJECT

:

:

Smith Group JJR


HSASFARCMDWDHA

------


----



1





Telephone: 330-220-8900

Fax: 330-220-8944


TE

ST

BO

RIN

G/P

IT R

EC

OR

D 1

305

0030

CLE

.GP

J C

TL

CO

RP

OR

AT

E.G

DT

5/1

3/14

Hard, gray, LEAN CLAY, "and" silt, trace sand,damp.



43.5

45.0

SS-7

SS-8

SS-9

SS-10

SS-11

91012

101116

7910

71116

50/3"

100

89

100

100

100

9.0*

9.0*

9.0*

9.0*

10

12

10

10

563.5

562.0

30

37

26

37

SP

Tpe

r 6"

N

B-06

25

30

35

40

45

------60

*LLPLPISPTN

2


OF

BORING NO.:

SHEETS

TR

AT

UM

ELE

VA

TIO

N

SA

MP

LED

EP

TH


IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

TO

TA

L U

NIT

WE

IGH

Tpc

f

UN

CO

NF

.C

OM

P.,

ksf

LL PL PI

ATTERBERGLIMITS

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%)

ST

RA

TU

MD

EP

TH

SA

MP

LEN

UM

BE

R

60


PROJECT

:

:

Smith Group JJR


HSASFARCMDWDHA

------


----



2





Telephone: 330-220-8900

Fax: 330-220-8944


TE

ST

BO

RIN

G/P

IT R

EC

OR

D 1

305

0030

CLE

.GP

J C

TL

CO

RP

OR

AT

E.G

DT

5/1

3/14

APPENDIX C

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100

U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES

306

D10

140

SAND

1 200

D60D100 %Gravel

3/84 3/4

COBBLES

4200.0070.0114.75SS-6B-01

Specimen ID

Specimen ID Sample

medium

GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS

GRAVELcoarse

3

%MC PI

%Sand

Sample

562

3

coarse

SS-6

14

LL

6

%Clay

fine

Cc

SILT OR CLAY

20

PL

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT

1/2

Cu

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION

U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS

100810

fine

16

Classification

D50

2 4

%Silt

1.5 60

HYDROMETER

D30

40 50

B-01 32 17 1519LEAN CLAY (CL)

Project: Lakeshore Stabilization

Location: Euclid, OH

CTL Project Number: 13050030CLE

CTL Engineering3085 Interstate ParkwayBrunswick, Ohio 44212Telephone: 330-220-8900Fax: 330-220-8944Email: [email protected]

CT

LLA

B_G

RA

INS

IZE

130

5003

0C

LE.G

PJ

CT

L C

OR

PO

RA

TE

.GD

T 3

/28

/14

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100


306

D10

140

SAND

1 200

D60D100 %Gravel

3/84 3/4

COBBLES

1400.0140.0260.0349.525SS-7B-02

Specimen ID

Specimen ID Sample

medium


GRAVELcoarse

3

%MC PI

%Sand

Sample

7313

3

coarse

SS-7

14

LL

6

%Clay

fine

Cc

SILT OR CLAY

20

PL

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT

1/2

Cu


U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS

100810

fine

16

Classification

D50

2 4

%Silt

1.5 60

HYDROMETER

D30

40 50

B-02 24 18 617SILTY CLAY (CL-ML)





CT

LLA

B_G

RA

INS

IZE

130

5003

0C

LE.G

PJ

CT

L C

OR

PO

RA

TE

.GD

T 3

/28

/14

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100


306

D10

140

SAND

1 200

D60D100 %Gravel

3/84 3/4

COBBLES

2820.0060.0180.0319SS-4B-03

Specimen ID

Specimen ID Sample

medium


GRAVELcoarse

3

%MC PI

%Sand

Sample

5020

3

coarse

SS-4

14

LL

6

%Clay

fine

Cc

SILT OR CLAY

20

PL

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT

1/2

Cu


U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS

100810

fine

16

Classification

D50

2 4

%Silt

1.5 60

HYDROMETER

D30

40 50

B-03 33 19 1421LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)





CT

LLA

B_G

RA

INS

IZE

130

5003

0C

LE.G

PJ

CT

L C

OR

PO

RA

TE

.GD

T 3

/28

/14

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100


306

D10

140

SAND

1 200

D60D100 %Gravel

3/84 3/4

COBBLES

6604.75SS-7B-03

Specimen ID

Specimen ID Sample

medium


GRAVELcoarse

3

%MC PI

%Sand

Sample

295

3

coarse

SS-7

14

LL

6

%Clay

fine

Cc

SILT OR CLAY

20

PL

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT

1/2

Cu


U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS

100810

fine

16

Classification

D50

2 4

%Silt

1.5 60

HYDROMETER

D30

40 50

B-03 48 23 2518LEAN CLAY (CL)





CT

LLA

B_G

RA

INS

IZE

130

5003

0C

LE.G

PJ

CT

L C

OR

PO

RA

TE

.GD

T 3

/28

/14

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100


306

D10

140

SAND

1 200

D60D100 %Gravel

3/84 3/4

COBBLES

2400.0080.0250.0389.525SS-5B-04

Specimen ID

Specimen ID Sample

medium


GRAVELcoarse

3

%MC PI

%Sand

Sample

5422

3

coarse

SS-5

14

LL

6

%Clay

fine

Cc

SILT OR CLAY

20

PL

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT

1/2

Cu


U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS

100810

fine

16

Classification

D50

2 4

%Silt

1.5 60

HYDROMETER

D30

40 50






CT

LLA

B_G

RA

INS

IZE

130

5003

0C

LE.G

PJ

CT

L C

OR

PO

RA

TE

.GD

T 3

/28

/14

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100


306

D10

140

SAND

1 200

D60D100 %Gravel

3/84 3/4

COBBLES

1450.0230.0660.15912.5SS-3B-05

Specimen ID

Specimen ID Sample

medium


GRAVELcoarse

3

%MC PI

%Sand

Sample

3942

3

coarse

SS-3

14

LL

6

%Clay

fine

Cc

SILT OR CLAY

20

PL

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT

1/2

Cu


U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS

100810

fine

16

Classification

D50

2 4

%Silt

1.5 60

HYDROMETER

D30

40 50

B-05 33 19 1415SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)





CT

LLA

B_G

RA

INS

IZE

130

5003

0C

LE.G

PJ

CT

L C

OR

PO

RA

TE

.GD

T 3

/28

/14

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100


306

D10

140

SAND

1 200

D60D100 %Gravel

3/84 3/4

COBBLES

3120.0050.0180.03412.5SS-2B-06

Specimen ID

Specimen ID Sample

medium


GRAVELcoarse

3

%MC PI

%Sand

Sample

4423

3

coarse

SS-2

14

LL

6

%Clay

fine

Cc

SILT OR CLAY

20

PL

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT

1/2

Cu


U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS

100810

fine

16

Classification

D50

2 4

%Silt

1.5 60

HYDROMETER

D30

40 50






CT

LLA

B_G

RA

INS

IZE

130

5003

0C

LE.G

PJ

CT

L C

OR

PO

RA

TE

.GD

T 3

/28

/14

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100


306

D10

140

SAND

1 200

D60D100 %Gravel

3/84 3/4

COBBLES

3320.0040.0120.0212.5SS-6B-06

Specimen ID

Specimen ID Sample

medium


GRAVELcoarse

3

%MC PI

%Sand

Sample

5411

3

coarse

SS-6

14

LL

6

%Clay

fine

Cc

SILT OR CLAY

20

PL

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT

1/2

Cu


U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS

100810

fine

16

Classification

D50

2 4

%Silt

1.5 60

HYDROMETER

D30

40 50

B-06 31 18 1316LEAN CLAY (CL)





CT

LLA

B_G

RA

INS

IZE

130

5003

0C

LE.G

PJ

CT

L C

OR

PO

RA

TE

.GD

T 3

/28

/14

APPENDIX D

ANALYZED SLOPE SECTIONS SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS

2L101

2L101

3L101

3L101

4L101

4L101

1L102

1L102

2L102

2L102

3L102

3L102

4L102

4L102

1L103

1L103

2L103

2L103

1L101

1L101

3L103

3L103

4L103

4L103

1L104

1L104

2L104

2L104

582' - 6"

LAKE ERIE

3L104

3L104

4L104

4L104

1L105

1L105

DRAWING NUMBER

PROJECT NUMBER

SCALE

DRAWING TITLE

SEALS AND SIGNATURES

ISSUED FOR REV DATE

Consultant OneDISCIPLINE ONEAddressCity, State, ZipPhone

Consultant TwoDISCIPLINE TWOAddressCity, State, ZipPhone

Consultant ThreeDISCIPLINE THREEAddressCity, State, ZipPhone

Consultant FourDISCIPLINE FOURAddressCity, State, ZipPhone

NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

Plot

Dat

e:

44 EAST MIFFLIN STREETSUITE 500MADISON, WI 53703608.251.1177www.smithgroupjjr.com



SHORELINE STUDY 2014 - 0217

1" = 100'-0"

3/27

/201

4 10

:05:

18 A

M SITE PLAN

L10050116.011

ES

TRUE NORTH

mkairouz

Text Box

Block A Analyzed Section

mkairouz

Line

mkairouz

Text Box

Block B Analyzed Section

mkairouz

Line

mkairouz

Text Box

Block C&D Analyzed Section

mkairouz

Line

mkairouz

Text Box

Block E Analyzed Section

mkairouz

Line

mkairouz

Text Box

Block F Analyzed Section

mkairouz

Line

Sediments 110 pcf 0 psf 18 ° Shale Medium Stiff Lean Clay 120 pcf 0 psf 18 ° Very Stiff Lean Clay 130 pcf 3,000 psf Stiff Lean Clay 125 pcf 1,500 psf

Block A Section L 101-4

SedimentsSediments

Medium Stiff Lean Clay

Shale

Shale

Very Stiff Lean Clay

Stiff Lean Clay

Stiff Lean Clay

Euclid Shores

Lake Erie

Safe F.S. > 1.3Unsafe F.S. < 1.3

~ 10 ft

Bishop Method Minimum FS = 0.3

STA 100+00

Horizontal (ft)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125

Elevation (ft)

550

555

560

565

570

575

580

585

590

595

600

605

610

615

Stiff Lean Clay

Block A Section L 101-4

Stiff Lean Clay


Stiff Lean Clay

Shale

To Be Removed


Sediments

Buttress

Euclid Shores

Lake Erie

Safe F.S. > 1.3

Bishop

~ 10 ft

2.7

STA 100+00

Provide Erosion Tensar Mat & Vegetation along Face

(Modified)

Horizontal (ft)0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125

Ele

vatio

n (ft

)

550

555

560

565

570

575

580

585

590

595

600

605

610

615

Sediments

Rbble Fill

Shale

Stiff Lean Clay

Random Fill

Block B Section L 102-1

Sediments 110 pcf 0 psf 18 °ShaleRbble Fill 120 pcf 0 psf 27 °Stiff Lean Clay 125 pcf 1,500 psf

Bishop Minimum F.S. = 0.8

Random Fill

Euclid Shores

Lake Erie

STA 100+00

Horizontal (ft)0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125

Ele

vatio

n (ft

)

550

555

560

565

570

575

580

585

590

595

600

605

610

615

Shale

Stiff Lean Clay

Buttress

Random FillSediments

Random Fill

Stone Columns

Random Fill

Stone Columns

Random Fill

1.1

Block B Section L 102-1

Sediments 110 pcf 0 psf 18 °ShaleRandom Fill 120 pcf 0 psf 27 °Stiff Lean Clay 125 pcf 1,500 psfButtress 135 pcf 0 psf 38 °Stone Columns 135 pcf 0 psf 36 °

Bishop

(Modified)

Euclid Shores

Lake Erie

STA 100+00

Horizontal (ft)0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125

Ele

vatio

n (ft

)

550

555

560

565

570

575

580

585

590

595

600

605

610

615

Sediments

Block C-D Section L 103-1

Bishop Minimum FS =

Shale


Random Fill

Euclid Shores

Lake Erie


Sediments 110 pcf 0 psf 18 °ShaleRubble Fill 120 pcf 0 psf 27 °Very Stiff Lean Clay 125 pcf 1,500 psfMedium Stiff Lean Clay 120 pcf 400 psf 18 °

0.7

STA 100+00

Horizontal (ft)0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140 145 150

Ele

vatio

n (ft

)

550

555

560

565

570

575

580

585

590

595

600

605

610

615

620

Sedement

Block C-D Section L 103-1 Modified

Bishop Minimum FS =

Shale


Random Fill

Euclid Shores

Lake Erie


Sediments 110 pcf 0 psf 18 °ShaleRubble Fill 120 pcf 0 psf 27 °Very Stiff Lean Clay 125 pcf 1,500 psfMedium Stiff Lean Clay 120 pcf 400 psf 18 °Buttress 135 pcf 0 psf 38 °

1.1

2.2H:1V

STA 100+00

Horizontal (ft)0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140 145 150

Ele

vatio

n (ft

)

550

555

560

565

570

575

580

585

590

595

600

605

610

615

620

Rubble Fill

Block E Section L 103-4

Bishop Minimum FS =


Sand

Euclid Shores

Lake Erie


Sand 125 pcf 0 psf 32 ° Shale Rubble Fill 120 pcf 0 psf 27 ° Very Stiff Lean Clay 125 pcf 1,500 psf

0.5

ShaleSTA 100+00

Horizontal (ft)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125

Ele

va

tio

n (

ft)

550

555

560

565

570

575

580

585

590

595

600

605

610

Rubble Fill

Block E Section L 103-4

Bishop Minimum FS =


Sand

Safe FS > 1

Euclid Shores

Lake Erie


Sand 125 pcf 0 psf 32 ° Shale Rubble Fill 120 pcf 0 psf 27 ° Very Stiff Lean Clay 125 pcf 1,500 psf

1.1

ShaleSTA 100+00

Unsafe Zone

~ 25'

Horizontal (ft)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125

Ele

va

tio

n (

ft)

550

555

560

565

570

575

580

585

590

595

600

605

610

Random Fill

Block E Section L 103-4Bishop Minimum FS =


Buttress

(With Buttress)

Euclid Shores

Lake Erie


Sand 125 pcf 0 psf 32 °ShaleRubble Fill 120 pcf 0 psf 27 °Very Stiff Lean Clay 125 pcf 1,500 psfButtress 135 pcf 0 psf 38 °

1.6

ShaleSTA 100+00

Horizontal (ft)0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125

Ele

vatio

n (ft

)

550

555

560

565

570

575

580

585

590

595

600

605

610


Block F Section L 104-4

Bishop Minimum FS =

Medium Stiff Lean ClayRequires Only Erosion Protection

Euclid Shores

Lake Erie

Medium Stiff Lean Clay 125 pcf 1,000 psf Shale Very Stiff Lean Clay 125 pcf 2,500 psf

3.0

ShaleSTA 100+00

1.2H:1V

Horizontal (ft)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125

Elevation (ft)

550

555

560

565

570

575

580

585

590

595

600

605

610

615

620

Documents

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT - Ohio EPA …web.epa.ohio.gov/dsw/401Applications/EuclidPIVB/Item 6 1f - Geotech... · geotechnical engineering report lake erie shores/slope stabilization