Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Houle Chevrier Engineering Ltd. • 32 Steacie Drive • Ottawa, Ontario • K2K 2A9 • www.hceng.ca
Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Sewer Replacement
Laurier Street
Clarence-Rockland, Ontario
Houle Chevrier Engineering Ltd. • 32 Steacie Drive • Ottawa, Ontario • K2K 2A9 • www.hceng.ca
Submitted to:
CH2M Hill Canada Limited
330 - 1101 Prince of Wales Drive
Ottawa, Ontario
K2C 2W7
Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Sewer Replacement
Laurier Street
Clarence-Rockland, Ontario
May 25, 2016
Project: 61977.85
Report to: CH2M Hill Canada Limited Project: 61977.85 (May 25, 2016)
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1
2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................ 1
2.1 Project Description ....................................................................................................... 1
2.2 Review of Geology Maps ............................................................................................. 1
2.3 Previous Geotechnical Investigation ............................................................................ 1
3.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION ...................................................................................... 1
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ............................................................................................ 2
4.1 General ........................................................................................................................ 2
4.2 Existing Pavement Structure ........................................................................................ 3
4.3 Fill Material .................................................................................................................. 3
4.4 Sand ............................................................................................................................ 4
4.5 Silty Clay ...................................................................................................................... 4
4.6 Groundwater Levels ..................................................................................................... 5
4.7 Soil Chemistry Relating to Corrosion ........................................................................... 5
5.0 GEOTECHNICAL GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................... 5
5.1 General ........................................................................................................................ 5
5.2 Proposed Sewer Replacement .................................................................................... 6
5.2.1 Overburden Excavation ........................................................................................ 6
5.2.2 Groundwater Pumping and Management .............................................................. 6 5.2.3 Pipe Bedding ........................................................................................................ 7
5.2.4 Trench Backfill ...................................................................................................... 7
5.2.5 Seepage Barriers .................................................................................................. 8
5.2.6 Winter Construction .............................................................................................. 8
5.2.7 Corrosion of Buried Concrete and Steel ................................................................ 8
5.3 Laurier Street Trench Reinstatement ........................................................................... 9
5.3.1 Pavement Design ................................................................................................. 9
5.3.2 Effects of Soil Disturbance and Construction Traffic.............................................. 9
5.4 Other Considerations ..................................................................................................10
5.4.1 Effects of Construction Induced Vibration ............................................................10
5.4.2 Excess Soil Management.....................................................................................10
5.4.3 Abandonment of Standpipe Piezometer ...............................................................10 5.4.4 Design Review and Construction Observation .....................................................10
Report to: CH2M Hill Canada Limited Project: 61977.85 (May 25, 2016)
iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Key Plan ................................................................................................... 12
Figure 2 Borehole Location Plan ............................................................................ 13
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Record of Borehole Sheets
Laboratory Classification Tests on Soil Samples
Chemical Test Results on Soil Samples
Report to: CH2M Hill Canada Limited Project: 61977.85 (May 25, 2016)
1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a subsurface investigation carried out for the proposed sewer
replacement along Laurier Street in the City of Clarence-Rockland, Ontario. The purpose of the
investigation was to identify the general subsurface conditions at the site by means of a limited
number of boreholes and, based on the factual information obtained, to provide engineering
guidelines on the geotechnical design aspects of the project, including construction
considerations that could influence design decisions.
The subsurface investigation was carried out in general accordance with our proposal dated
April 15, 2016.
2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION
2.1 Project Description
Plans are being prepared to replace a 380 metre long section of sanitary sewer along Laurier
Street in the City of Clarence-Rockland, Ontario (see Key Plan, Figure 1). It is assumed that the
invert depth of the proposed sewer will be, at most, about 5 metres below the roadway surface.
Trench reinstatement along Laurier Street is also included in the scope of this project.
2.2 Review of Geology Maps
Surficial geology maps of the area indicate that the site is underlain by near surface dolostone
bedrock of the Oxford formation. Fill material associated with the existing roadway and services
should also be expected.
2.3 Previous Geotechnical Investigation
A previous geotechnical investigation was carried out by John D. Paterson and Associates
Limited for the replacement of the sanitary forcemain along Laurier Street between Laviolette
Street and St. Jean Street, located about 300 metres southeast of the subject site. The report
titled, “Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Sanitary Forcemain Replacement, Laurier Street
and Laviolette Street, Rockland, Ontario” dated July 10, 2002, was provided to us. The
subsurface conditions encountered as part of the previous geotechnical investigation generally
consist of existing pavement structure and fill material overlying sand, silty sand and sandy
gravel. Bedrock was encountered at depths ranging between about 1.7 and 4.0 metres below
ground surface.
3.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION
The field work for this investigation was carried out on May 9, 2016. At that time, six (6)
boreholes, numbered 16-1 to 16-6, inclusive, were advanced at the site. The boreholes were
advanced to a depth of about 5.2 metres below existing ground surface (elevation 48.1 to 54.0
metres, geodetic datum) using a truck mounted, hollow stem auger drill rig supplied and
Report to: CH2M Hill Canada Limited Project: 61977.85 (May 25, 2016)
2
operated by Marathon Drilling Co. Ltd. All boreholes were located along Laurier Street in the
travelled portion of the east bound lane.
Standard penetration tests were carried out in the boreholes and samples of the soils
encountered were recovered using a 50 millimetre diameter split barrel sampler. The
subsurface conditions encountered in the upper 0.9 metres of the boreholes were identified by
visual and tactile examination of the materials exposed on the sides of the boreholes. Grab
samples of the soils encountered within this depth were recovered manually. One (1) standpipe
piezometer was installed in borehole 16-4 to measure the stabilized groundwater level. The
field work was observed by a member of our engineering staff who directed the drilling
operations, observed the in situ testing and logged the samples and boreholes.
Following the fieldwork, the soil samples were returned to our laboratory for examination by a
geotechnical engineer. Selected samples of the soil were tested for water content, grain size
distribution and Atterberg limits. One (1) soil sample from each of boreholes 16-1 and 16-6
were sent to Paracel Laboratories Ltd. for basic chemical testing relating to corrosion of buried
concrete and steel.
The approximate locations and surface elevations of the boreholes are shown on the Borehole
Location Plan on Figure 2. Descriptions of the subsurface conditions logged in the boreholes
are provided on the Record of Borehole sheets in Appendix A. The results of the grain size
distribution and Atterberg limits testing are provided on Figures B1 to B3, inclusive, in Appendix
B. The results of the chemical testing on the soil samples are provided in Appendix C.
The borehole locations were selected by Houle Chevrier Engineering Ltd. personnel and
positioned at the site relative to existing site features. The locations of the boreholes and
ground surface elevations at the borehole locations were determined using a Trimble R10 GPS
survey instrument. The elevations are referenced to geodetic datum.
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
4.1 General
As previously indicated, the soil and groundwater conditions identified in the boreholes are
given on the Record of Borehole sheets in Appendix A. The borehole logs indicate the
subsurface conditions at the specific test locations only. Boundaries between zones on the logs
are often not distinct, but rather are transitional and have been interpreted. The precision with
which subsurface conditions are indicated depends on the method of drilling, the frequency and
recovery of samples and the uniformity of the subsurface conditions. Subsurface conditions at
areas other than the borehole locations may vary from the conditions encountered in the
boreholes. In addition to soil variability, fill of variable physical and chemical composition can be
present over portions of the site or on adjacent properties.
Report to: CH2M Hill Canada Limited Project: 61977.85 (May 25, 2016)
3
The groundwater conditions described in this report refer only to those observed at the place
and time of observation noted in the report. These conditions may vary seasonally or as a
consequence of construction activities in the area.
The soil descriptions in this report are based on commonly accepted methods of classification
and identification employed in geotechnical practice. Classification and identification of soil
involves judgement and Houle Chevrier Engineering Ltd. does not guarantee descriptions as
exact, but infers accuracy to the extent that is common in current geotechnical practice.
The following presents an overview of the subsurface conditions encountered in boreholes 16-1
to 16-6, inclusive, advanced during this investigation.
4.2 Existing Pavement Structure
Asphaltic concrete was encountered from the ground surface at all borehole locations. The
asphaltic concrete has a thickness of about 100 to 200 millimeters and is underlain by granular
base/subbase material. At each of the borehole locations there is no obvious distinction
between the base and subbase materials. The granular base/subbase material is generally
composed of grey brown crushed sand and gravel and gravelly sand and ranges in thickness
from about 410 to 730 millimetres.
The results of grain size distribution testing carried out on two (2) samples of the base/subbase
material recovered from boreholes 16-3 and 16-5 are provided on Figure B1 in Appendix B
along with the grain size distribution envelope for Ontario Provincial Standard Specification
(OPSS) Granular B Type I. The samples obtained from borehole 16-3 and 16-5 exceed the
specified amount of fines (15 and 14 percent passing the 0.075 millimetre sieve, respectively,
compared with the maximum allowable of 8 percent).
Moisture content testing carried out on samples of the roadway base/subbase material indicate
a moisture content of about 3 percent.
4.3 Fill Material
Fill material was encountered beneath the pavement structure in all boreholes at depths ranging
between about 0.6 and 0.9 metres below ground surface (elevation 52.7 to 58.6 metres,
geodetic datum). The fill material is variable in nature and can generally be described as brown
to grey brown sand with varying amounts of silt and gravel. The fill material has a thickness
ranging from about 0.2 to 1.0 metres and extends to depths of about 0.9 to 1.8 metres below
ground surface (elevation 52.2 to 58.3 metres, geodetic datum).
Moisture content testing carried out on one (1) sample of the fill material indicates a moisture
content of about 15 percent.
Report to: CH2M Hill Canada Limited Project: 61977.85 (May 25, 2016)
4
4.4 Sand
Native deposits of brown to grey brown fine grained sand were encountered below the fill
material in boreholes 16-1 to 16-5, inclusive, at depths ranging between about 0.9 and 1.8
metres below ground surface (elevation 53.1 and 58.3 metres, geodetic datum). Layers of silty
sand were encountered within the sand deposits at some of the borehole locations.
Standard penetration testing carried out in the native sand deposits generally gave N values
ranging from 6 to 16 blows per 0.3 metres of penetration, which reflects a loose to compact
relative density. One (1) N value of 1 blow per 0.3 metres of penetration was recorded in
borehole 16-2 at a depth of about 1.6 metres below surface grade, which reflects a very loose
relative density.
Where fully penetrated, the sand deposits in boreholes 16-1 and 16-5 have a thickness of about
3.7 and 2.3 metres, respectively, and extend to depths of about 4.6 and 3.2 metres below
ground surface, respectively (elevation 54.6 and 50.9 metres, geodetic datum).
The results of one (1) grain size distribution test carried out on a sample of the sand recovered
from borehole 16-3 are provided on Figure B2 in Appendix B.
The water content of samples of the native sand deposits ranges from about 4 to 7 percent.
Boreholes 16-2 to 16-4, inclusive, were terminated within the sand deposits at a depth of about
5.2 metres below ground surface (elevation 51.1 to 53.3 metres, geodetic datum).
4.5 Silty Clay
Native deposits of silty clay were encountered in boreholes 16-1, 16-5 and 16-6 at depths
ranging from about 1.1 to 4.6 metres below ground surface (elevation 50.9 to 54.6 metres,
geodetic datum). A relatively thin layer (i.e., 80 millimetres) of silty clay was also encountered in
borehole 16-4 at a depth of about 4.7 metres below surface grade.
The upper part of the silty clay is weathered and grey brown to reddish grey brown. The SPT N
values recorded within the weathered silty clay crust generally range from about 3 to 19 blows
per 0.3 metres of penetration, which reflect a stiff to very stiff consistency. One (1) SPT N value
of over 50 blows per 0.3 metres of penetration was recorded in borehole 16-6 at a depth of
about 2.6 metres below ground indicating a very stiff consistency.
Grey silty clay was encountered below the weathered silty clay crust in borehole 16-6 at a depth
of about 5.0 metres below ground (elevation 48.3 metres, geodetic datum).
One (1) Atterberg limit test was undertaken on a sample of the silty clay recovered from
borehole 16-6 at a depth of about 2.6 metres below ground surface. The results show that the
Report to: CH2M Hill Canada Limited Project: 61977.85 (May 25, 2016)
5
sample has a liquid limit of 54 percent and a plastic limit of 25 percent; as indicated on the
plasticity chart on Figure B3 in Appendix B, the sample has a high plasticity.
Moisture content testing carried out on samples of the silty clay indicates a moisture content
ranging from about 42 to 66 percent.
Boreholes 16-1, 16-5, and 16-6, were terminated within the silty clay deposits at a depth of
about 5.2 metres below ground surface (elevation 48.1 to 54.0 metres, geodetic datum).
4.6 Groundwater Levels
The standpipe piezometer installed in borehole 16-4 was dry on May 18, 2016.
The groundwater levels may be higher during wet periods of the year such as the early spring or
following periods of precipitation.
4.7 Soil Chemistry Relating to Corrosion
The results of chemical testing of soil samples from borehole 16-1 and 16-6 are provided in
Appendix C and summarized in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1 – Results of Chemical Testing of Soil Samples
Parameter Borehole
16-1 16-6
pH 7.66 7.27
Resistivity (Ohm.m) 115 5.61
Chloride Content (µg/g) 40 970
Sulphate Content (µg/g) 12 375
5.0 GEOTECHNICAL GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 General
The information in the following sections is provided for the guidance of the design engineers
and is intended for the design of this project only. Contractors bidding on or undertaking the
works should examine the factual results of the investigation, satisfy themselves as to the
adequacy of the information for construction, and make their own interpretation of the factual
data as it affects their construction techniques, schedule, safety and equipment capabilities.
Report to: CH2M Hill Canada Limited Project: 61977.85 (May 25, 2016)
6
The professional services retained for this project include only the geotechnical aspects of the
subsurface conditions. The implications of possible surface and/or subsurface contamination
resulting from previous uses or activities of this site or adjacent properties, and/or resulting from
the introduction onto the site from materials from offsite sources are outside the terms of
reference for this report and have not been addressed.
5.2 Proposed Sewer Replacement
5.2.1 Overburden Excavation
The excavation for the proposed sanitary sewer will be carried out through the existing
pavement structure, fill material and native deposits of sand and silty clay.
In the overburden, the excavation for flexible service pipes should be in accordance with Ontario
Provincial Standard Drawing (OPSD) 802.010 for Type 3 soil. The excavation for rigid service
pipes should be in accordance with OPSD 802.031 for Type 3 soil.
The sides of the excavations within overburden soils should be sloped in accordance with the
requirements in Ontario Regulation 213/91 under the Occupational Health and Safety Act.
According to the Act, most of the soils at this site can be classified as Type 3 soils. Therefore, for
design purposes, allowance should be made for 1 horizontal to 1 vertical, or flatter, excavation
slopes. As an alternative or where space constraints dictate, the service installation could be
carried out within a tightly fitting, braced steel trench box, which is specifically designed for this
purpose.
No unusual constraints are expected in excavating the fill material and sand deposits above the
water level and the silty clay deposits both above and below the groundwater level.
5.2.2 Groundwater Pumping and Management
The standpipe piezometer installed in borehole 16-4 was dry when measured on May 18, 2016.
The groundwater levels may be higher during wet periods of the year such as the early spring or
following periods of precipitation.
Based on our previous experience, any groundwater inflow from the overburden deposits into
the excavations should be relatively small and controlled by pumping from filtered sumps within
the excavations. It is not expected that short term pumping during excavation will have a
significant effect on nearby structures and services.
Suitable detention and filtration will be required before discharging the pumped water to any
sewers. The contractor should be required to prepare and submit an excavation and
groundwater management plan for review and approval as part of the contract.
Report to: CH2M Hill Canada Limited Project: 61977.85 (May 25, 2016)
7
5.2.3 Pipe Bedding
The bedding for the proposed sewer should be in accordance with Ontario Provincial Standards
Drawing (OPSD) 802.010 and 802.031 for flexible and rigid pipes in overburden excavations.
The pipe bedding material should consist of at least 150 millimetres of well graded crushed
stone meeting OPSS Granular A. OPSS documents allow recycled asphaltic concrete and
concrete to be used in Granular A material. Since the source of recycled material cannot be
determined, it is suggested, for environmental reasons, that any granular materials used in the
service trench be composed of virgin material only.
In areas where unsuitable fill material (such as existing fill material) exists below the pipe
subgrade level, where the subgrade becomes disturbed, or where very loose sand is
encountered (i.e., in borehole 16-2), the unsuitable/disturbed/very loose material should be
removed and replaced with a subbedding layer of compacted granular material, such as that
meeting OPSS Granular B Type II. To provide adequate support for the pipe in the long term in
areas where subexcavation of material is required below design subgrade level, the excavations
should be sized to allow a 1 horizontal to 2 vertical spread of granular material down and out
from the bottom of the pipe.
Cover material, from pipe spring line to at least 300 millimetres above the top of the pipe, should
consist of granular material, such as OPSS Granular A.
The use of clear crushed stone as bedding or subbedding material should not be permitted.
The subbedding, bedding and cover materials should be compacted in maximum 200 millimetre
thick lifts to at least 98 percent of the standard Proctor dry density value.
5.2.4 Trench Backfill
To reduce the potential for differential frost heaving between the area over the trench and the
adjacent roadway, acceptable native materials should be used as backfill between the roadway
subgrade level and the depth of seasonal frost penetration (i.e., 1.8 metres below finished
grade). The backfill materials within the zone of frost penetration should match the materials
exposed on the trench walls. Backfill below the zone of seasonal frost penetration could consist
of either acceptable native material or imported granular material conforming to OPSS Granular
B Type I or II.
To minimize future settlement of the backfill the trench backfill should be compacted in
maximum 300 millimetre thick lifts to at least 95 percent of the standard Proctor dry density
value.
The native silty clay material is sensitive to changes in moisture content and precipitation.
Depending on the weather conditions encountered during the construction, the specified
densities may not be possible to achieve, and, as a consequence, some settlement of these
Report to: CH2M Hill Canada Limited Project: 61977.85 (May 25, 2016)
8
backfill materials could occur. Consideration could be given to implementing one or a
combination of the following measures to reduce post construction settlement above the trench,
depending on the weather conditions encountered during the construction:
Allow the overburden materials to dry prior to compaction;
Reuse any wet materials in the lower part of the trench and make provision to defer final
paving of surface course (i.e., the Superpave 12.5 asphaltic concrete) above the trench
for 3 months, or longer, to allow the trench backfill settlement to occur and thereby
improve the final roadway appearance.
Avoid reusing any wet materials within the trench. If additional material is required for
trench backfill, consideration could be given to using relatively dry on-site material or
imported fill, such as OPSS Select Subgrade Material or Granular B Type I, below the
zone of frost penetration.
5.2.5 Seepage Barriers
The standpipe piezometer installed in borehole 16-4 was at dry when measured on May 18,
2016. Based on the groundwater conditions observed during the geotechnical investigation,
seepage barriers are likely not required.
5.2.6 Winter Construction
In order to carry out the work during freezing temperatures and maintain adequate performance
of the trench backfill as a roadway subgrade, the service trench should be opened for as short a
time as practicable and the excavations should be carried out only in lengths which allow all of
the construction operations, including backfilling, to be fully completed in one working day. The
materials on the sides of the trench should not be allowed to freeze. In addition, the backfill
should be excavated, stored and replaced without being disturbed by frost or contaminated by
snow or ice.
5.2.7 Corrosion of Buried Concrete and Steel
The measured sulphate concentration in two (2) samples of soil recovered from boreholes 16-1
and 16-6 was 12 and 375 micrograms per gram, respectively. According to Canadian
Standards Association (CSA) “Concrete Materials and Methods of Concrete Construction”, the
concentration of sulphate in the soil is in the low range. Therefore any concrete in contact with
the native soil or groundwater could be batched with General Use (GU) cement. The effects of
freeze thaw in the presence of de-icing chemical (sodium chloride) use on the roadway should
be considered in selecting the air entrainment and the concrete mix proportions for any
concrete.
Report to: CH2M Hill Canada Limited Project: 61977.85 (May 25, 2016)
9
Based on the resistivity of the sample, the soil in these areas can be classified as non-
aggressive towards unprotected steel. It is noted that the corrosivity of the soil/groundwater
could vary throughout the year due to the application of sodium chloride for de-icing.
5.3 Laurier Street Trench Reinstatement
5.3.1 Pavement Design
It is understood that following the construction of the sanitary sewer, the roadway above the
trench will be reinstated. For the trench reinstatement on Laurier Street, we recommend that
the asphaltic concrete and granular thicknesses match those exposed in the excavation to
reduce the potential for differential frost heaving, with provision for the following minimum
granular and asphaltic concrete thicknesses:
120 millimetres of asphaltic concrete, over
150 millimetres of OPSS Granular A, over
450 millimetres of OPSS Granular B Type II
The asphaltic concrete should consist of a 50 millimetre surface layer of Superpave 12.5 over
one 70 millimetre thick layer of Superpave 19.0. Performance grade PG 58-34 asphaltic
concrete should be specified. In the absence of traffic data, the superpave asphaltic concrete
mixes should be designed for Traffic Level C.
Suitable tapers should be provided for the granular materials where the new pavement structure
abuts existing pavement structure along Laurier Street.
All imported granular materials should be placed in maximum 200 millimetre thick lifts and
should be compacted to at least 98 percent of the standard Proctor dry density value using
suitable vibratory compaction equipment.
5.3.2 Effects of Soil Disturbance and Construction Traffic
The guidelines for the trench reinstatement assume that the trench backfill is adequately
compacted, and prepared as described in this report. If the subgrade surface above the sewer
becomes disturbed or wetted due to construction operations or precipitation, the Granular B
Type II thickness given above may not be adequate and it may be necessary to increase the
thickness of the Granular B Type II subbase and/or to incorporate a woven geotextile separator
between the roadway subgrade surface and the granular subbase material. The adequacy of
the design pavement thickness should be assessed by geotechnical personnel at the time of
construction.
If the granular pavement materials above the trenches are to be used by construction traffic, it
may be necessary to increase the thickness of the Granular B Type II, install a woven geotextile
separator between the subgrade surface and the granular material, or a combination, to prevent
Report to: CH2M Hill Canada Limited Project: 61977.85 (May 25, 2016)
10
pumping and disturbance to the subbase material. The contractor should be made responsible
for their construction access.
5.4 Other Considerations
5.4.1 Effects of Construction Induced Vibration
Some of the construction operations (such as granular material compaction, excavation, etc.) will
cause ground vibration on and off of the site. The vibrations will attenuate with distance from the
source, but may be felt at nearby structures. The magnitude of vibrations will be much less than
that required to cause damage to the nearby structures or services that are in good condition.
Nevertheless, we recommend that preconstruction surveys be carried out on the adjacent
structures and that vibration monitoring be carried out during the construction so that any damage
claims can be addressed in a fair manner.
5.4.2 Excess Soil Management
It should be noted that the soil samples recovered during this investigation were not tested to
assess the presence of contamination, either naturally occurring or due to human activity. This
report does not constitute an excess soil management plan. The disposal requirements for
excess soil from the site have not been assessed.
5.4.3 Abandonment of Standpipe Piezometer
The standpipe piezometer installed as part of this investigation should be decommissioned by a
licensed well technician. The well abandonment could be carried out in advance of or during
the construction.
5.4.4 Design Review and Construction Observation
It is recommended that the final design drawings be reviewed by the geotechnical engineer to
ensure that the guidelines provided in this report have been interpreted as intended.
The engagement of the services of the geotechnical consultant during construction is
recommended to confirm that the subsurface conditions throughout the proposed excavations
do not materially differ from those given in the report and that the construction activities do not
adversely affect the intent of the design. The subgrade surfaces for the sanitary sewer and
roadway should be inspected by experienced geotechnical personnel to ensure that suitable
materials have been reached and properly prepared. The placing and compaction of earth fill
and imported granular materials should be inspected to ensure that the materials used conform
to the grading and compaction specifications.
Report to: CH2M Hill Canada Limited Project: 61977.85 (May 25, 2016)
11
We trust this report provides sufficient information for your present purposes. If you have any
questions concerning this report, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
Lauren Ashe, M.A.Sc., P.Eng.
Brent Wiebe, P.Eng. Senior Geotechnical Engineer
25 May 2016
2001000
1:5000
300m
32 Steacie Drive, Ottawa, ON
T: (613) 836-1422 | www.hceng.ca | [email protected]
Project
Drwn By DateChkd By Project No.
Drawing
Revision No.
B.V. L.A. MAY, 2016 61977.85 0
FIGURE 1
LAURIER STREET SEWER
REPLACEMENT
KEY PLAN
E
D
W
A
R
D
S
S
T
R
E
E
T
P
O
U
L
I
O
T
T
E
S
T
R
E
E
T
BH 16-1
59.19
BH 16-2
58.43
BH 16-3
57.65
BH 16-4
56.26
BH 16-5
54.04
BH 16-6
53.31
L
A
U
R
I
E
R
S
T
R
E
E
T
0 40 80
1:2000
120m
Rev.
Chkd by
Location
Scale
Date
ProjectClient
Houle Chevrier Engineering Ltd.
32 Steacie Drive
Ottawa, ON
Tel: (613) 836-1422
www.hceng.ca
LEGEND
Drwn by
LAURIER STREET,
CLARENCE-ROCKLAND
CH2M HILL CANADA LTD.
61977.85
FIGURE 2
B.V. L.A.
MAY, 2016
0
BOREHOLE LOCATION PLAN
BH 16-1
59.19
BOREHOLE LOCATION IN PLAN AND ELEVATION
(current investigation by Houle Chevirer Engineering Ltd.)
P:\0. Files\61900\61977.85\Drafting\Drawings\61977.85_FG2_V01_2016-05-12.dwg, 25/05/2016 4:14:50 PM, DWG To PDF.pc3
Report to: CH2M Hill Canada Limited Project: 61977.85 (May 25, 2016)
APPENDIX A
Record of Borehole Sheets
List of Abbreviations and Terminology
1,2
3
4
5
6
7
8
GS +50
D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
Pow
er A
uger
0.10
0.61
0.91
4.62
5.18
200m
m D
iam
eter
Hol
low
Ste
m
24
6
8
8
8
16
4
59.09
58.58
58.28
54.57
54.01
Backfilledwith augercuttings
Asphaltic Concrete
Grey brown, sand and gravel, somesilt (BASE/SUBBASE)
Grey brown sand, some gravel, tracesilt (FILL MATERIAL)
Loose to compact, grey brown, finegrained SAND, trace silt
Very stiff, reddish grey brown, SILTYCLAY (WEATHERED CRUST)
End of Borehole
WATER CONTENT, PERCENT
20
Q -U -
60
-5 -2
80
AD
DIT
ION
AL
LAB
. TE
ST
ING
W
ELEV.
20
60
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
SOIL PROFILE
80
PROJECT: 61977.85
LOCATION: See Borehole Location Plan, Figure 2
BORING DATE: May 9, 2016
DE
PT
H S
CA
LEM
ET
RE
S
BO
RIN
G M
ET
HO
D
nat. V -rem. V -
40ST
RA
TA
PLO
T
DEPTH(m)
RECORD OF BOREHOLE 16-1
4020
DEPTH SCALE
1 to 30
NU
MB
ER
TY
PE
PIEZOMETEROR
STANDPIPEINSTALLATION
HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY,k, cm/s
80
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATUM: Geodetic
SPT HAMMER: 63 kg drop, 0.76 metres
59.19
DYNAMIC PENETRATIONRESISTANCE, BLOWS/0.3m
SHEAR STRENGTHCu, kPa
-4
Wp Wl40 60
DESCRIPTION
BLO
WS
/0.3
m
Ground Surface
LOGGED: B.V.
CHECKED:
SAMPLES
10 10 -310 10
BO
RE
HO
LE L
OG
619
77.8
5_G
INT
LO
GS
_GN
T_V
01_2
016-
05-1
1.G
PJ
HO
ULE
CH
EV
RIE
R 2
015.
GD
T 5
-25-
16
1,2
3
4
5
6
7
8
GS +50
D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
Pow
er A
uger
0.10
0.69
0.91
2.64
3.05
5.18
200m
m D
iam
eter
Hol
low
Ste
m
28
6
1
9
8
6
6
58.33
57.74
57.52
55.79
55.38
53.25
Backfilledwith augercuttings
Asphaltic Concrete
Grey brown gravelly sand, some silt(BASE/SUBBASE)
Grey brown sand, trace gravel, traceto some silt (FILL MATERIAL)
Very loose to loose, brown, finegrained SAND, trace silt
Grey brown SILTY SAND
Loose, grey brown, fine grainedSAND, trace silt
End of Borehole
WATER CONTENT, PERCENT
20
Q -U -
60
-5 -2
80
AD
DIT
ION
AL
LAB
. TE
ST
ING
W
ELEV.
20
60
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
SOIL PROFILE
80
PROJECT: 61977.85
LOCATION: See Borehole Location Plan, Figure 2
BORING DATE: May 9, 2016
DE
PT
H S
CA
LEM
ET
RE
S
BO
RIN
G M
ET
HO
D
nat. V -rem. V -
40ST
RA
TA
PLO
T
DEPTH(m)
RECORD OF BOREHOLE 16-2
4020
DEPTH SCALE
1 to 30
NU
MB
ER
TY
PE
PIEZOMETEROR
STANDPIPEINSTALLATION
HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY,k, cm/s
80
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATUM: Geodetic
SPT HAMMER: 63 kg drop, 0.76 metres
58.43
DYNAMIC PENETRATIONRESISTANCE, BLOWS/0.3m
SHEAR STRENGTHCu, kPa
-4
Wp Wl40 60
DESCRIPTION
BLO
WS
/0.3
m
Ground Surface
LOGGED: B.V.
CHECKED:
SAMPLES
10 10 -310 10
BO
RE
HO
LE L
OG
619
77.8
5_G
INT
LO
GS
_GN
T_V
01_2
016-
05-1
1.G
PJ
HO
ULE
CH
EV
RIE
R 2
015.
GD
T 5
-25-
16
1,2
3
4
5
6
7
8
GS +50
D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
Pow
er A
uger
0.13
0.86
1.82
5.18
200m
m D
iam
eter
Hol
low
Ste
m
>50
21
8
8
7
9
9
57.52
56.79
55.83
52.47
Sieve(seeFig.B1)
Sieve(seeFig.B2)
Backfilledwith augercuttings
Asphaltic Concrete
Grey brown, gravelly sand, some silt(BASE/SUBBASE)
Grey brown, fine to medium grainedsand, trace to some silt, trace gravel(FILL MATERIAL)
Loose, grey brown, fine grainedSAND, trace silt
End of Borehole
WATER CONTENT, PERCENT
20
Q -U -
60
-5 -2
80
AD
DIT
ION
AL
LAB
. TE
ST
ING
W
ELEV.
20
60
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
SOIL PROFILE
80
PROJECT: 61977.85
LOCATION: See Borehole Location Plan, Figure 2
BORING DATE: May 9, 2016
DE
PT
H S
CA
LEM
ET
RE
S
BO
RIN
G M
ET
HO
D
nat. V -rem. V -
40ST
RA
TA
PLO
T
DEPTH(m)
RECORD OF BOREHOLE 16-3
4020
DEPTH SCALE
1 to 30
NU
MB
ER
TY
PE
PIEZOMETEROR
STANDPIPEINSTALLATION
HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY,k, cm/s
80
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATUM: Geodetic
SPT HAMMER: 63 kg drop, 0.76 metres
57.65
DYNAMIC PENETRATIONRESISTANCE, BLOWS/0.3m
SHEAR STRENGTHCu, kPa
-4
Wp Wl40 60
DESCRIPTION
BLO
WS
/0.3
m
Ground Surface
LOGGED: B.V.
CHECKED:
SAMPLES
10 10 -310 10
BO
RE
HO
LE L
OG
619
77.8
5_G
INT
LO
GS
_GN
T_V
01_2
016-
05-1
1.G
PJ
HO
ULE
CH
EV
RIE
R 2
015.
GD
T 5
-25-
16
1,2
3
4
5
6
7
8
GS +50
D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
Pow
er A
uger
0.13
0.61
0.91
4.57
4.674.75
5.18
200m
m D
iam
eter
Hol
low
Ste
m
35
12
9
7
15
13
10
56.13
55.65
55.35
51.69
51.08
Backfilledwith augercuttings
Bentoniteseal
Filtersand
50 mmdiameter,1.52metre wellscreen
Standpipepiezometerwas drywhenmeasuredon May18, 2016
Asphaltic Concrete
Grey brown gravelly sand, some silt(BASE/SUBBASE)
Brown to grey brown, sand, trace tosome silt, trace gravel (FILLMATERIAL)
Loose to compact, brown to greybrown, fine grained SAND, trace silt,occasional silty sand pockets
Grey SILTY SAND, trace clay
Grey SILTY CLAY, some sand
Loose to compact, grey brown, finegrained SAND, trace to some silt
End of Borehole
WATER CONTENT, PERCENT
20
Q -U -
60
-5 -2
80
AD
DIT
ION
AL
LAB
. TE
ST
ING
W
ELEV.
20
60
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
SOIL PROFILE
80
PROJECT: 61977.85
LOCATION: See Borehole Location Plan, Figure 2
BORING DATE: May 9, 2016
DE
PT
H S
CA
LEM
ET
RE
S
BO
RIN
G M
ET
HO
D
nat. V -rem. V -
40ST
RA
TA
PLO
T
DEPTH(m)
RECORD OF BOREHOLE 16-4
4020
DEPTH SCALE
1 to 30
NU
MB
ER
TY
PE
PIEZOMETEROR
STANDPIPEINSTALLATION
HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY,k, cm/s
80
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATUM: Geodetic
SPT HAMMER: 63 kg drop, 0.76 metres
56.26
DYNAMIC PENETRATIONRESISTANCE, BLOWS/0.3m
SHEAR STRENGTHCu, kPa
-4
Wp Wl40 60
DESCRIPTION
BLO
WS
/0.3
m
Ground Surface
LOGGED: B.V.
CHECKED:
SAMPLES
10 10 -310 10
BO
RE
HO
LE L
OG
619
77.8
5_G
INT
LO
GS
_GN
T_V
01_2
016-
05-1
1.G
PJ
HO
ULE
CH
EV
RIE
R 2
015.
GD
T 5
-25-
16
1,2
3
4
5
6
7
8
GS +50
D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
Pow
er A
uger
0.15
0.56
0.91
3.18
5.18
200m
m D
iam
eter
Hol
low
Ste
m
38
11
10
12
5
7
3
53.89
53.48
53.13
50.86
48.86
Sieve(seeFig.B1)
Backfilledwith augercuttings
Asphaltic Concrete
Grey to grey brown sand and gravel,some silt (BASE/SUBBASE)
Brown, sand, trace silt, trace gravel(FILL MATERIAL)
Compact, brown, fine grained SAND,trace silt
Very stiff to stiff, grey brown SILTYCLAY (WEATHERED CRUST)
End of Borehole
WATER CONTENT, PERCENT
20
Q -U -
60
-5 -2
80
AD
DIT
ION
AL
LAB
. TE
ST
ING
W
ELEV.
20
60
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
SOIL PROFILE
80
PROJECT: 61977.85
LOCATION: See Borehole Location Plan, Figure 2
BORING DATE: May 9, 2016
DE
PT
H S
CA
LEM
ET
RE
S
BO
RIN
G M
ET
HO
D
nat. V -rem. V -
40ST
RA
TA
PLO
T
DEPTH(m)
RECORD OF BOREHOLE 16-5
4020
DEPTH SCALE
1 to 30
NU
MB
ER
TY
PE
PIEZOMETEROR
STANDPIPEINSTALLATION
HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY,k, cm/s
80
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATUM: Geodetic
SPT HAMMER: 63 kg drop, 0.76 metres
54.04
DYNAMIC PENETRATIONRESISTANCE, BLOWS/0.3m
SHEAR STRENGTHCu, kPa
-4
Wp Wl40 60
DESCRIPTION
BLO
WS
/0.3
m
Ground Surface
LOGGED: B.V.
CHECKED:
SAMPLES
10 10 -310 10
BO
RE
HO
LE L
OG
619
77.8
5_G
INT
LO
GS
_GN
T_V
01_2
016-
05-1
1.G
PJ
HO
ULE
CH
EV
RIE
R 2
015.
GD
T 5
-25-
16
1,2
3
4
5
6
7
8
GS +50
D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
50D.O.
Pow
er A
uger
0.20
0.66
1.07
5.03
5.18
200m
m D
iam
eter
Hol
low
Ste
m
32
12
19
>50
9
7
4
53.11
52.65
52.24
48.28
48.13
Backfilledwith augercuttings
Asphaltic Concrete
Grey brown, sand and gravel, somesilt (BASE/SUBBASE)
Brown sand, trace gravel, trace silt(FILL MATERIAL)
Very stiff, grey brown SILTY CLAY(WEATHERED CRUST)
Grey SILTY CLAY
End of Borehole
WATER CONTENT, PERCENT
20
Q -U -
60
-5 -2
80
AD
DIT
ION
AL
LAB
. TE
ST
ING
W
ELEV.
20
60
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
SOIL PROFILE
80
PROJECT: 61977.85
LOCATION: See Borehole Location Plan, Figure 2
BORING DATE: May 9, 2016
DE
PT
H S
CA
LEM
ET
RE
S
BO
RIN
G M
ET
HO
D
nat. V -rem. V -
40ST
RA
TA
PLO
T
DEPTH(m)
RECORD OF BOREHOLE 16-6
4020
DEPTH SCALE
1 to 30
NU
MB
ER
TY
PE
PIEZOMETEROR
STANDPIPEINSTALLATION
HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY,k, cm/s
80
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATUM: Geodetic
SPT HAMMER: 63 kg drop, 0.76 metres
53.31
DYNAMIC PENETRATIONRESISTANCE, BLOWS/0.3m
SHEAR STRENGTHCu, kPa
-4
Wp Wl40 60
DESCRIPTION
BLO
WS
/0.3
m
Ground Surface
LOGGED: B.V.
CHECKED:
SAMPLES
10 10 -310 10
BO
RE
HO
LE L
OG
619
77.8
5_G
INT
LO
GS
_GN
T_V
01_2
016-
05-1
1.G
PJ
HO
ULE
CH
EV
RIE
R 2
015.
GD
T 5
-25-
16
Report to: CH2M Hill Canada Limited Project: 61977.85 (May 25, 2016)
APPENDIX B
Laboratory Classification Tests on Soil Samples
Figures B1 to B3, inclusive
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.0010.010.1110100
15
14
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION FIGURE B1
Grain Size, mm
% P
assi
ng
% Gravel % Sand % Silt & ClayBoreholeLegend Depth (m)Sample
0.2 - 0.8
0.1 - 0.6
2
2
16-3
16-5
31
39
55
47
Date: May 2016
Project: 61977.85
SAND
Sieve Size, mm
4.759.5
13.2
19.0
26.5
37.5
50.075.0
.075.150
.180
.250.425.8502.0063.0
CO
BB
LES COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE
SILT AND CLAYGRAVEL
SO
ILS
GR
AIN
SIZ
E G
RA
PH
UN
IFIE
D %
(S
IEV
E)
619
77.8
5_G
INT
LO
GS
_GN
T_V
01_2
016-
05-
11.
GP
J H
OU
LE C
HE
VR
IER
FE
B 9
201
1.G
DT
5-
25-1
6
Gradation Envelope: OPSS 1010 - GRANULAR B TYPE I
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.0010.010.1110100
3
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION FIGURE B2
Grain Size, mm
% P
assi
ng
% Gravel % Sand % Silt & ClayBoreholeLegend Depth (m)Sample
2.3 - 2.9516-3 0 97
Date: May 2016
Project: 61977.85
SAND
Sieve Size, mm
4.759.5
13.2
19.0
26.5
37.5
50.075.0
.075.150
.180
.250.425.8502.0063.0
CO
BB
LES COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE
SILT AND CLAYGRAVEL
SO
ILS
GR
AIN
SIZ
E G
RA
PH
UN
IFIE
D %
(S
IEV
E)
619
77.8
5_G
INT
LO
GS
_GN
T_V
01_2
016-
05-
11.
GP
J H
OU
LE C
HE
VR
IER
FE
B 9
201
1.G
DT
5-
25-1
6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 20 40 60 80 100
"A" LINE
FIGURE B3PLASTICITY CHART
LOW HIGH
"U" LINE
Liquid Limit, %
Pla
stic
ity In
dex,
PI
Legend Borehole Sample Depth (m) LL % PL % PI %
16-6 5 2.3 - 2.9 54.2 25.0 29.2
Project Name: Laurier Street Sewer Replacement
Date: May 2016
Project: 61977.85
HC
E A
TT
ER
BE
RG
LIM
ITS
619
77.8
5_G
INT
LO
GS
_GN
T_V
01_2
016-
05-1
1.G
PJ
HO
ULE
CH
EV
RIE
R F
EB
9 2
011.
GD
T 5
-25-
16
MH or OH
ML or OLCL - ML
CL or OL
CH or OH
7
4
16
Group Symbol
CL = Lean ClayML = SiltCH = Fat ClayMH = Elastic SiltCL - ML = Silty ClayOL (Above "A" Line) = Organic ClayOL (Below "A" Line) = Organic SiltOH (Above "A" Line) = Organic ClayOH (Below "A" Line) = Organic Silt
Report to: CH2M Hill Canada Limited Project: 61977.85 (May 25, 2016)
APPENDIX C
Chemical Test Results on Soil Samples
Corrosion of Buried Concrete and Steel
Paracel Laboratories Order No. 1621040
www.paracellabs.com1-800-749-1947
Ottawa, ON, K1G 4J8300 - 2319 St. Laurent Blvd
Attn: Blasco VitayabaskaranKanata, ON K2K 24932 Steacie DriveHoule Chevrier
Certificate of Analysis
This Certificate of Analysis contains analytical data applicable to the following samples as submitted:
Paracel ID Client ID
Order #: 1621040
Order Date: 13-May-2016 Report Date: 19-May-2016
Client PO:
Custody: Project: 61977.85
1621040-01 16-1 SA61621040-02 16-6 SA6
Any use of these results implies your agreement that our total liabilty in connection with this work, however arising, shall be limited to the amount paid by you for this work, and that our employees or agents shall not under any circumstances be liable to you in connection with this work.
Lab Supervisor
Mark Foto, M.Sc.
Approved By:
Page 1 of 7
Order #: 1621040
Project Description: 61977.85
Certificate of AnalysisClient:
Report Date: 19-May-2016
Order Date: 13-May-2016
Client PO:
Houle Chevrier
Analysis Summary Table
Analysis Method Reference/Description Extraction Date Analysis Date
EPA 300.1 - IC, water extraction 18-May-16 18-May-16AnionsEPA 150.1 - pH probe @ 25 °C, CaCl buffered ext. 17-May-16 17-May-16pH, soilEPA 120.1 - probe, water extraction 18-May-16 19-May-16ResistivityGravimetric, calculation 18-May-16 18-May-16Solids, %
Page 2 of 7
Order #: 1621040
Project Description: 61977.85
Certificate of AnalysisClient:
Report Date: 19-May-2016
Order Date: 13-May-2016
Client PO:
Houle Chevrier
Client ID: 16-1 SA6 16-6 SA6 - -Sample Date: --09-May-1609-May-16
1621040-01 1621040-02 - -Sample ID:MDL/Units Soil Soil - -
Physical Characteristics
% Solids --67.496.90.1 % by Wt.
General Inorganics
pH --7.277.660.05 pH Units
Resistivity --5.611150.10 Ohm.m
Anions
Chloride --970405 ug/g dry
Sulphate --375125 ug/g dry
Page 3 of 7
Order #: 1621040
Project Description: 61977.85
Certificate of AnalysisClient:
Report Date: 19-May-2016
Order Date: 13-May-2016
Client PO:
Houle Chevrier
Method Quality Control: Blank
Analyte ResultReporting
Limit UnitsSourceResult %REC
%RECLimit RPD
RPDLimit Notes
General InorganicsResistivity ND 0.10 Ohm.m
Page 4 of 7
Order #: 1621040
Project Description: 61977.85
Certificate of AnalysisClient:
Report Date: 19-May-2016
Order Date: 13-May-2016
Client PO:
Houle Chevrier
Method Quality Control: Duplicate
Analyte ResultReporting
Limit UnitsSourceResult %REC
%RECLimit RPD
RPDLimit Notes
AnionsChloride 75.2 5 ug/g dry 76.8 202.1Sulphate 1250 5 ug/g dry 1180 205.7
General InorganicspH 7.89 0.05 pH Units 7.91 100.3Resistivity 63.1 0.10 Ohm.m 62.5 201.0
Physical Characteristics% Solids 86.6 0.1 % by Wt. 87.0 250.5
Page 5 of 7
Order #: 1621040
Project Description: 61977.85
Certificate of AnalysisClient:
Report Date: 19-May-2016
Order Date: 13-May-2016
Client PO:
Houle Chevrier
Method Quality Control: Spike
Analyte ResultReporting
Limit Units SourceResult
%REC %RECLimit
RPDRPDLimit Notes
AnionsChloride 185 76.8 108 78-1135 ug/g Sulphate 105 ND 105 78-1115 ug/g
Page 6 of 7
Order #: 1621040
Project Description: 61977.85
Certificate of AnalysisClient:
Report Date: 19-May-2016
Order Date: 13-May-2016
Client PO:
Houle Chevrier
Qualifier Notes :None
Sample Data RevisionsNone
Work Order Revisions / Comments :
None
Other Report Notes :
MDL: Method Detection Limit
n/a: not applicable
Source Result: Data used as source for matrix and duplicate samples%REC: Percent recovery.RPD: Relative percent difference.
ND: Not Detected
Soil results are reported on a dry weight basis when the units are denoted with 'dry'.Where %Solids is reported, moisture loss includes the loss of volatile hydrocarbons.
Page 7 of 7
experience • knowledge • reliability
geotechnical
environmental
hydrogeology
materials testing & inspection