Preliminary Geotechnical Report · Preliminary recommendations are also provided with regards to...

Tetra Tech Canada Inc. Suite 1000 – 10th Floor, 885 Dunsmuir Street

Vancouver, BC V6C 1N5 CANADA Tel 604.685.0275 Fax 604.684.6241

PRESENTED TO

BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure

Highway 97 & Swanson Lumber Road Signalization Project Preliminary Geotechnical Report

DECEMBER 8, 2017 ISSUED FOR REVIEW FILE: ENG.VGEO03315-01

This “Issued for Review” document is provided solely for the purpose of client review and presents our interim findings and recommendations to date. Our usable findings and recommendations are provided only through an “Issued for Use” document, which will be issued subsequent to this review. Final design should not be undertaken based on the interim recommendations made herein. Once our report is issued for use, the “Issued for Review” document should be either returned to Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech) or destroyed.

Hwy 97 Swanson Geotechnical Report_IFR_Dec 8 2017

This page intentionally left blank.

PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FILE: ENG.VGEO03315-01 | DECEMBER 8, 2017 | ISSUED FOR REVIEW

i Hwy 97 Swanson Geotechnical Report_IFR_Dec 8 2017

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................... 1

3.0 INFORMATION REVIEWED ........................................................................................................ 1

4.0 SITE DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................... 2 4.1 General .................................................................................................................................................. 2 4.2 Surficial Geology .................................................................................................................................... 2

5.0 GEOTECHNICAL SITE EXPLORATION...................................................................................... 2 5.1 General .................................................................................................................................................. 2 5.2 Logging and Sampling ........................................................................................................................... 3 5.3 Laboratory Testing ................................................................................................................................. 3

6.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ..................................................................................................... 3 6.1 Interpreted Soil Stratigraphy .................................................................................................................. 3 6.2 Groundwater .......................................................................................................................................... 4

7.0 PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................ 4 7.1 Pavement ............................................................................................................................................... 4

7.1.1 Traffic Loading .......................................................................................................................... 4 7.1.2 Subgrade Strength .................................................................................................................... 6 7.1.3 Additional Input Parameters ..................................................................................................... 6 7.1.4 Pavement Thickness Options ................................................................................................... 7 7.1.5 Drainage Considerations .......................................................................................................... 7 7.1.6 Existing Pavement Surface and Tie-In Considerations ............................................................ 8 7.1.7 Pavement Mix Considerations .................................................................................................. 8 7.1.8 Recommended Pavement Thickness ....................................................................................... 8

7.2 Site Preparation ..................................................................................................................................... 9 7.3 Embankment Slopes and Ditches ......................................................................................................... 9 7.4 Utility Impacts......................................................................................................................................... 9 7.5 Material Reuse ..................................................................................................................................... 10

7.5.1 Granular Fills .......................................................................................................................... 10 7.5.2 Silty Clay ................................................................................................................................. 10

8.0 CLOSURE .................................................................................................................................. 11

REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 12


ii Hwy 97 Swanson Geotechnical Report_IFR_Dec 8 2017

LIST OF TABLES IN TEXT

Table 1: Geotechnical Site Exploration – Highway 97 / Swanson Lumber Road .................................... 2 Table 2: Truck Factor ............................................................................................................................. 5 Table 3: 20-Year Design ESALs ............................................................................................................ 5 Table 4: AASHTO Pavement Design Inputs ........................................................................................... 6 Table 5: Pavement Layer Coefficients ................................................................................................... 6 Table 6: Pavement Layer Thicknesses (mm) ......................................................................................... 7 APPENDIX SECTIONS

FIGURES

Figure 1 Testhole Location Plan

APPENDICES

Appendix A Appendix B

Tetra Tech’s Limitations on the Use of this Document Testhole Logs


iii Hwy 97 Swanson Geotechnical Report_IFR_Dec 8 2017

LIMITATIONS OF REPORT This report and its contents are intended for the sole use of BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure and their agents. Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech) does not accept any responsibility for the accuracy of any of the data, the analysis, or the recommendations contained or referenced in the report when the report is used or relied upon by any Party other than BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, or for any Project other than the proposed development at the subject site. Any such unauthorized use of this report is at the sole risk of the user. Use of this document is subject to the Limitations on the Use of this Document attached in the Appendix or Contractual Terms and Conditions executed by both parties.


1 Hwy 97 Swanson Geotechnical Report_IFR_Dec 8 2017

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech) was retained by the BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (BCMoTI) under Contract No. 860CS1021 to provide geotechnical and pavements engineering services for the Highway 97 & Swanson Lumber Road Signalization Project located to the east of the city limit of Fort St. John, BC. Civil design of the project is being completed by Urban Systems Ltd. (Urban Systems) under separate contract to the BCMoTI.

This report presents the results of the geotechnical exploration completed at the site and summarizes the soil and groundwater conditions encountered. Preliminary recommendations are also provided with regards to pavement structure, site preparation, embankment slopes and ditches, and the potential for material reuse. During detailed design, Tetra Tech should be provided the opportunity to review the drawings and specifications to confirm that the recommendations provided in our report have been appropriately understood and applied.

The Limitations on the Use of this Document, attached in Appendix A, forms an integral part of this report.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

This project involves the signalization of the Highway 97 / Swanson Lumber Road (259 Rd.) intersection as well as widening/four-laning of adjacent sections of Highway 97, over a total length of about 920 m. Based on the information provided by BCMoTI and the design team, it is understood that:

The purpose of the intersection upgrade is to ease turning and improve safety for highway users.

The majority of the proposed widening will take place along the northern side of the highway, abutting the existing asphalt pavement.

The average annual daily traffic (AADT) on Highway 97 at the intersection in 2014 was approximately 10,000 vehicles per day, of which about 20-25% were heavy vehicles.

3.0 INFORMATION REVIEWED

The following information sources were reviewed as part of a desktop study completed early in the project:

Information provided by BCMoTI and Urban Systems, including plans, drawings, testhole logs, traffic data, as well as a previous geotechnical report prepared by AMEC (2004) for widening of Highway 97.

Published water well logs from the BC Water Resources Atlas (http://maps.gov.bc.ca/ess/hm/wrbc).

Historical testhole logs and reports from previous Tetra Tech projects in the Fort St John area.

Relevant geological maps and papers published by the Geological Survey of Canada, BC Geological Survey and other information sources.

http://maps.gov.bc.ca/ess/hm/wrbc



4.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

4.1 General The project site is located at about 650 m above sea level and is contained within the Boreal White and Black Spruce biogeoclimatic ecosystem classification zone. The regional topography is relatively flat with slope gradients on the order of 1 to 2% sloping from north to south. Environment Canada weather records from the nearest station at the Fort St. John Airport (period 1980 to 2010) indicate that mean annual precipitation is 445 mm and annual snowfall accumulation is 190 cm. Average daily temperatures range from -13°C in the winter to +16°C in the summer.

4.2 Surficial Geology According to the Geological Survey of Canada map 1460A (Mathews 1978), the soil conditions at the site are anticipated to consist of glaciolacustrine deposits, described as “clay silt, minor sand and shoreline gravel; material generally more than 6 feet thick”, overlying glacial till-like deposits at depth.

5.0 GEOTECHNICAL SITE EXPLORATION

5.1 General The geotechnical site exploration was completed on October 12-13, 2017 and consisted of a total of twelve (12) solid-stem auger testholes completed using a truck mounted drill rig supplied by Peace Drilling & Research Ltd. of Fort St. John, BC. The testholes were drilled to a terminus depth of 3 m below ground surface and were generally located in the middle of the highway travel lanes at the locations indicated below. Six (6) hand-excavated testpits were also completed to a terminus depth of 1 m below ground surface along the existing highway ditch in areas of proposed widening.

A summary of the completed explorations is presented in Table 1. The testhole locations are shown on Figure 1.

Table 1: Geotechnical Site Exploration – Highway 97 / Swanson Lumber Road

Testhole / Testpit

Location (UTM Zone 10) 1 Terminus Depth (m) Method Location Comments 2

Northing Easting

TH17-01 6232543 638386 3 Solid-Stem Auger NB 259 Rd. TH17-02 6232512 638372 3 Solid-Stem Auger SB 256 Rd. @ Hwy 97 merge TH17-03 6232503 638318 3 Solid-Stem Auger WB Hwy 97 slow lane TH17-04 6232501 638229 3 Solid-Stem Auger WB Hwy 97 slow lane TH17-05 6232497 638129 3 Solid-Stem Auger WB Hwy 97 slow lane TH17-06 6232479 638096 3 Solid-Stem Auger EB Hwy 97 slow lane TH17-07 6232486 638377 3 Solid-Stem Auger EB Hwy 97 slow lane TH17-08 6232508 638483 3 Solid-Stem Auger WB Hwy 97 exit lane TH17-09 6232510 638417 3 Solid-Stem Auger WB Hwy 97 exit lane TH17-10 6232503 638749 3 Solid-Stem Auger EB Hwy 97 TH17-11 6232506 638672 3 Solid-Stem Auger WB Hwy 97



Table 1: Geotechnical Site Exploration – Highway 97 / Swanson Lumber Road

Testhole / Testpit

Location (UTM Zone 10) 1 Terminus Depth (m) Method Location Comments 2

Northing Easting

TH17-12 6232505 638579 3 Solid-Stem Auger WB Hwy 97 TP17-01 6232510 638350 1 Hand-Excavated Testpit Hwy 97 Ditch (north side) TP17-02 6232508 638293 1 Hand-Excavated Testpit Hwy 97 Ditch (north side) TP17-03 6232499 638103 1 Hand-Excavated Testpit Hwy 97 Ditch (north side) TP17-04 6232498 638771 1 Hand-Excavated Testpit Hwy 97 Ditch (south side) TP17-05 6232511 638626 1 Hand-Excavated Testpit Hwy 97 Ditch (north side) TP17-06 6232524 638402 1 Hand-Excavated Testpit Hwy 97 Ditch (north side)

1. Testhole locations were obtained from a hand-held GPS at the time of excavation and are approximate. 2. NB = northbound; SB = southbound; EB = eastbound; WB = westbound.

5.2 Logging and Sampling A Tetra Tech field engineer was on site during advancement of the testholes to log and sample the material encountered, as well as to direct the termination depths and backfilling. Disturbed (grab) soil samples were obtained from the auger flights at typical spacing of 0.5 to 1 m for geotechnical index laboratory testing. Dynamic Cone Penetration Tests (DCPTs) were also conducted in most of the testholes to evaluate the soil consistency. The DCPT tip is similar in size and shape to the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) split-spoon sampler and is driven with the same hammer energy (automatic trip hammer with a nominal mass of 63.5 kg and a drop height of 762 mm). Based on our previous experience, DCPT blow counts are considered approximately equivalent to SPN N-values.

Details are shown on the attached logs in Appendix B.

5.3 Laboratory Testing Soil samples recovered from the testholes and testpits were sent to Tetra Tech’s laboratory for geotechnical index classification testing. Geo-environmental / contaminated sites testing was not included in the project scope. The following tests were conducted on selected samples:

Water Content (ASTM D2216).

Atterberg Limits (ASTM D4318).

Grain Size Analysis of material finer than 75 μm (ASTM D1140).

The laboratory test results are presented on the attached logs in Appendix B.

6.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

6.1 Interpreted Soil Stratigraphy In general, the results of the site exploration were consistent with the soil conditions anticipated from the surficial geology mapping (Mathews 1978) and the findings of the previous geotechnical report prepared by AMEC (2004). A copy of the AMEC (2004) testhole logs are attached in Appendix B for reference. The interpreted soil stratigraphy was as follows:



Topsoil: The hand-excavated testpits (TP17-01 to TP17-06), located along the existing highway ditch, encountered varying mixtures of grass and topsoil to a depth of 100 mm below ground surface. Topsoil was not encountered in any of the solid-stem auger testholes (TH17-01 to TH17-12) drilled along the highway.

Asphalt Concrete: The solid-stem auger testholes encountered 90 mm to 370 mm of asphalt concrete, with most locations exceeding 130 mm in thickness. The minimum 90 mm thickness of asphalt concrete was located in the northbound lane of Swanson Lumber Road.

Granular Fill: Both the highway asphalt and topsoil materials in the ditch were underlain by granular fill composed of sand and gravel with trace to some silt. The fill ranged in thickness from 230 to 1150 mm, with most locations exceeding 480 mm in thickness. In some of the testholes, it was possible to differentiate the granular base from the underlying subbase material. The percentage of crushed gravel particles (based on visual estimate) in the fill ranges from 10% to 80%, with higher percentages in the granular base compared to the subbase. Laboratory testing of the fill indicated fines contents (material passing #200 sieve) ranging from 4% to 11%, with an average of 8%. Moisture contents in the fill ranged from 2% to 5%, with an average of 3%.

Silty Clay: The granular fill was underlain by glaciolacustrine deposits, typically consisting of grey, stiff to very stiff, medium to high plastic silty clay with trace gravel and trace to some sand. Atterberg Limits testing (total of 4 soil samples) indicated liquid limits in the range of 50% to 76% and plastic limits in the range of 22% to 25%. Natural moisture contents in the clay ranged from 18% to 35%, with an average of 27%.

6.2 Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered in any of the testholes at the time of drilling. However, during periods of wet weather and spring thaw, perched groundwater can be expected to accumulate on the surface of the silty clay.

7.0 PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 Pavement Pavement structure options have been developed based on the BCMoTI Pavement Structure Design Guidelines, Technical Circular T-01/15, and discussions with the Regional Paving Manager.

The Pavement Structure Design Guidelines are based on AASHTO flexible pavement design methodology, as outlined in the Guide for Design of Pavement Structures (1993). Key inputs to the design method are traffic loading and subgrade strength.

7.1.1 Traffic Loading The works to be constructed includes through lanes on Highway 97, turning lanes to/from Swanson Lumber Road, and shoulders.

The available traffic loading information provided by the BCMoTI included:

For Highway 97:

− The average annual daily traffic (AADT) at the intersection in 2014 was approximately 10,000 vehicles per day, of which about 20-25% were heavy vehicles.

− A compound annual growth rate of 1.5% is anticipated for a 20-year design horizon.



A turning movement count dated March 1, 2004 at the intersection of Swanson Lumber Road and Highway 97, Count ID 100271. This count indicated:

− AADT of 721 on Swanson Lumber Road.

− On Swanson Lumber Road, 37% of vehicles were light or heavy trucks.

− On Swanson Lumber Road, 5% of trucks were light and 95% are heavy.

− On Highway 97, 12% of trucks were light and 88% were heavy.

BCMoTI Uniform Traffic Volume Segment No. 556 which indicated a historical 10-year compound annual growth rate of 4.5%.

The weighted average number of ESALs per vehicle, truck factor, was determined for each roadway as shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Truck Factor Roadway Element

Truck Factors Truck Distribution Blended Truck Factor Light Trucks 1 Heavy Trucks 2,3 % Light % Heavy

Highway 97 0.881 2.073 12% 88% 1.930 Swanson Lumber

Road 0.881 6.720 5% 95% 6.428

Truck factors have been estimated as: 1. 0.881 for single unit (light) trucks. 2. 2.073 for tractor trailer combination trucks (heavy trucks). 3. 6.720 for heavy trucks on Swanson Lumber Road based on an 8-axle B-train at legal axle loading with a maximum gross combination

vehicle weight of 63,500 kg. The total 20-year design loading was calculated for each roadway element as shown in Table 3.

Table 3: 20-Year Design ESALs

Roadway Element

Historic Traffic Year

Historic AADT

2018 AADT1

Percent Commercial

Daily Trucks

Truck Factor

2018 Daily ESALs per

Design Lane2

20-Year ESALs

(million)3 Highway

97 2014 10,000 10,614 23% 2388 1.930 2356 19.9

Swanson Lumber Road

2004 721 1,335 37% 494 6.430 1590 13.4

1. 2018 AADT calculated based on 1.5% growth from 2014 for Highway 97, 4.5% growth from 2004 for Swanson Lumber Road. This results in 85% more traffic on Swanson Lumber Road than in 2004. This growth is considered realistic since the oriented strand board plant opened after 2004.

2. Based on a direction factor of 50% and 100% lane distribution factor. 3. A compound annual growth rate of 1.5% was used from 2018 to 2037 for all roadway elements. From Table 3, it can be seen that the design ESALs range from 13.4 million to 19.9 million. Both roadways are therefore classified as Medium Volume for the purpose of pavement design.



7.1.2 Subgrade Strength The testhole logs were reviewed to estimate the Subgrade Resilient Modulus (MR) for input into the pavement structure designs. It is expected that the subgrade will generally consist of firm to stiff, medium to high plastic silty clay. The Plasticity Index was 50 or greater for two of three samples tested. Based on these properties, the silty clay may undergo large volume change with only a small change in moisture content and may pose a swelling problem. The risk of swelling can be mitigated through proper drainage. The absence of groundwater in the testpits suggests that the existing highway alignment has sufficient drainage to minimize the potential for swelling. It is understood that BCMoTI practice in the area is to mitigate swelling and improve drainage by using pavement structures with a minimum total thickness of 1.0 m.

Based on review of the testhole logs, and our understanding of the soil conditions, a design MR of 30 MPa was considered representative of the overall soil conditions and was used for the pavement structure designs.

7.1.3 Additional Input Parameters In addition to traffic and subgrade, the design parameters required by the AASHTO method are summarized in Table 4. These inputs are consistent with BCMoTI’s Pavement Structure Design Guidelines (T-01/15).

Table 4: AASHTO Pavement Design Inputs Criteria Value Rationale

Reliability 85% Based on engineering judgment, the roadway classification, and BCMoTI standard criteria.

Serviceability

In accordance with generally accepted pavement engineering principles and AASHTO practice.

Initial Serviceability Index (Pi) 4.2

Terminal Serviceability Index (Pt) 2.5

Serviceability Loss (∆PSI) 1.7

Overall Standard Deviation (So) 0.45

The AASHTO method indicates that Structural Number (SN) values of 159 mm and 151 mm are required for the combined strength of the new pavement structures on Highway 97 and Swanson Lumber Road, respectively.

The layer coefficients used for the pavement structure layers are presented in Table 5. Based on our discussions with BCMoTI, Intermediate Graded Base (IGB) has been considered for use as crushed base course due to its improved drainage characteristics versus a Well Graded Crushed Granular Base course.

Table 5: Pavement Layer Coefficients

Pavement Layer Structural Layer Coefficient

Drainage Coefficient Rationale

New ACP 0.40 - In accordance with generally accepted pavement

engineering principles and AASHTO practice. (BCMoTI Technical Circular T-01/15)

New Crushed Granular Base Course – Intermediate

Graded Base (IGB) 0.14 1.051

Granular Subbase 0.10 0.95 1. IGB has permeability between well graded and open graded aggregate. Therefore, the average drainage coefficient of well graded and

open graded base course has been used.



7.1.4 Pavement Thickness Options Pavement structure options have been developed based on the traffic loading, subgrade strength, and input parameters noted in previous subsections. The pavement structure thicknesses are shown in Table 6.

Consistent with Technical Circular T-01/15, total asphalt concrete pavement thicknesses minimums of 150 mm and 140 mm are applicable to Highway 97 and Swanson Lumber Road, respectively. Options for each roadway were developed considering the minimum ACP thickness, the structural number requirement, and a minimum 1 m total pavement structure thickness.

Table 6: Pavement Layer Thicknesses (mm)

Pavement Layer

Highway 97 Option A Highway 97 Option B Swanson Lumber

Road Option A

Swanson Lumber

Road Option B

Travelled Lanes Shoulder1 Travelled

Lanes Shoulder1

Total ACP 150 100 160 100 140 140

Crushed Granular Base - 25 mm Intermediate

Graded Base 300 350 300 360 300 300

Granular Subbase (SGSB)

600 600 540 540 600 560

Non-Woven Geotextile2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Total Thickness 1050 1050 1000 1000 1040 1000 1. For Highway 97 Option A and B, the travelled lane structure may also be used on shoulders. If the reduced thickness is used, the travelled

lane thickness should extend 0.6 m into the shoulder. 2. A medium weight non-woven geotextile as indicated on the preliminary design drawings (November 9, 2017) is warranted to separate the

fine grained subgrade and SGSB. The preliminary design submission also indicates biaxial geogrid (in excavation only). The biaxial geogrid could be considered as a provisional item to be used as a construction aid should soft soils be encountered or develop due to precipitation events during construction.

7.1.5 Drainage Considerations The thickness of the pavement structure of the widening will need to allow for continuity of lateral drainage of the existing structure by ensuring that the widened subgrade elevation is at or below the existing subgrade elevation and that new pavement base and subbase are daylighted to the sideslope. In 10 of 12 testholes, the total existing pavement structure thickness is generally thinner than the options presented. However, 2 of 12 testholes (TH17-02 and TH17-09) indicated thicker existing pavement structure than proposed. Where the existing total pavement structure is thicker than proposed, the SGSB layer thickness should be increased to provide for lateral drainage to the new ditch. Provision should be made for determination of the existing subgrade elevation during construction and for adding to the SGSB layer thickness if required.

The long term pavement performance would be adversely affected by the presence of groundwater or surface runoff water within 1 m below the SGSB/subgrade interface. While groundwater was not encountered in any of the testholes at the time of drilling, water from rainfall or snowmelt can be expected to accumulate on the relatively impermeable silty clay soil. The drainage system should be designed to remove surface runoff and to limit potential moisture ingress into the pavement structure.



7.1.6 Existing Pavement Surface and Tie-In Considerations It is understood that the intent of the design team is to leave the existing pavement as-is, therefore, rehabilitation of the existing pavement surface has not been evaluated in detail. However, it is noted that there are locations where the options developed result in thicker asphalt concrete pavement than the existing surface. This situation was noted in TH17-01 (90 mm) on Swanson Lumber Road, as well as TH17-06 (130 mm) and TH17-08 (140 mm) on Highway 97. Areas with locally thinner pavement, particularly the asphalt concrete layer, that are not rehabilitated in conjunction with the widening may be subject to premature deterioration. Consideration should be given to the evaluation of rehabilitation options to provide increased strength if required.

The preliminary design drawings (dated November 9, 2017) includes a tie-in detail. The detail shows notching all lifts of the widening into the existing pavement structure and milling the existing asphalt concrete pavement to a width of 0.5 m and depth of 38 mm. Consideration should be given to specifying the 0.5 m milling width as a minimum, with the width increased where necessary so that the joint aligns with shoulder-line, lane edge, or between wheel paths.

7.1.7 Pavement Mix Considerations The introduction of signalization at the intersection would reduce the average speed of traffic on Highway 97. In combination with the design ESALs, this reduced traffic speed would increase the potential for rutting.

It is understood that the BCMoTI typically uses a 150/200A penetration grade binder in the Northern Region (Performance Grade, PG 58-28). Thermal cracking of the widening similar to the existing roadway should be expected with this binder. The 150/200A binder, based on the LTPP high temperature model, provides one grade bump with greater than 99% reliability for rutting. In accordance with the AASHTO MP-2 grade bumping protocol, one grade bump is appropriate for slow moving traffic and the design ESALs.

A BCMoTI Class 1 Medium Mix (16 mm) with 150/200A binder and the following supplemental requirements is recommended:

Coarse aggregate (retained on the 4.75 mm sieve) fracture count greater than 90% (with two fractured faces), and greater than 98% with one fractured face,

VFA (Voids Filled with Asphalt) 65-75%.

Minimum 75% manufactured fines (passing the 4.75 mm sieve).

Minimum 10 kN Marshall stability.

The intent of these modifications is to improve rut resistance by increasing stability and limiting the amount of rounded coarse aggregate and the amount of natural sand in the asphalt mix. The mix could be placed in two lifts where the design ACP thickness is 100 mm, and three lifts where the design ACP thickness is 140 mm to 160 mm.

7.1.8 Recommended Pavement Thickness The recommended pavement structure thicknesses for each roadway are Option A. In each case, Option A provides higher total pavement thickness which reduces the extent to which the SGSB thickness may need to be increased to provide lateral drainage. In summary, the recommended option for each roadway is:

Highway 97 (1050 mm total thickness):

− 150 mm of ACP.



− 300 mm of 25 mm IGB.

− 600 mm of SGSB.

Swanson Lumber Road (1040 mm total thickness):

− 140 mm of ACP.

− 300 mm of 25 mm IGB.

− 600 mm of SGSB.

The options, considerations, and recommendations are considered valid until 2022 based on the preliminary plans provided. In the event of significant changes to roadway geometry or deferral of the project, the options, considerations, and recommendations should be reviewed for validity and updated as necessary.

7.2 Site Preparation Organics, topsoil and other deleterious materials should be stripped within the footprint of the proposed highway embankment. Based on the testhole results, and our observations of the site, the anticipated stripping depth ranges from 100 mm in areas of existing fills to 300 mm in the native silty clay. Additional adjustments to the stripping depths may be required during construction to account for any poor soil conditions encountered.

The prepared subgrade should be proof-rolled prior to fill placement. Any soft areas observed during proof rolling should be sub-excavated and replaced with suitable fill material prior to placement and compaction of the embankment. Based on discussions with BCMoTI staff, and typical highway construction practice in the Fort St. John area, areas of soft subgrade should be further reinforced with at least one layer of biaxial geogrid within the embankment fill in order to limit the potential for differential subgrade movement and pavement distress.

7.3 Embankment Slopes and Ditches According to the preliminary design drawings (dated November 9, 2017), the areas of proposed widening involve embankment fills up to 2 m high (including the pavement structure) inclined at 4H:1V or flatter. Provided that site preparation is undertaken as recommended above, post-construction settlements of the widened areas are expected to be negligible due to the stiff and overconsolidated nature of the native silty clay subgrade.

Ditch back-slopes inclined at 3H:1V, as shown on the preliminary design drawings, are considered suitable based on the soil conditions encountered in the testholes. However, locally steeper back-slopes inclined at 2H:1V or flatter could be considered if there are areas where 3H:1V back-slopes would result in utility conflicts or encroachment into environmentally or archaeologically sensitive terrain.

7.4 Utility Impacts Plan drawings of impacted utilities are included in the preliminary design drawings. It is understood that the details of these impacts, including potential utility relocation requirements, have yet to be confirmed. While the conditions encountered in the testholes are generally favourable as it concerns the excavation of utility trenches, there is a risk that the highway could experience post-construction cracking and/or settlement proximate to these trenches due to differential frost heave effects between the native silty clay and the trench backfill. As such, consideration should be given to staggering/offsetting the asphalt cut line by a minimum distance of 150 mm from the edge of the trench to limit the potential for pavement distress.



7.5 Material Reuse

7.5.1 Granular Fills Based on the site exploration findings, and our observations of the site, the existing granular fills should be suitable for reuse, provided that care is taken during construction to avoid mixing/blending of the fill with the native silty clay subgrade or other deleterious materials. As shown on the preliminary design drawings, widened areas should be keyed/benched into the existing shoulder fills in order to reduce potential differential settlements at the transition.

7.5.2 Silty Clay We anticipate that native silty clay will encountered in a portion of the excavations required to construct the widened embankments and ditches. As optimum moisture contents for compaction of this material are estimated to be on the order of 20% to 25% based on the Atterberg Limits laboratory test results, we concur with the findings of the AMEC (2004) report that some amount of moisture conditioning (i.e. scarification and drying) will likely be required to facilitate compaction of this material in the base of the new embankment. Care will also be required during construction to prevent moisture-induced softening of this material in the exposed subgrade prior to fill placement.



8.0 CLOSURE

We trust this report meets your present requirements. If you have any questions or comments, please contact the undersigned.

Respectfully submitted, Tetra Tech Canada Inc. ISSUED FOR REVIEW ISSUED FOR REVIEW Prepared by: Prepared by: Jason Pellett, P.Eng./P.Geo. Alan Reggin, P.Eng. Senior Geotechnical Engineer Pavement / Asset Management Engineer Direct Line: 778.945.5841 Direct Line: 778.945.5729 [email protected] [email protected] ISSUED FOR REVIEW Reviewed by: Don Gillespie, P.Eng. . Senior Geotechnical Engineer Direct Line: 250.818.4017 [email protected] /JP/AR/DG/cy



REFERENCES AMEC Earth & Environmental Ltd. 2004. Geotechnical Investigation, Highway 97 Widening to 4 Lanes, 86th Street

to Swanson Lumber Road, Ft St John, BC. Geotechnical report to Urban Systems Ltd. dated 04/15/2004.

Mathews, W.H. 1978. Surficial Geology, Charlie Lake (094A), British Columbia. Geological Survey of Canada Map 1460A, Scale 1:250,000.



FIGURES

Figure 1 Testhole Location Plan

TH17-01

TH17-02TH17-03TH17-04

TH17-05

TH17-06TH17-07

TH17-08TH17-09TH17-10TH17-11TH17-12

TP17-01TP17-02

TP17-03 TP17-04

TP17-05

TP17-06

CLIENT

PROJECT NO. DWN CKD REV

OFFICE DATEFigure 1

Q:\V

anco

uver

\Dra

fting\E

ngine

ering

\VGE

O\EN

G.VG

EO03

315-

01\E

NG.V

GEO0

3315

Site

Plan

R0a

.dwg [

FIGU

RE 1]

Nov

embe

r 24,

2017

- 3:5

1:20 p

m (B

Y: H

ALL,

ROBE

RT J)

ENG.VGEO03315-01 RH JP 0

VANC November 24, 2017

HIGHWAY 97 / SWANSON LUMBER ROAD SIGNALIZATIONFORT ST JOHN, BC

NOTES1. Imagery from Google Earth Pro.

TESTHOLE LOCATION PLAN

ISSUED FOR REVIEWLEGEND

Solid-Stem Auger Testhole (2017)Hand Excavated Testpit (2017)

SCALE 1:2000

20 0 20 40 80m

Image @ 2017 DigitalGlobe©2017

97

259 RD

FORT ST JOHN

TAYLOR



APPENDIX A

TETRA TECH’S LIMITATIONS ON THE USE OF THIS DOCUMENT

LIMITATIONS ON USE OF THIS DOCUMENT

1

GEOTECHNICAL 1.1 USE OF DOCUMENT AND OWNERSHIP

This document pertains to a specific site, a specific development, and a specific scope of work. The document may include plans, drawings, profiles and other supporting documents that collectively constitute the document (the “Professional Document”). The Professional Document is intended for the sole use of TETRA TECH’s Client (the “Client”) as specifically identified in the TETRA TECH Services Agreement or other Contractual Agreement entered into with the Client (either of which is termed the “Contract” herein). TETRA TECH does not accept any responsibility for the accuracy of any of the data, analyses, recommendations or other contents of the Professional Document when it is used or relied upon by any party other than the Client, unless authorized in writing by TETRA TECH. Any unauthorized use of the Professional Document is at the sole risk of the user. TETRA TECH accepts no responsibility whatsoever for any loss or damage where such loss or damage is alleged to be or, is in fact, caused by the unauthorized use of the Professional Document. Where TETRA TECH has expressly authorized the use of the Professional Document by a third party (an “Authorized Party”), consideration for such authorization is the Authorized Party’s acceptance of these Limitations on Use of this Document as well as any limitations on liability contained in the Contract with the Client (all of which is collectively termed the “Limitations on Liability”). The Authorized Party should carefully review both these Limitations on Use of this Document and the Contract prior to making any use of the Professional Document. Any use made of the Professional Document by an Authorized Party constitutes the Authorized Party’s express acceptance of, and agreement to, the Limitations on Liability. The Professional Document and any other form or type of data or documents generated by TETRA TECH during the performance of the work are TETRA TECH’s professional work product and shall remain the copyright property of TETRA TECH. The Professional Document is subject to copyright and shall not be reproduced either wholly or in part without the prior, written permission of TETRA TECH. Additional copies of the Document, if required, may be obtained upon request. 1.2 ALTERNATIVE DOCUMENT FORMAT

Where TETRA TECH submits electronic file and/or hard copy versions of the Professional Document or any drawings or other project-related documents and deliverables (collectively termed TETRA TECH’s “Instruments of Professional Service”), only the signed and/or sealed versions shall be considered final. The original signed and/or sealed electronic file and/or hard copy version archived by TETRA TECH shall be deemed to be the original. TETRA TECH will archive a protected digital copy of the original signed and/or sealed version for a period of 10 years. Both electronic file and/or hard copy versions of TETRA TECH’s Instruments of Professional Service shall not, under any circumstances, be altered by any party except TETRA TECH. TETRA TECH’s Instruments of Professional Service will be used only and exactly as submitted by TETRA TECH. Electronic files submitted by TETRA TECH have been prepared and submitted using specific software and hardware systems. TETRA TECH makes no representation about the compatibility of these files with the Client’s current or future software and hardware systems.

1.3 STANDARD OF CARE

Services performed by TETRA TECH for the Professional Document have been conducted in accordance with the Contract, in a manner consistent with the level of skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in the jurisdiction in which the services are provided. Professional judgment has been applied in developing the conclusions and/or recommendations provided in this Professional Document. No warranty or guarantee, express or implied, is made concerning the test results, comments, recommendations, or any other portion of the Professional Document. If any error or omission is detected by the Client or an Authorized Party, the error or omission must be immediately brought to the attention of TETRA TECH. 1.4 DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION BY CLIENT

The Client acknowledges that it has fully cooperated with TETRA TECH with respect to the provision of all available information on the past, present, and proposed conditions on the site, including historical information respecting the use of the site. The Client further acknowledges that in order for TETRA TECH to properly provide the services contracted for in the Contract, TETRA TECH has relied upon the Client with respect to both the full disclosure and accuracy of any such information. 1.5 INFORMATION PROVIDED TO TETRA TECH BY OTHERS

During the performance of the work and the preparation of this Professional Document, TETRA TECH may have relied on information provided by persons other than the Client. While TETRA TECH endeavours to verify the accuracy of such information, TETRA TECH accepts no responsibility for the accuracy or the reliability of such information even where inaccurate or unreliable information impacts any recommendations, design or other deliverables and causes the Client or an Authorized Party loss or damage. 1.6 GENERAL LIMITATIONS OF DOCUMENT

This Professional Document is based solely on the conditions presented and the data available to TETRA TECH at the time the data were collected in the field or gathered from available databases. The Client, and any Authorized Party, acknowledges that the Professional Document is based on limited data and that the conclusions, opinions, and recommendations contained in the Professional Document are the result of the application of professional judgment to such limited data. The Professional Document is not applicable to any other sites, nor should it be relied upon for types of development other than those to which it refers. Any variation from the site conditions present, or variation in assumed conditions which might form the basis of design or recommendations as outlined in this report, at or on the development proposed as of the date of the Professional Document requires a supplementary investigation and assessment. TETRA TECH is neither qualified to, nor is it making, any recommendations with respect to the purchase, sale, investment or development of the property, the decisions on which are the sole responsibility of the Client.

LIMITATIONS ON USE OF THIS DOCUMENT GEOTECHNICAL

2

1.7 ENVIRONMENTAL AND REGULATORY ISSUES

Unless stipulated in the report, TETRA TECH has not been retained to investigate, address or consider and has not investigated, addressed or considered any environmental or regulatory issues associated with development on the subject site. 1.8 NATURE AND EXACTNESS OF SOIL AND

ROCK DESCRIPTIONS

Classification and identification of soils and rocks are based upon commonly accepted systems and methods employed in professional geotechnical practice. This report contains descriptions of the systems and methods used. Where deviations from the system or method prevail, they are specifically mentioned. Classification and identification of geological units are judgmental in nature as to both type and condition. TETRA TECH does not warrant conditions represented herein as exact, but infers accuracy only to the extent that is common in practice. Where subsurface conditions encountered during development are different from those described in this report, qualified geotechnical personnel should revisit the site and review recommendations in light of the actual conditions encountered. 1.9 LOGS OF TESTHOLES

The testhole logs are a compilation of conditions and classification of soils and rocks as obtained from field observations and laboratory testing of selected samples. Soil and rock zones have been interpreted. Change from one geological zone to the other, indicated on the logs as a distinct line, can be, in fact, transitional. The extent of transition is interpretive. Any circumstance which requires precise definition of soil or rock zone transition elevations may require further investigation and review. 1.10 STRATIGRAPHIC AND GEOLOGICAL INFORMATION

The stratigraphic and geological information indicated on drawings contained in this report are inferred from logs of test holes and/or soil/rock exposures. Stratigraphy is known only at the locations of the test hole or exposure. Actual geology and stratigraphy between test holes and/or exposures may vary from that shown on these drawings. Natural variations in geological conditions are inherent and are a function of the historic environment. TETRA TECH does not represent the conditions illustrated as exact but recognizes that variations will exist. Where knowledge of more precise locations of geological units is necessary, additional investigation and review may be necessary. 1.11 PROTECTION OF EXPOSED GROUND

Excavation and construction operations expose geological materials to climatic elements (freeze/thaw, wet/dry) and/or mechanical disturbance which can cause severe deterioration. Unless otherwise specifically indicated in this report, the walls and floors of excavations must be protected from the elements, particularly moisture, desiccation, frost action and construction traffic. 1.12 SUPPORT OF ADJACENT GROUND AND STRUCTURES

Unless otherwise specifically advised, support of ground and structures adjacent to the anticipated construction and preservation of adjacent ground and structures from the adverse impact of construction activity is required. 1.13 INFLUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY

There is a direct correlation between construction activity and structural performance of adjacent buildings and other installations. The influence of all anticipated construction activities should be considered by the contractor, owner, architect and prime engineer in consultation with a geotechnical engineer when the final design and construction techniques are known.

1.14 OBSERVATIONS DURING CONSTRUCTION

Because of the nature of geological deposits, the judgmental nature of geotechnical engineering, as well as the potential of adverse circumstances arising from construction activity, observations during site preparation, excavation and construction should be carried out by a geotechnical engineer. These observations may then serve as the basis for confirmation and/or alteration of geotechnical recommendations or design guidelines presented herein. 1.15 DRAINAGE SYSTEMS

Where temporary or permanent drainage systems are installed within or around a structure, the systems which will be installed must protect the structure from loss of ground due to internal erosion and must be designed so as to assure continued performance of the drains. Specific design detail of such systems should be developed or reviewed by the geotechnical engineer. Unless otherwise specified, it is a condition of this report that effective temporary and permanent drainage systems are required and that they must be considered in relation to project purpose and function. 1.16 BEARING CAPACITY

Design bearing capacities, loads and allowable stresses quoted in this report relate to a specific soil or rock type and condition. Construction activity and environmental circumstances can materially change the condition of soil or rock. The elevation at which a soil or rock type occurs is variable. It is a requirement of this report that structural elements be founded in and/or upon geological materials of the type and in the condition assumed. Sufficient observations should be made by qualified geotechnical personnel during construction to assure that the soil and/or rock conditions assumed in this report in fact exist at the site. 1.17 SAMPLES

TETRA TECH will retain all soil and rock samples for 30 days after this report is issued. Further storage or transfer of samples can be made at the Client’s expense upon written request, otherwise samples will be discarded.



APPENDIX B

TESTHOLE LOGS − Tetra Tech (2017)

− AMEC (2004)

0.09m

0.6m

0.9m

3.0m

1

2

3

4

ASPHALT (90 mm)GP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL),estimated 70% crushed gravel particles,some silt, brown, dry, very dense

GP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL),estimated 10% crushed gravel particles,trace silt, brown, dry, dense

CH - CLAY, high plastic, some silt, tracegravel, grey, homogeneous, w ~ PL, firm tostiff

- very stiff to hard below 1.8 m

End of testhole at 3.0 m depth (targetdepth reached).- Testhole coordinates and collar elevationare appoximate (obtained using ahandheld GPS unit).- Gradation and moisture content of coarsegrained soils may not be representative ofin situ conditions due to drillingdisturbance.- Dynamic Cone Penetration Testing(DCPT) was carried out using anautomatic hammer with a nominal mass of63.5 kg (140 lbs) and a drop height of 762mm (30").- Estimates of soilcompactness/consistency weredetermined as follows: - Coarse grained soils: based onmeasured DCPT blow counts - Fine grained soils: based on measuredDCPT blow counts, visual classification ofrecovered samples, and drill rigperformance.

Sieve (Sa#1)G:% S:% F:9%


Atterberg (Sa#3):PL:22% LL:63%

L#-Lab SampleW-Wash(mud return)

Elevation: 653.0 m

652

651

650

649

Tetra Tech Canada Inc.Prepared by:

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube

C-CoreA-Auger G-Grab V-Vane

1

2

3

4

Driller: Jesse Rushton

Drill Make/Model: Truck-Mounted

CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION

Location: Fort St John, BC

Date(s) Drilled: 10/12/2017

Drilling Method: Solid Stem AugerCoordinates taken with GPS

Project: Highway 97 and Swanson Lumber Road Signalization

Logged by: OB Reviewed by: JP

SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

Drill Hole #: TH17-01

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0

Northing/Easting: 6232543 , 638386

Final Depth of Hole: 3.0 mDepth to Top of Rock:

Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING

Drillers Estimate{G % S % F %}

Drilling Company: Peace Drilling & Research

704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

SUMMARY LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17

DYNAMIC CONE (BLOWS/300 mm)

W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%

SPT "N" (BLOWS/300 mm) Natural Vane (KPa) Remold Vane (KPa)

100 200 300 400 Pocket Penetrometer Shear Strength (kPa)

2

2

26

25

0.15m

0.7m

1.3m

3.0m

1

2

ASPHALT (150 mm)

GP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL),estimated 60% crushed gravel particles,some silt, medium to coarse grained sand,subangular gravel, brown, dry, very dense

GP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL), tracesilt, medium grained sand, rounded gravel,brown, dry, compact

CI - CLAY, medium plastic, some silt, tracegravel, grey, homogeneous, w ~ PL, stiff tovery stiff





Elevation: 653.0 m

652

651

650

649


ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube


1

2

3

4



CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION






SO

IL S

YM

BO

L


RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0



Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING



704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

SUMMARY LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17


W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%



3

32

0.32m

0.8m

3.0m

1

2

3

ASPHALT (320 mm)

GP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL),estimated 50% crushed gravel particles,some silt, medium to coarse grained sand,subangular to rounded gravel, brown, dry,dense

CI - CLAY, medium plastic, some silt, tracegravel, grey, homogeneous, w ~ PL, stiff tovery stiff





Elevation: 653.0 m

652

651

650

649


ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube


1

2

3

4



CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION






SO

IL S

YM

BO

L


RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0



Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING



704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

SUMMARY LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17


W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%



3

26

29

0.32m

0.8m

3.0m

1

2

3

ASPHALT (320 mm)

GP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL),estimated 80% crushed gravel particles,some silt, medium to coarse grained sand,subangular to rounded gravel, brown, dry,dense

CH - CLAY, high plastic, some silt, tracegravel, grey, homogeneous, w ~ PL, stiff tovery stiff






Elevation: 653.0 m

652

651

650

649


ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube


1

2

3

4



CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION






SO

IL S

YM

BO

L


RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0



Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING



704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

SUMMARY LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17


W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%



3

22

26

0.15m

0.58m

0.9m

3.0m

1

2

3

ASPHALT (150 mm)

GP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL),estimated 50% crushed gravel particles,some silt, medium to coarse grained sand,subangular gravel, brown, dry, very dense- geotextile encountered at 0.58 m

GP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL), tracesilt, medium grained sand, rounded gravel,brown, dry, dense

CH - CLAY, high plastic, some silt, tracegravel, grey, oxidized staining,homogeneous, w ~ PL, very stiff





Elevation: 654.0 m

653

652

651

650


ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube


1

2

3

4



CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION






SO

IL S

YM

BO

L


RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0



Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING



704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

SUMMARY LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17


W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%



2

30

0.13m

0.58m

0.9m

3.0m

1

2

3

ASPHALT (130 mm)

GP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL),estimated 50% crushed gravel particles,some silt, medium to coarse grained sand,subangular gravel, brown, dry- geotextile encountered at 0.58 m

GP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL), tracesilt, medium to coarse grained sand,rounded gravel, brown, dry

CH - CLAY, high plastic, some silt, tracegravel, grey, homogeneous, w ~ PL,grades from stiff to hard with depth

End of testhole at 3.0 m depth (targetdepth reached).- Testhole coordinates and collar elevationare appoximate (obtained using ahandheld GPS unit).- Gradation and moisture content of coarsegrained soils may not be representative ofin situ conditions due to drillingdisturbance.- Estimates of soilcompactness/consistency weredetermined as follows: - Coarse grained soils: based onmeasured DCPT blow counts - Fine grained soils: based on measuredDCPT blow counts, visual classification ofrecovered samples, and drill rigperformance.



Elevation: 654.0 m

653

652

651

650


ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube


1

2

3

4



CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION






SO

IL S

YM

BO

L


RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0



Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING



704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

SUMMARY LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17


W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%



2

29

28

0.15m

0.43m

0.9m

3.0m

1

2

3

ASPHALT (150 mm)

GP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL),estimated 20% crushed gravel particles,trace to some silt, medium to coarsegrained sand, subangular gravel, brown,dry, dense- geotextile encountered at 0.43 mGP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL), tracesilt, medium grained sand, rounded gravel,brown, dry, dense

CH - CLAY, high plastic, silty, trace gravel,grey, homogeneous, w ~ PL, very stiff tohard





Elevation: 653.0 m

652

651

650

649


ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube


1

2

3

4



CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION






SO

IL S

YM

BO

L


RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0



Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING



704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

SUMMARY LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17


W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%



2

28

28

0.14m

0.5m

3.0m

1

2

ASPHALT (140 mm)

GP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL), traceto some silt, medium to coarse grainedsand, subangular gravel, brown, dry, verydense

CH - CLAY, high plastic, silty, trace gravel,trace sand, grey, homogeneous, w ~ PL,stiff to very stiff




Elevation: 653.0 m

652

651

650

649


ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube


1

2

3

4



CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION






SO

IL S

YM

BO

L


RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0



Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING



704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

SUMMARY LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17


W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%



21

33

0.21m

0.6m

1.1m

3.0m

1

2

3

ASPHALT (205 mm)

GP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL),estimated 40% crushed gravel particles,some silt, medium to coarse grained sand,subangular gravel, brown, dry, very dense

GM1 - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL), silty,medium to coarse grained sand,subangular gravel, brown, dry, compact todense- geotextile encountered at 0.9 m

CH - CLAY, high plastic, silty, trace gravel,trace sand, grey, homogeneous, w ~ PL,stiff to very stiff

- very siff to hard below 1.8 m




Elevation: 652.0 m

651

650

649

648


ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube


1

2

3

4



CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION






SO

IL S

YM

BO

L


RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0



Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING



704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

SUMMARY LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17


W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%



2

5

29

0.3m

0.6m

0.9m

3.0m

1

2

3

4

ASPHALT (300 mm)

GP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL),estimated 65% crushed gravel particles,some silt, medium to coarse grained sand,subangular gravel, brown, dryGP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL),estimated 50% crushed gravel particles,some silt, medium to coarse grained sand,subangular to rounded gravel, brown, dryCH - CLAY, high plastic, silty, gravelly,grades to trace gravel with depth, tracesand, trace organics, grey, homogeneous,w ~ PL, very stiff to hard

End of testhole at 3.0 m depth (targetdepth reached).- Testhole coordinates and collar elevationare appoximate (obtained using ahandheld GPS unit).- Gradation and moisture content of coarsegrained soils may not be representative ofin situ conditions due to drillingdisturbance.- Estimates of soilcompactness/consistency weredetermined as follows: - Coarse grained soils: based onmeasured DCPT blow counts - Fine grained soils: based on measuredDCPT blow counts, visual classification ofrecovered samples, and drill rigperformance.




Elevation: 651.0 m

650

649

648

647


ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube


1

2

3

4



CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION






SO

IL S

YM

BO

L


RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0



Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING



704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

SUMMARY LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17


W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%



3

3

18

28

0.35m

1.0m

3.0m

1

2

ASPHALT (345 mm)

GP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL), somesilt, medium to coarse grained sand,subangular gravel, brown, dry, dense tovery dense

CI - CLAY and GRAVEL, medium plastic,some silt, trace sand, brown and grey,homogeneous, w ~ PL, stiff to very stiff




Elevation: 651.0 m

650

649

648

647


ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube


1

2

3

4



CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION






SO

IL S

YM

BO

L


RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0



Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING



704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

SUMMARY LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17


W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%



23

21

0.37m

0.6m

3.0m

1

2

3

ASPHALT (370 mm)

GP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL), somesilt, medium to coarse grained sand,subangular gravel, brown, dryCI - CLAY, medium plastic, some silt tosilty, trace gravel, grey, homogeneous, w ~PL, stiff to very stiff




Elevation: 652.0 m

651

650

649

648


ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube


1

2

3

4



CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION






SO

IL S

YM

BO

L


RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0



Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING



704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

SUMMARY LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17


W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%



3

24

29

0.1m

0.6m

1.0m

1

GRASS (100 mm)

GP/SP - SAND and GRAVEL (FILL), traceto some silt, brown, dry


End of hand-excavated testpit at 1.0 mdepth (target depth reached).- Testhole coordinates and collar elevationare appoximate (obtained using ahandheld GPS unit).- Estimates of soil consistency in finegrained soils were determined fromexcavation difficulty and visualclassification of recovered samples.


Elevation: 652.0 m

651

650

649

648


ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube


1

2

3

4

Operator:

Excavator: Hand-Excavated Testpit

CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION



Coordinates taken with GPS



SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

Test Pit #: TP17-01

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0



Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING


Excavating Company: Tetra Tech Canada Inc.

704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

TEST PIT LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17


W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%



35

0.1m

1.0m

1

GRASS (100 mm)




Elevation: 652.0 m

651

650

649

648


ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube


1

2

3

4

Operator:


CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION






SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

Test Pit #: TP17-02

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0



Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING



704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

TEST PIT LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17


W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%



4

0.1m

0.9m

1.0m1

GRASS (100 mm)


CH - CLAY, high plastic, some silt, tracegravel, grey, homogeneous, w ~ PL, firm tostiffEnd of hand-excavated testpit at 1.0 mdepth (target depth reached).- Testhole coordinates and collar elevationare appoximate (obtained using ahandheld GPS unit).- Estimates of soil consistency in finegrained soils were determined fromexcavation difficulty and visualclassification of recovered samples.


Elevation: 651.0 m

650

649

648

647


ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube


1

2

3

4

Operator:


CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION






SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

Test Pit #: TP17-03

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0



Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING



704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

TEST PIT LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17


W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%



28

0.1m

1.0m

1

GRASS (100 mm)




Elevation: 650.0 m

649

648

647

646


ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube


1

2

3

4

Operator:


CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION






SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

Test Pit #: TP17-04

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0



Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING



704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

TEST PIT LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17


W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%



5

0.1m

0.6m

1.0m

1

GRASS (100 mm)





Elevation: 651.0 m

650

649

648

647


ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube


1

2

3

4

Operator:


CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION






SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

Test Pit #: TP17-05

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0



Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING



704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

TEST PIT LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17


W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%



32

0.1m

1.0m

1

GRASS (100 mm)




Elevation: 652.0 m

651

650

649

648


ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m)

1

2

3

4

LegendSample Type:

S-SplitSpoon

O-Odex(air rotary)

T-ShelbyTube


1

2

3

4

Operator:


CLA

SSIF

ICAT

ION






SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

Test Pit #: TP17-06

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

SA

MP

LE N

O

SA

MP

LE T

YP

E

SOILDESCRIPTION

00

Page 1 of 1

DE

PT

H (

m)

DR

ILLI

NG

DE

TA

ILS

Alignment:

5

0



Station/Offset:

COMMENTSTESTING



704-ENG.VGEO03315-01

TEST PIT LOG

Datum: NAD 83 (Z10)

MO

T-S

OIL

-RE

V2

EN

G-V

GE

O03

315

SW

AN

SO

N L

UM

BE

R R

OA

D_R

2.G

PJ

MO

T-D

RA

FT

-RE

V2.

GD

T 7

/12/

17


W % LW %

20 40 60 80P W%



14

Preliminary Geotechnical Report · Preliminary recommendations are also provided with regards to...

Documents

Transcript of Preliminary Geotechnical Report · Preliminary recommendations are also provided with regards to...