geotechnical assessment and design · geotechnical assessment and design bear flat cache creek...

Prepared for:

R.F. Binnie & Associates Ltd.

101 - 1577 7th Avenue, Prince George, BC, V2L 3P5

February 19, 2020

GEOTECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND

DESIGN

Bear Flat Cache Creek Segment (West)

Highway 29, British Columbia

Project # KX05280503

‘Wood’ is a trading name for John Wood Group PLC and its subsidiaries

GEOTECHNICAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN


Highway 29, British Columbia

Project # KX05280503

Prepared for: R.F. Binnie & Associates Ltd.

101 - 1577 7th Avenue, Prince George, BC, V2L 3P5

Prepared by: Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions,

a Division of Wood Canada Limited

3456 Opie Crescent Prince George, BC V2N 2P9

February 19, 2020

Copyright and non-disclosure notice

The contents and layout of this report are subject to copyright owned by Wood (© Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions)

save to the extent that copyright has been legally assigned by us to another party or is used by Wood under license. To the extent

that we own the copyright in this report, it may not be copied or used without our prior written agreement for any purpose other

than the purpose indicated in this report. The methodology (if any) contained in this report is provided to you in confidence and

must not be disclosed or copied to third parties without the prior written agreement of Wood. Disclosure of that information may

constitute an actionable breach of confidence or may otherwise prejudice our commercial interests. Any third party who obtains

access to this report by any means will, in any event, be subject to the Third Party Disclaimer set out below.

Third-party disclaimer

Any disclosure of this report to a third party is subject to this disclaimer. The report was prepared by Wood at the instruction of, and

for use by, our client named on the front of the report. It does not in any way constitute advice to any third party who is able to

access it by any means. Wood excludes to the fullest extent lawfully permitted all liability whatsoever for any loss or damage

howsoever arising from reliance on the contents of this report. We do not however exclude our liability (if any) for personal injury or

death resulting from our negligence, for fraud or any other matter in relation to which we cannot legally exclude liability.

Geotechnical Assessment and Design


Project # KX05280503 | 2/19/2020 Table of Contents

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 1

SCOPE ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................ 3

BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................................................................................... 4

4.1 GEOLOGY ............................................................................................................................................................... 4

SITE CONDITIONS AND DISCUSSION ......................................................................................................................... 5

5.1 SUBSURFACE GEOLOGICAL CONDITIONS ................................................................................................ 5

5.1.1 Highway 29 Realignment ................................................................................................................ 5

5.1.2 Watson Spring Boat Launch Access Road ................................................................................ 6

5.2 SHALE BEDROCK ................................................................................................................................................. 6

5.3 ACID ROCK DRAINAGE AND METAL LEACHING POTENTIAL ........................................................... 7

5.4 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS ..................................................................................................................... 8

GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................10

6.1 STRIPPING ............................................................................................................................................................10

6.2 SUBGRADE PREPARATION ............................................................................................................................10

6.3 TEMPORARY EXCAVATIONS .........................................................................................................................11

6.4 EMBANKMENT FILL CONSTRUCTION .......................................................................................................11

6.5 CUT SLOPES .........................................................................................................................................................12

6.5.1 Sta. 42+000 to Sta. 42+230 ..........................................................................................................13

6.6 GEOTEXTILE AND BIAXIAL GEOGRID SPECIFICATIONS .....................................................................13

6.7 PAVEMENT STRUCTURE .................................................................................................................................14

6.8 WASTE DISPOSAL .............................................................................................................................................14

6.9 DETAILED GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS BY STATION SECTION ................................15

CLOSURE ...............................................................................................................................................................................18

REFERENCES .........................................................................................................................................................................19

List of Appendices

APPENDIX A FIGURES

List of Tables

Table 5-1: Encountered Bedrock ........................................................................................................................................ 7

Table 5-2: Summary of Groundwater Monitoring ....................................................................................................... 9

Table 6-1: Non-Woven Geotextile Specifications ..................................................................................................... 13

Table 6-2: Biaxial Polypropylene Geogrid Specifications....................................................................................... 14

Table 6-3: Recommended Minimum Pavement Structure Thickness ............................................................... 14

Table 6-4: Detailed Geotechnical Recommendations by Station Section....................................................... 16



Project # KX05280503 2/19/2020 Page 1

INTRODUCTION As part of BC Hydro’s proposed Site C Clean Energy Project, portions of the existing Highway 29

alignment between Hudson’s Hope and Charlie Lake, BC, will be flooded during normal reservoir

operation. Before filling of the reservoir, the affected portions of the highway will be relocated away from

the reservoir area. As part of the project, an access road for a boat launch is proposed south of the new

Bear Flat – Cache Creek highway alignment, in the vicinity of Watson Spring and Watson Spring Road. In

support of the project, Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions a Division of Wood Canada Limited

(Wood), formerly Amec Foster Wheeler, was retained by R.F. Binnie & Associates Ltd. (Binnie) to provide

geotechnical engineering services in support of proposed realignment for an approximately 4.9 km long

segment of Highway 29 located in the Cache Creek Bear Flats region along with additional geotechnical

engineering services in support of design of the boat launch. The general locations are shown in Figure 1,

and a plan of the proposed realignment and boat launch are provided on two map sheets in Figure 2. This

report has been prepared specifically in relation to the approximately 2.54 km long westernmost portion

of the alignment located on the west side of the Cache Creek valley and proposed new bridge crossing as

well as the boat launch access road.

Granular borrow investigations carried out in the vicinity of the Bear Flat Cache Creek realignment are

described in separate reporting. Additional background geotechnical information is provided in our

previous report: Preliminary Geotechnical Assessment, Proposed Bear Flat Segment, Highway 29 Definition

Design, Site C Clean Energy Project dated 5 March 2012. Results of geotechnical subsurface investigations

carried out to date are provided in our report: Geotechnical Data Report, Bear Flat Cache Creek Segment,

dated 14 August 2019. Amec Foster Wheeler also produced a Geotechnical Assessment and Design

Report: Geotechnical Assessment and Design, Highway No. 29, Bear Flat-Cache Creek, dated 21 July 2017,

for a previous L4000-Line alignment which has since been superseded.

This report includes a description of the scope of services, methodology, a discussion of geotechnical

engineering analysis and geotechnical recommendations developed to support the detailed design for

the proposed highway alignment on the west side of Cache Creek and boat launch access road. The

detailed design (analysis and reporting) of the bridge structure, abutments/end fills and the portion of the

alignment to the east of Cache Creek are reported separately.

SCOPE The general scope of Wood’s geotechnical field assessment for the Bear Flat Cache Creek realignment

segment and Watson Spring Boat Launch access road was as described in Work Order 5 Release 3

Highway 29 Contract Completion for the Cache Creek West (CCW) segment and the Detail and Functional

Design of a new alignment called the Cache Creek East (CCE) segment, and pursuant to the Sub-Consultant

Agreement between Binnie and Wood, dated 1 April 2018.

The geotechnical assessment included the following activities:

Attendance at project team meetings;

Review of relevant project background data;

Preparation of a site-specific health and safety plan for the fieldwork;

Field reconnaissance to identify locations and access routes for the geotechnical investigation;

Development of multiple geotechnical site investigation plans and budgets for various phases of field

investigation;



Project # KX05280503 2/19/2020 Page 2

Preparation of various site access plans and permit support information;

Procurement and coordination of subcontractor equipment and support services for the geotechnical

investigation work including utility location, tree fallers, Level 3 medical support with emergency

transport vehicle, an excavator contractor, traffic control, multiple drill rigs, and downhole geophysical

testing subcontractors;

Coordination of the access preparation and geotechnical investigation work with concurrent activities

by others, including property considerations, surveyors, archaeology and environmental studies;

Supervision of several phases of geotechnical field investigation, including logging of ground

conditions, retention of soil samples from test pits, and retention of soil and rock core samples from

boreholes;

Supervision of the installation of groundwater instrumentation (vibrating wire piezometers) at select

locations, and follow-up monitoring;

Coordination and review of in-situ downhole geophysics data procurement;

Laboratory testing on selected soil and rock samples;

Provision of interim geotechnical data reports and draft recommendations as required; and

Compilation of this report.



Project # KX05280503 2/19/2020 Page 3

GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed approximately 4.9 km long Bear Flat Cache Creek realignment segment is referenced as

L4000O43 (Binnie draft geometric design drawings dated 17 January 2020). The subject L4000O43 Line

begins near Station 404+260 (eastern terminus of what is referred to as the Cache Creek West segment of

the new Highway 29 alignment) and runs north of and approximately parallel to the existing Highway 29

alignment. The new alignment will consist of two paved lanes. A major bridge structure is planned over

Cache Creek between approximately Sta. 406+744 to Sta. 407+334. The new highway alignment then

merges with the existing highway at approximately Station 409+144. In addition to the L4000O43 Line,

there will also be a side road (L42A10-Line, Binnie draft geometric design drawings dated 29 May 2019)

that will form an intersection at Sta. 403+590. The L42A10-Line begins at Sta. 42+000, where it will branch

south off the new highway alignment and follow a curving alignment down and generally to the east-

southeast to the Watson Spring Boat Launch parking area at approximately Sta. 42+230. Further details

pertaining to the Watson Spring Boat Launch can be found in our draft report: Geotechnical Site

Characterization, Watson Spring Boat Launch (Wood, September 2019).

This report provides a discussion and geotechnical recommendations prepared by Wood for the detailed

design of the approximately 2.54 km section of the proposed Bear Flat Cache Creek segment on the west

side of Cache Creek (i.e. from Sta. 404+200 to 406+744) as well as the proposed access road leading to

the Watson Spring Boat Launch parking area (i.e. from Sta. 42+000 to 42+230). Generally, the new

highway alignment and boat launch access road is located north of the future Site C reservoir shoreline,

along an upper fluvial terrace level within the Peace River valley.

Figure 1 depicts the general location of the project segment and the proposed boat launch access road.

Figure 2 (sheets 1 to 2) presents a detailed plan view of the new highway alignment and boat launch

access road on an orthophoto underlay. Figure 3 (sheets 1 to 6) depicts a profile view along the new

highway alignment centreline (sheets 1 to 5) and boat launch access road (sheet 6).

For more detailed descriptions of the background topographic, geology and terrain conditions along the

project segment, the reader is referred to our definition design phase reporting (Amec Foster Wheeler, 5

March 2012). Results of geotechnical subsurface investigations carried out to date are provided in our

report: Geotechnical Data Report, Bear Flat Cache Creek Segment, dated 14 August 2019.



Project # KX05280503 2/19/2020 Page 4

BACKGROUND

4.1 GEOLOGY

Within the study region, the bedrock geology consists of Cretaceous marine sedimentary rock sequences

overlain by a series of glacial and fluvial Quaternary sediments (Hartman and Clague, 2008). The bedrock

units present include flakey and fissile shales and siltstone ascribed to the Shaftesbury Formation (part of

the Fort St. John Group), overlain by Dunvegan Formation sandstones and conglomerates (Hartman and

Clague, 2008 and Bidwell, 1999). Gates Formation sandstone (also part of the Fort St. John group) can be

found underlying the Shaftesbury Formation (Thurber, 1978). The bedding inclination of the bedrock has

been reported as near horizontal (Klohn Crippen Berger and SNC-Lavalin, 2003) in the vicinity of the

project segment, but may exhibit local undulation and variations.

The Dunvegan sandstone outcrops in upper elevation slopes within the Peace River Valley, within a

previously identified landslide feature to the east of the project segment. The contact between the

sandstone and the underlying shale is estimated to be near 670 m elevation (Thurber, 1978) at that

location, but dips downwards to the east / northeast.

The Shaftesbury shale typically is well bedded with thin, weak layers, some of which include bentonitic

clays from ashfall deposits that exhibit high plasticity and have low shear strength (Bidwell, 1999). Stability

issues in the shale have developed from weak cementation, valley rebound due to stress relief and

movement along pre-sheared or weak layers parallel to bedding. Within the Bear Flat Cache Creek project

segment, shale bedrock outcrops are apparent along both the Peace River and the Cache Creek valley

sidewall slopes between the base of the valley at about 430 m elevation up to about 475 m elevation.

Shale is assumed to underlie the terrace on which the alignment will be constructed at depths of 3 to

16 m.

The Gates Formation can consist of sandstone, shale and silty shale. It does not outcrop within the Bear

Flat project segment and is anticipated to underlie the valley bottom at an unknown depth.

The Quaternary-age sediments of the Peace River region are well exposed in the study area. Several

research papers (Matthews, 1978; Hartman and Clague, 2008) identify and describe a series of

predecessor valleys of the Peace River and its tributaries. In general, four paleovalleys have been identified

within the proposed Site C reservoir area. The paleovalleys are sometimes wider, but generally shallower

than the modern valley. The valleys are infilled with a sediment sequence that can be listed by decreasing

age as follows: pre-glacial fluvial deposits overlying the bedrock; advance phase fine-grained

glaciolacustrine soils (Glacial Lake Mathews); glacial tills of the last glaciation, late-glacial fine-grained

glaciolacustrine deposits (Glacial Lake Peace) and post-glacial deposits including fluvial sand, gravel and

silt and landslide debris.

In the Bear Flat Cache Creek project segment, a predecessor of the modern Halfway River tributary

drainage meets the ancient Peace River valley. As a result, the Peace Valley sidewall slopes within the

project area west of Cache Creek are underlain by colluvium derived from glacial sediments. East of Cache

Creek valley, the slopes are primarily underlain by similar colluvium, but shale bedrock outcrops in existing

highway cuts on the lower reaches of Cache Creek Hill.



Project # KX05280503 2/19/2020 Page 5

SITE CONDITIONS AND DISCUSSION

5.1 SUBSURFACE GEOLOGICAL CONDITIONS

5.1.1 Highway 29 Realignment

Sta. 404+260 to 404+584: This section represents the scratch grade transition from the Cache Creek

West segment. Low cuts and embankment fills with heights less than 2 m would be excavated and

constructed along the relatively level surface of a fluvial terrace. The subsurface conditions are anticipated

to consist of up to 0.3 m of topsoil and 0.6 to 1.4 m of low to high plasticity clay and silt overlying at least

1.7 to 2.7 m of compact to very dense fluvial gravel and sand. Shale bedrock was not encountered in any

of the test holes. Groundwater was also not encountered in any of the test holes in this section.

Sta. 404+584 to 405+150: This section of the alignment entails a minor embankment fill construction of

up to 2 m in height, to be constructed along the relatively level surface of a fluvial terrace. The subsurface

conditions are anticipated to consist of up to 0.3 m of topsoil and 0.1 to 1.2 m of low to high plasticity silt

and clay overlying at least 1.1 to 3.7 m of compact to very dense gravel and sand with cobbles. Shale

bedrock underlies the gravel and sand and the bedrock surface appears to be dipping towards the south

and west. Shale is anticipated to be encountered at elevations as high as 473.4 to 474.9 m; however,

bedrock was not encountered at three locations (TH16-A-033, TP18-A-029, and TP18-A-030).

Groundwater was not encountered in any of the test pits or test holes.

Sta. 405+150 to 405+950: This section represents another area of low cuts and embankment fills with

heights less than 2 m, to be excavated and constructed on a relatively level fluvial terrace. The subsurface

conditions are anticipated to consist of up to 0.2 m of topsoil and 1.0 to 7.8 m of compact to very dense

sand and gravel with cobbles, with increasing thickness towards the east. Weathered shale and/or shale

bedrock underlies the sand and gravel at elevations ranging from 471.3 to 476.3 m. Generally, the shale

bedrock surface appears to dip towards the south. East of approximately Sta. 405+300 the bedrock

surface appears to dip towards the south and east. Groundwater was encountered in one borehole BH18-

A-055 at 6.4 m (EL. 473.8 m). An abandoned/decommissioned oil/gas drill site is present on a side slope

cut near Sta. 405+500 and BH18-A-055 and is located outside the footprint of the proposed highway.

The drill site was most likely constructed using imported fill.

Sta. 405+950 to 406+570: This section of the alignment is comprised of a side slope cut of up to 8 m on

the left (north) and up to 3 m on the right (south) side of the highway. The side slope cut is likely to

encounter 0.4 m of topsoil and 2.9 to 11.7 m of gravel and sand with cobbles. Borehole BH18-A-060 (Sta.

406+530) encountered 1.4 m of SAND below the topsoil. A relatively flat-lying weathered shale and/or shale

bedrock surface underlies the gravel and sand at depths of 3.1 to 11.9 m, and was encountered at

elevations ranging from 467.7 to 472.6 m. Groundwater was encountered in three boreholes (approx.

472.3 m in BH18-A-057; 470.6 in BH18-A-058; 470.1 m in BH18-A-059).

Sta. 406+570 to 406+744: This section comprises the western approach to the planned new bridge

across the Cache Creek valley. Embankment sections up to 4 m high would be constructed on the

relatively level surface of a fluvial terrace. The subsurface conditions are expected to consist of up to 0.4 m

of topsoil and 3.4 to 5.1 m of compact to very dense sand and gravel with cobbles. An isolated low

plasticity clay deposit with a thickness of 0.2 m was identified at a depth of 2.1 m (BH18-A-061).

Weathered bedrock and/or shale bedrock was encountered underlying the sand and gravel, the surface of

which appears to be dipping towards the south. Shale was encountered at elevations ranging from

approximately 465.4 to 468.0 m. Groundwater was encountered in one test hole TH18-A-043 at 2.1 m

(approx. 469.6 m).



Project # KX05280503 2/19/2020 Page 6

5.1.2 Watson Spring Boat Launch Access Road

Sta. 42+030 to 42+180: The subsurface conditions are generally anticipated to be consistent across the

extent of the Watson Spring Boat Launch access road. The section between Sta. 42+000 and 42+030

represents the scratch grade transition from the Highway 29 intersection. The section of the access road

between Sta. 42+030 to 42+070 represents an area of relatively minor cuts of less than 2 m in depth

along a relatively flat fluvial terrace as well as fills up to 6 m in height along the slope of an excavated

gravel pit area. Sta. 42+070 to 42+180 represents an area of excavated cuts up to 9 m in depth. Between

Sta. 42+180 to 42+230 entails excavated cuts up to 6 m in depth and fills less than 2 m in height along

the slope located along the north side of Watson Spring Road. The subsurface conditions are anticipated

to generally consist of compact to very dense gravel and sand with cobbles to a depth of 10.5 to 11.1 m.

A low plasticity clay layer was encountered within the gravel and sand in BH18-WS-004 and BH18-WS-005

at depths ranging from 7.9 to 8.4 m with corresponding elevations of 470.8 to 471.8 m, respectively.

Weathered shale bedrock was encountered underlying the sand and gravel, the surface of which appears

to be dipping towards the east. Shale is anticipated to be encountered at elevations of approximately

468.2 to 471.1 m. Groundwater was encountered at elevations of 471.2 in BH18-WS-004 and 468.3 m in

BH18-WS-005, and appears to be locally ponded on top of the bedrock surface.

5.2 SHALE BEDROCK

In general, where bedrock was encountered during the investigation, it consisted of shale attributed to the

Shaftesbury Formation (part of the Fort. St. John Group). The Shaftesbury shale typically is well bedded

with thin, weak layers, some of which may include bentonitic clays from ashfall deposits that exhibit high

plasticity and have low shear strength. Stability issues in the shale have developed from weak

cementation, valley rebound due to stress relief and movement along pre-sheared or weak layers parallel

to bedding (Amec Foster Wheeler, 5 March 2012). It is anticipated that the planned earthworks between

Sta. 42+180 to 42+230 along the Watson Spring Boat Launch access road will encounter shale bedrock. It

is not expected that shale bedrock will be encountered by the proposed new highway alignment

earthworks. The shale bedrock locations and elevations encountered by drilling relative to the L4000O43-

Line and L42A10-Line (Station and Offsets) are summarized in Table 5.1, below.

In general, at the interface between the overburden and shale bedrock, the shale was weak, highly

weathered and in many instances resembled residual clay soil. Based on previous experience in the area,

portions of the Shaftesbury shale can be highly sensitive to moisture changes when exposed/disturbed

and can rapidly decompose to a clay-like soil. The shale bedrock is generally not considered suitable for

highway embankment fill construction without special consideration (low slope angles, careful placement,

encapsulation to prevent moisture driven decomposition, etc.).



Project # KX05280503 2/19/2020 Page 7

Table 5-1: Encountered Bedrock

ID Station Offset

(m)

Bedrock Depth

(m)

Bedrock Elevation

(m)

HIGHWAY 29 REALIGNMENT

TP18-A-031 407+331 -12 1.8 473.4

TP18-A-032 407+393 -8 1.7 474.9

BH18-A-054 407+435 40 1.1 476.3

TP18-A-033 407+540 -16 3.2 475.2

BH18-A-055 407+677 2 7.8 472.4

BH18-A-056 407+803 3 7.4 471.3

BH18-A-057 407+896 -22 11.9 467.7

BH18-A-058 407+996 -43 4.8 468.7

BH18-A-059 408+002 -2 7.4 468.5

BH18-A-060 408+129 -4 3.1 472.6

TH18-A-043 408+258 -36 3.7 468.0

TH18-A-044 408+261 92 3.8 466.8

BH18-A-062 408+377 39 5.3 465.4

WATSON SPRING BOAT LAUNCH ACCESS ROAD

BH18-WS-004 42+090.2 -8.9 11.1 469.0

BH18-WS-005 42+141.2 -10.2 10.5 468.2

5.3 ACID ROCK DRAINAGE AND METAL LEACHING POTENTIAL

In general, shale bedrock is anticipated to be below the limits of planned earthworks for the highway

design alignment, however, is anticipated to be encountered in portions of the boat launch access road.

To assess the shale’s potential for acid rock drainage (ARD) and metal leaching (ML), two core samples

were previously selected from two drill holes completed near the western bridge abutment area for a

previous downstream alignment (BH16-A-015, at an approximate depth 7.6 m / elevation of 462 m and

DH11-51, at approximate depth of 7.1 m / elevation of 461.9 m). The samples were crushed and sent to

SGS Canada Inc. (SGS) in Burnaby, BC for acid-base accounting (ABA) analysis and multi-element analyses,

and to SGS in Lakefield, Ontario for quantitative X-ray diffraction by Rietveld Refinement. The laboratory

results can be found in the Geotechnical Data Report (Wood, August 2019).

ABA (acid-based accounting) results indicated that the pH values of the samples were 6.82 and 7.8 for

BH16-A-015 and DH11-51, respectively, with the total concentrations of sulphur at 0.52% and 0.48%. The

acid potential (AP) values (based on the sulphide content) were 11.3 and 12.2 tonnes CaCO3 per 1000

tonnes of material, and the modified Sobek Neutralization Potential (NP) values were 3.4 and 32.7 tonnes

CaCO3 per 1000 tonnes of material respectively.

The neutralization potential ratio (NPR) is a measure of the proportion of NP to AP (NPR = NP/AP). The

NPR value for BH16-A-015 was 0.3, while for DH11-51 it was 2.68. Based on the NPR criteria outlined in

the guidance document Technical Circular Letter T-04/13 (MoTI, 15 September 2013), the sample from

BH16-A-15 was classified as having a high potential to produce ARD. The sample from DH11-15 was

classified as non-acid generating with low potential to produce ARD. While both samples contained pyrite

(1.2 to 1.3%), only DH11-51 had appreciable carbonate (calcite, siderite) which would provide offsetting

neutralization potential. This high variation between the two samples found in relatively close proximity

and at similar elevations suggests that the ARD & ML potential will most likely be highly variable and

dependent on local mineralogy within each shale layer. Accordingly, it will be onerous and likely

impractical to screen and separate non-acid generating layers from shale that is or has the potential to be

acid generating. Consequently, it is conservatively considered that all the shale bedrock, if encountered,

should be considered as potentially acid generating, and where excavated should be disposed of in an



Project # KX05280503 2/19/2020 Page 8

environmentally appropriate manner. Should significant surface exposures of shale remain after

excavation, they could likely be appropriately treated by backfill cover.

5.4 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS

Vibrating wire piezometers were installed to provide information on the long-term groundwater conditions

for both the boat launch access road and highway realignment areas. The details of the vibrating wire

piezometers, along with maximum and minimum piezometric levels in 2016, 2018, and 2019 are provided

in Table 5-2. Further information on the instrumentation installation can be found in the Geotechnical Data

Report (Wood, August 2019).



Project # KX05280503 | 2/18/2020 Page 9

Table 5-2: Summary of Groundwater Monitoring

Hole ID Station Offset Piezometer

No.

Elevation

Ground/Tip

(m)

Measured

Piezometric Level

in 2016

Measured

Piezometric Level

in 2018

Measured

Piezometric Level

in 2019

Highway 29 Realignment

BH16-A-013 407+412 269R

BH16-A-013A 470.1/464.9 465.4 – 465.7 465.7 466.0

BH16-A-013B 470.1/445.4 462.1 – 465.6 463.0 462.6

BH16-A-013C 470.1/429.0 442.9 – 444.1 443.4 443.3

BH16-A-015 407+996 43L BH16-A-015 463.0 433.4 – 434.9 - -

Watson Spring Boat Launch Access Road

BH18-WS-005 42+141.2 10.2L BH18-WS-005A 478.7/470.9 - 470.3 470.0

BH18-WS-005B 478.7/468.2 - 468.8 – 469.3 469.0



Project # KX05280503| 2/19/2020 Page 10

GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS &

RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the office and field investigations to date, there does not appear to be any significant

geohazards or geotechnical conditions that would preclude the construction of the L4000O43 alignment.

However, the lower end of the proposed L42A10 boat launch access road will encounter groundwater,

potentially acid generating shale bedrock, and will be in close proximity to the steep lower valley slope

that may retrogress under the effects of reservoir inundation and erosion. Interception of groundwater by

the road excavation may affect the flow of the adjacent Watson Spring. For further discussion of the

reservoir shoreline slope stability issue and recommendations, refer to our draft report: Geotechnical Site

Characterization, Watson Spring Boat Launch (Wood, September 2019).

Section 6.1 through Section 6.9 provide geotechnical recommendations that are generally applicable for

the design and construction of the new highway alignment and boat launch access road. A summary of

recommendations specific to various station ranges is provided in Section 6.9. Recommendations for the

highway alignment are based on specific base mapping data provided to Wood on 9 Jan 2018 and design

alignment L4000O43 provided on 17 Jan2019 by Binnie. Recommendations for the boat launch access

road are based on the Option 1 L42A10-Line provided on 29 May 2019 by Binnie. The following

recommendations also reference the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure’s 2016 version of the

Standard Specifications for Highway Construction (SS2016), which is assumed will be used for the project

construction, unless updated prior to construction.

6.1 STRIPPING

For design, unless indicated otherwise, a minimum average stripping depth of 300 mm should be

assumed at the base of the proposed fills. Additional areas (e.g. existing ditches, colluvial slopes and wet

areas) will require deeper stripping and/or sub-excavation of soft, wet, weakened and organic soils that

are unsuitable for fill foundations. All stripped foundation subgrades should be reviewed prior to fill

placement by a geotechnical engineer or their representative to confirm that underlying soft, wet,

weakened and organic soils have been appropriately removed and that conditions are as anticipated in

this report. Some additional details regarding stripping and/or sub-excavation specific to various project

station ranges are provided in Section 6.9 below.

6.2 SUBGRADE PREPARATION

For the purposes of fill construction, the following subgrade preparation procedure is recommended:

Remove all unsuitable materials such as loose-fill, organic materials, stripping, and softened soils

from the subgrade surface. Location-specific guidance for additional sub-excavation (in excess of

stripping) of subgrade soils is provided in Section 6.9. A geotechnical engineer should review all

prepared subgrade prior to placement of fill (and/or geotextile separators, where applicable) to

confirm that unsuitable soils have been adequately removed.

Crown the subgrade to promote drainage by providing a minimum cross fall of 2% as soon as

possible following exposure of the subgrade soils. This will help minimize softening of the fine-

grained subgrade materials due to infiltration of surface water from precipitation events that occur

following exposure of the subgrade.

Minimize disturbance of the subgrade by limiting vehicle and construction traffic over the prepared

subgrade surface. If the subgrade surface is disturbed and becomes softened, removal of softened

soils and replacement with suitable fill will be required.



Project # KX05280503| 2/19/2020 Page 11

Deposits of unsuitable subgrade soils that are too deep to be practically removed will require

additional subgrade improvements as directed by a geotechnical engineer at the time of

construction. Subgrade improvements may consist of (but are not limited to) use of geotextile

separator(s), biaxial geogrid layer(s), granular backfills and/or other methods.

6.3 TEMPORARY EXCAVATIONS

Temporary excavations greater than 1.2 m in depth, where worker entry is required should be constructed

in accordance with the current Part 20.78 through 20.95 of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation

as per WorkSafeBC. The construction contractor, however, is ultimately responsible for the safety of

temporary excavation slopes. Should excavations encounter groundwater, flatter slopes than those

recommended by WorkSafeBC could be required. Excavations greater than 1.2 m in depth with steeper

slopes and those subject to seepage or sloughing should not be entered unless they are shored, braced

or sloped as approved by the contractor’s geotechnical engineer.

6.4 EMBANKMENT FILL CONSTRUCTION

New embankment fills along the highway alignment are estimated to be less than 4 m high. Maximum fill

slopes of 3H:1V are recommended between Sta. 404+260 to 405+150, unless the underlying fine silt and

clay soil cap (0.4 to 1.4 m thick where present) is removed to expose granular subgrade. Maximum fill

slopes of 2H:1V could be used elsewhere, i.e. between Sta. 405+150 to 405+950 and Sta. 406+570 to

406.744. New embankment fills along the boat launch access road are estimated to be constructed to a

maximum height of 6 m. A maximum fill slope of 2H:1V is recommended.

The maximum slope recommendations of 3H:1V and 2H:1V are also based on the embankment being

constructed on a properly prepared subgrade approved by a geotechnical engineer, and the fill consisting

primarily of Type D granular borrow as defined in SS 2016.

The following general recommendations are provided for fill construction.

All fill foundation preparation, fill placement and fill compaction operations should be observed by

qualified geotechnical engineering field personnel to confirm that the construction is in accordance

with the recommendations in this report and SS 2016.

Existing organic materials, loose-fill and/or otherwise unsuitable soils should be removed from under

the footprint of any new fills and from the outside face of the existing fill slopes prior to placing the

new fill.

Fill materials should consist of inorganic granular soil with moisture contents near (±1%) of the

optimum moisture content (as determined by laboratory moisture-density testing) such that they are

conducive to good compaction. In general, the following two granular fill types are recommended for

indicated uses:

Clean Granular Fill (CGF) – to be used for all embankment/berm fills constructed below an elevation of

466 m, the lower or back 1 m of fills placed on or against groundwater seepage zones.

♦ Material is to be free of organics and other detritus and has less than 5 % passing the

0.075 mm sieve.

♦ Maximum particle size as large as 300 mm can be used, provided that adequate lift thickness

and compaction is achieved before placement of the next lift. The contractor must

demonstrate via test strips and test excavations that they have the equipment, methodology

and are achieving compaction nominally equivalent to 95 % (Standard Proctor Maximum Dry



Project # KX05280503| 2/19/2020 Page 12

Density as per the current version of ASTM D 698), with no observable segregation or

deflection and no rutting greater than 10 mm under construction traffic loading.

Type D Granular Fill – to be used for all other fill locations, where internal drainage is not required as

described above.

♦ Material gradation shall meet SS 2016 Section 201.44 and consist of predominately granular

material with a maximum 300 mm particle size that contains a maximum of 20% fines

(material passing the 0.075 mm sieve) and is free of organics and other detritus material.

Fills that will overlie seepage zones from existing fill or natural slopes will require field review by a

geotechnical engineer. These areas should be treated on a case by case basis and may need to be

treated by placement of a granular drainage blanket from the base of the excavation to a minimum of

2.0 m above the seepage area.

Fills underlain by groundwater seepage zones should be founded on a minimum 0.5 m thickness (as

measured above the high-water level or original ground surface, as determined by the geotechnical

engineer) of clean granular fill. A layer of non-woven geotextile (as defined in Section 6.6) should be

placed on the prepared subgrade before placement of granular drainage fill. Geotextile should also be

placed over granular drainage fill where finer-grained fill (i.e. having greater than 5% fines) will be

placed over the cleaner drainage fill.

Drainage from under an embankment area should be directed to an exposed face of a ditch or a sub-

drain system but should not be directed over the face of potentially unstable or erodible slopes

without additional armouring and/or riprap.

6.5 CUT SLOPES

Some shallow cuts up to 2 m and relatively minor ditch cuts of up to 2 m will be required for the currently

proposed highway alignment. Between Sta. 405+950 to 406+570 larger ditch cuts up to 8 m will be at the

left side (north) of the highway will be required. The required cuts between Sta. 404+260 to 404+584 are

expected to encounter mainly glaciofluvial and alluvial soils (BCMoTI Type D excavation) that are generally

anticipated to be unsuitable for use in the construction of new highway embankments (Type D borrow).

Cuts located between Sta. 404+584 and 406+570 are also anticipated to encounter primarily coarse-

grained fluvial and alluvial soils.

For detailed design, the following recommendations are provided:

Unless otherwise specified in Section 6.9, use a maximum cut slope angle of 3H:1V.

Cuts that encounter seepage require field review by a geotechnical engineer and may need to be

protected from piping erosion by the placement of a granular drainage blanket on the face of the

slope from the base of the ditch to a minimum of 2 m above the seepage zone.

Fine-grained soil from cuts within the project alignment are unsuitable for re-use and should be

considered waste.

Coarse-grained soil from cuts may be used for construction borrow purposes provided laboratory

testing is conducted on sampled material, and results confirm construction borrow material

specifications are met.

Cut areas should be hydro-seeded with an appropriate vegetation seed mix as soon as possible

after soil disturbance is complete.



Project # KX05280503| 2/19/2020 Page 13

6.5.1 Sta. 42+000 to Sta. 42+230

A maximum slope of 2H:1V is recommended for cuts within coarse-grained material, and 1.5H:1V for cuts

within shale bedrock. Where bedrock is exposed there is potential acid rock drainage and metal leaching.

Where bedrock is exposed and/or wasted it should be treated as potentially acid generating. Should

significant surface exposures of shale remain after excavation, they could likely be appropriately treated

by backfill cover as needed.

It is also anticipated that the lower portions of cuts will encounter significant groundwater, likely perched

on the underlying bedrock. This groundwater has the potential to cause piping failures in face of cuts in

sand and gravel. It is therefore recommended that such groundwater areas be covered with granular

drainage blankets, which could also be tied into granular cover treatment for exposed potentially acid

generating shale bedrock. It is recommended that buried trench drains be installed along the ditch line

through these areas to direct groundwater away from the subgrade. Further details and a typical section

will be developed as detailed design proceeds.

Further to the groundwater issue, it is anticipated that interception of groundwater by the boat launch

access road may affect the groundwater discharge currently known as Watson Spring. Depending on the

future required use of Watson Spring, this may or may not be a concern. If flow disruption is a concern,

then a specific and detailed hydrogeologic assessment of the potential interaction between the road

works drainage and the spring will be required.

6.6 GEOTEXTILE AND BIAXIAL GEOGRID SPECIFICATIONS

Where non-woven geotextiles are required, the recommended specifications listed in Table 6-1, below

should be used.

Table 6-1: Non-Woven Geotextile Specifications

1. Elongation > 50%, as per ASTM D4632

2. Based on minimum average roll values (as per ASTM C 4759) in the weaker principal direction

3. Based on maximum average roll values

Where geogrid is required for local subgrade improvement during construction, the recommended

specifications for a biaxial polypropylene geogrid are provided in Table 6-2, below.

Property Test Method Class 1 Class 2

Material Type Non-Woven1 Non-Woven1

Grab Tensile Strength2 ASTM D 4632 ≥ 900 N ≥ 700 N

Sewn Seam Strength2 ASTM D 4632 ≥ 810 ≥ 630 N

Tear Strength2 ASTM D 4533 ≥ 350 ≥ 250 N

Puncture Strength2 ASTM D 6241 ≥ 1925 ≥ 1375 N

Permittivity ASTM D4491 ≥ 0.2 sec-1 ≥ 0.1 sec-1

Apparent Opening Size3 ASTM D 4751 < 0.43 mm < 0.22 mm

Recommended Application + 50 kg class riprap

drainage layers

subgrade separation

- 50 kg class riprap



Project # KX05280503| 2/19/2020 Page 14

Table 6-2: Biaxial Polypropylene Geogrid Specifications

Property Test Method Value

Tensile Strength @ 5% Strain, Machine Direction1 ASTM D 6637 ≥ 11.8 kN/m

Tensile Strength @ 5% Strain, Cross Machine Direction1 ASTM D 6637 ≥ 18.8 kN/m

Maximum Aperture Size 50 mm

Minimum Aperture Size 15 mm

Flexural Stiffness1 ASTM D 7748 ≥ 700 g-cm

Roll Width 4.0 +/- 0.1 m 1. Based on minimum average roll values (as per ASTM C4759).

6.7 PAVEMENT STRUCTURE

The recommended pavement structure is dependent on the nature of the soil subgrade that will be

encountered (in cuts) or constructed (fills). Table 6-3 provides a recommended pavement structure for the

new highway alignment and boat launch access road, for two different subgrade conditions (Type A for

well-drained granular subgrades, Type B for poorly drained and/or fine-grained subgrades).

Table 6-3: Recommended Minimum Pavement Structure Thickness

It is currently anticipated that the recommended Type B structure would be used for the entire alignment

segment. In cases where subgrade fill meets the gradation for SGSB, the thinner Type A structure could

be used. It is anticipated that granular soils, as well as weathered shale bedrock, will be encountered

during planned earthworks for the boat launch access road. Generally, a Type A structure should be

suitable to use for most of the boat launch access road. However, in areas where groundwater and

weathered shale will be encountered, a Type B structure is recommended. Additionally, a groundwater

interception subdrain may be required along upgradient ditch lines.

6.8 WASTE DISPOSAL

The following procedures are recommended for general siting and placing waste from unsuitable or

surplus soil materials generated by the project. Specific disposal scenarios different from below should be

assessed on a case by case basis by a geotechnical engineer.

Waste materials should only be placed on slopes with a gradient of 10° (approx. 5.7H:1V) or less

and should not be placed in the vicinity of the crests of other slopes where they could have a de-

stabilising influence.

Do not site waste areas within or near environmentally sensitive locations such as riparian zones,

seepage zones, or where the waste will cause ponding of water or redirection of drainage patterns

(including ditches).

Waste materials should be placed with a maximum slope of 3H:1V, and to a maximum height of

3 m. Place the waste in maximum 1 m thick lifts and level with tracked equipment, as required.

Do not site waste piles adjacent to existing and proposed road fills, where practicable. Waste piles

placed adjacent to road fills are often encountered during future road widening and upgrading

projects, frequently leading to costly removal (and schedule delays) during construction.

Subgrade Type Pavement

Structure Asphalt (AP)

Crushed Base

Course SGSB

Well Drained Granular Soils (sand

and gravel <10% fines) A 125 mm 300 mm 300 mm

Poorly Drained or Fine-Grained

Soils (>10% fines) B 125 mm 300 mm 600 mm



Project # KX05280503| 2/19/2020 Page 15

Waste piles placed adjacent to road fills should not block drainage from existing fills and should be

kept at least 1 m below existing or proposed road pavement structure subgrade and/or any other

granular fills that are likely to transmit drainage.

Contour the waste material to promote surface drainage. To maintain positive drainage from the

fill surface while allowing for a long-term settlement of the loosely placed fill, use a minimum 10%

cross fall slopes to crown the waste material.

Use appropriate short-term measures to control off-site transport of fines in runoff (such as silt

fencing). Maintain the short-term controls until effective long-term measures (such as vegetation

cover) are established.

Subject to relevant environmental and land use requirements, disposal of surplus excavation material

(waste) is not anticipated to be a geotechnical concern, especially if deposited on fluvial terrace areas and/or

below the reservoir inundation level. Surplus material should not be disposed along the Cache Creek valley

slope crest, the main Peace River Valley sidewall slope located above and to the north of the proposed

alignment and/or along the crests of the terrace slopes down towards the Peace River to the south, as these

areas may be unstable.

6.9 DETAILED GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS BY STATION

SECTION

A summary of geotechnical conditions encountered, and station-specific recommendations are provided

in Table 6-4 on the following pages.



Project # KX05280503| 2/19/2020 Page 16

Table 6-4: Detailed Geotechnical Recommendations by Station Section

Station Range Reference Geometric

Design Configuration

Representative

Geotechnical

Investigation

Anticipated Subsurface Conditions Geotechnical Recommendations From To

403+590 See Watson Spring Boat Launch Access Road

HIGHWAY 29 REALIGNMENT

404+260 404+584

Scratch Grade Transition from

the Cache Creek West Segment

Low Cuts and Fills < 2 m

depth/height

TP16-A-031

TH16-A-032

Upper 0.1 to 0.3 m: TOPSOIL.

Below TOPSOIL: 0.6 to 1.4 m of SILT/CLAY.

Below SILT/CLAY: SAND and GRAVEL with cobbles to depths ranging from at least 3.4

to 3.7 m below ground surface.

Shale bedrock was not encountered.

Groundwater not encountered.

Stripping: Typically, 0.3 m, maybe locally deeper.

Subgrade to be reviewed and approved by a geotechnical engineer.

Max Fill Slopes 3H:1V if SILT/CLAY left in-situ. If sub-excavation of SILT/CLAY (0.6

to 1.4 m) undertaken Max Fill Slopes 1.5H:1V. Use granular fill.

Max Cut Slopes 3H:1V in SILT/CLAY.

Estimated Waste: 100%

404+584 405+150 Fill up to 2 m in height

TH16-A-033

TP18-A-029

TP18-A-030

TP18-A-031

TP18-A-032


Below TOPSOIL: 0.1 to 1.2 m of SILT/CLAY, decreasing thickness to the east.

Below SILT/CLAY: 1.1 to 3.7 m SAND and GRAVEL with cobbles over SHALE BEDROCK.

Bedrock was encountered in two test pits.

Bedrock: TP18-A-031 (1.8 m – EL. 474.4 m), TP18-A-032 (1.7 m – EL. 474.9 m


Stripping: Typically, 0.1 to 0.3 m.


Max Fill Slopes: 3H:1V. Use granular fill.

Max Fill Slopes 3H:1V if SILT/CLAY left in-situ. If sub-excavation of SILT/CLAY (0.1

to 1.4 m) undertaken Max Fill Slopes 1.5H:1V.

Max Ditch Cut Slopes: 3H:1V in SILT/CLAY.


405+150 405+950 Low Cuts and Fills < 2 m

depth/height

BH18-A-054

TP18-A-033

TP18-A-034

BH18-A-055

TP18-A-035

TP18-A-036

TP18-A-037

BH18-A-056


Below TOPSOIL: 1.0 to 7.8 m of SAND and GRAVEL with cobbles over SHALE

BEDROCK, increasing thickness to the east.

Bedrock was encountered in three boreholes and one test pit.

Bedrock: BH18-A-054 (1.1 m – EL. 476.3 m), TP18-A-033 (3.2 m – EL. 475.2, BH18-A-

055 (7.8 m – EL, 472.4 m), and BH18-A-056 (7.4 m – 471.3 m),

Groundwater was encountered in one borehole BH18-A-055 (6.4 m – EL. 473.8 m).

Stripping: Typically, 0.1 to 0.2 m, maybe locally deeper.


Max Fill Slopes 2H:1V. Use granular fill.

Max Cut Slopes: 1.5H:1V in granular soils.

Estimated Waste: 5%.

405+950 406+570

Cuts up to 8 m in height on left

and up to 3 m in height on right

of highway.

TP18-A-038

TP18-A-039

TP18-A-040

TP18-A-041

TP18-A-042

BH18-A-057

BH18-A-058

BH18-A-059

BH18-A-060

Upper 0.1 to 0.4 m TOPSOIL.

Below TOPSOIL: 2.9 to 11.7 m SAND and GRAVEL with cobbles over SHALE BEDROCK.

Bedrock was encountered in four boreholes. Borehole BH18-A-060 encountered 1.m

of SAND below the topsoil.

Bedrock: BH18-A-057 (11.9 m – EL. 464.7 m), BH18-A-058 (4.8 m – EL 468.7 m), BH18-

A-059 (7.4 m – EL. 468.5 m), and BH18-A-060 (3.1 m – EL. 472.6 m)

Groundwater encountered in some locations (approx. 472.3 m in BH18-A-057; 470.6 in

BH18-A-058; 470.1 m in BH18-A-059)


Max Cut Slopes 1.5H:1V in SAND and GRAVEL.

Max Cut Slope 2H:1V in SAND.

Potential for additional granular borrow if cuts are expanded.

Estimated Waste: 5%

406+570 406+744.010 Fills up to 4 m in height

TH18-A-043

TH18-A-044

BH18-A-061

BH18-A-062


Below TOPSOIL: 3.4 to 5.1 m SAND and GRAVEL with cobbles over SHALE BEDROCK.

BH18-A-061 encountered 0.2 m of low plasticity clay at 2.1 m.

Bedrock was encountered in two test holes and one borehole.

Bedrock: TH18-A-043 (3.7 m – EL. 468 m), TH18-A-044 (3.8 m – EL 466.8 m), and BH18-

A-062 (5.3 m – EL. 465.4 m).

Groundwater was encountered in one test hole TH18-A-043 (2.1 m - EL. 469.6 m).



Max Fill Slopes 2H:1V. Use granular fill.



Project # KX05280503| 2/19/2020 Page 17

Station Range Reference Geometric

Design Configuration

Representative

Geotechnical

Investigation

Anticipated Subsurface Conditions Geotechnical Recommendations From To

WATSON SPRING BOAT LAUNCH ACCESS ROAD

42+000 42+030

Scratch Grade Transition from

the Highway 29 intersection

Low Cuts and Fills < 1 m

depth/height

TP16-A-0251

Upper 2.7 m GRAVEL with cobbles.

Below GRAVEL: >2.0 m GRAVEL and SAND with cobbles.

Bedrock not encountered.


Stripping: Approximately 0.3 m


Max Fill Slopes: 2H:1V. Use granular fills.

Estimated Waste: 5%

42+030 42+070

Left: Minor drainage cuts < 2 m

in depth.

Right: Fills up to 6 m in height

BH18-WS-0041

BH18-WS-0051

Upper 7.9 to 8.4 m: GRAVEL and SAND with cobbles.

Below GRAVEL and SAND: 0.8 to 1.2 m of low plasticity CLAY.

Below CLAY: 1.5 to 1.8 m of GRAVEL and SAND over SHALE BEDROCK.

Bedrock at elevation 469.0 to 468.2 m.

Groundwater encountered at approximately 471.2 m in BH18-WS-004 and 468.3 m in

BH18-WS-005.


Max Fill Slopes: 2H:1V. Use granular fills.

Estimated Waste: 5%

42+070 42+180 Cuts up to 9 m in depth BH18-WS-004

BH18-WS-005

Upper 7.9 to 8.4 m: GRAVEL and SAND with cobbles.

Below GRAVEL and SAND: 0.8 to 1.2 m of low plasticity CLAY.

Below CLAY: 1.5 to 1.8 m of GRAVEL and SAND over SHALE BEDROCK.

Bedrock was encountered in two boreholes.

Bedrock: BH18-WS-004 (11.1 m – EL. 469.0 m), and BH18-WS-005 (10.5 m – EL

468.2 m),

Groundwater encountered at approximately 471.2 m in BH18-WS-004 and 468.3 m in

BH18-WS-005.


Use 1.5H:1V in weathered shale bedrock.

Requires sub drainage and drainage blanket on slope face over groundwater

discharge areas on slope face (Sta. 42+145 to Sta. 42+180).Bedrock exposure in

lower portion of cut will require treatment as potentially acid generating

(Sta. 42+150 to Sta. 42+180)

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER TO REVIEW SUBGRADE AT THE TIME OF

CONSTRUCTION.


42+180 42+230 Left: Minor fills < 2 m in height

Right: Cuts up to 7 m in depth TP18-WS-0021

Upper 0.5 m: GRAVEL, sandy, over SHALE BEDROCK.

Bedrock was encountered in one test pit.

Bedrock: TP18-WS-002 (10.5 m – EL. 468.2 m),

Groundwater not encountered at nearest test pit which is approximately 45 m west of

this section of highway.


Use 1.5H:1V in weathered shale bedrock. Max Fill Slopes: 2H:1V. Use granular fills.

Requires sub drainage and drainage blanket on slope face over groundwater

discharge areas on slope face (Sta. 42+180 to Sta. 42+230).

Bedrock exposure in lower portion of cut will require treatment as potentially acid

generating (Sta. 42+180 to Sta. 42+230)

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER TO REVIEW SUBGRADE AT THE TIME OF

CONSTRUCTION.


1. Nearest exploratory hole, may not be representative of ground conditions on the access road.



Project # KX05280503| 2/19/2020 Page 19

REFERENCES Amec Foster Wheeler. (5 March 2012). Preliminary Geotechnical Assessment Proposed Bear Flat Segment

Highway 29 Definition Design.

Amec Foster Wheeler. (19 January 2017). Gravel Investigation – Lower Cache Creek Gravel Borrow

Prospect Highway 29: Bear Flat – Cache Creek.

Amec Foster Wheeler. (27 January 2017, revised 20 April 2018). Gravel Resource Assessment Peaceview Pit

Prospect Highway 29 Bear Flat to Cache Creek.

Amec Foster Wheeler. (21 July 2017). Geotechnical Assessment and Design Highway No. 29 Bear Flat –

Cache Creek.

Bidwell, A.K., May 1999, “The Engineering Geology of the Fort St. John Area”, Master of Engineering

Report, University of Alberta.

Hartman, G.M.D. and Clague, J.J., 25 June 2008, “Quaternary Stratigraphy and Glacial History of the Peace

River Valley, Northeast British Columbia”, Canadian Journal of Earth Science, Volume 45, pages

549-564.

Klohn Crippen Berger and SNC-Lavalin Inc., January 2003, “Peace Cascade Development, Prefeasibility for

a Cascade of Low Consequence Structures as an Alternative to Site C”, Technical Report.

Wood Environment and Infrastructure Solutions. (14 Aug 2019). Geotechnical Data Report Highway 29,

Bear Flat Cache Creek Segment.

Appendix A

Figures

E

L4000O43 DesignAlignment

Hwy 29

Lower Cache CreekGravel Borrow Prospect

Ha l f

w a y R i ve

r

CacheCreekEast

CacheCreekWest Watson Spring

Boat LaunchPeaceview PitProspect

C a c h e C r e e k

C h a r l i eL a k e

P e a c eR i v e r

Notes:1. L4000O43 centreline alignment provided by R.F. Binnie & Associates CAD file 'ACAD-20200108 - Plan.dwg', received 27 January 2020.2. Watson Spring boat launch location provided by Moffat & Nichol CAD file '959806-FIG-01.dwg', received 22 May 2019.3. Bing Maps Road - © 2018 Microsoft Corporation © 2018 HERE.

LegendWatson Spring Boat Launch

L4000O43 Centreline AlignmentE

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

_̂

VancouverKamloops

ChetwyndFort St John

PrinceGeorge

ProjectLocation

This drawing was originally produced in colour.

CLIENT:

S:\Internal\KX052805-GIS\4CacheCreek\CCEW-AlignGeotechInvest-DetDes-Fig1-SiteLocationPlan.mxd

SCALE:

PROJECTION:

DATUM:

CHK'D BY:

DWN BY: TITLE:

PROJECT:REV NO.:

PROJECT NO.:

DATE:

HIGHWAY NO. 29BEAR FLAT CACHE CREEKUTM Zone 10

NAD 83

KS

BB SITE LOCATION PLANGEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

A

FIGURE 1

KX05280503

FEBRUARY 2020

$

1:200,000

0 4 8 12 162km

3456 Opie CrescentPrince George, BC, CANADA V2N 2P9Tel. (250) 564-3243 Fax (250) 562-7045

WoodEnvironment & Infrastructure Solutions

a Division of Wood Canada Limited (Wood)

BC HYDRO c/o R.F. BINNIE &ASSOCIATES LTD.

402+500

403+000

403+500

404+000

404+500

405+000

LIMIT OF CONSTRUCTION

404+260.000

42+100

42+200

LIMIT OF CONSTRUCTION42+230.000

LIMIT OF CONSTRUCTION

42+000.000

")

")

") ")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

!A

")

")

!A !A

")

!A

!A

!A!A

!A

!A

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

Watson

Road

Watson Road

Highway 29

Watson SpringBoat Launch

(See Note 1)

TH16-A-032 TH16-A-033

TP16-A-030TP16-A-031

TP16-A-025

BH18-WS-002 BH18-WS-003

BH18-WS-004

BH18-WS-005

TP18-A-029TP18-A-030

TP18-A-031

TP18-A-032

TP18-WS-002

PV16-010

PV16-015

PV16-011 PV16-013PV16-014

PV16-009

PV16-017

PV16-018

PV16-012

PV16-016


a Division of Wood Canada Limited (Wood)Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions

PROJECTION:

DATUM:

CHK'D BY:

DWN BY:


CLIENT: DATE:

KX05280503

FEBRUARY 2020

A

SITE PLAN WITH ORTHOPHOTOGEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

HIGHWAY NO. 29BEAR FLAT CACHE CREEK

TITLE:

PROJECT:

UTM Zone 10

NAD 83

KS

BBPROJECT NO.:

REV NO.:

1:6,000S:\Internal\KX052805-GIS\4CacheCreek\CCEW-AlignGeotechInvest-DetDes-Fig2-SitePlan-Ortho.mxd

SCALE:

0 100 200 300 40050m

Notes:1. Hole location provided by handheld GPS.2. L4000O43 centreline alignment and slope stake lines provided by R.F. Binnie & Associates Ltd. CAD file 'ACAD-20200108 - Plan.dwg', received 27 January 2020.3. L42-LINE centreline alignment and slope stake lines provided by R.F. Binnie & Associates Ltd. CAD file 'ACAD-SECT-L42A10-BFCC-15-0674- Model.dwg', received 13 September 2019.4. Maximum Normal Reservoir Level (461.8 m) downloaded from BC Hydro SharePoint 11 April 2018.5. Orthophoto imagery (foreground) provided by BC Hydro 9 January 2018.6. Orthophoto imagery (background; 2009) provided by R.F. Binnie & Associates Ltd., received 1 June 2011.

BC HYDRO c/o R.F. BINNIE & ASSOCIATES LTD.Legend!A 2018 Borehole Location

") 2018 Test Pit Location

!A 2016/2017 Borehole Location") 2016/2017 Test Pit Location

") 2016 Pavement Core Location

L4000O43 Centreline AlignmentL4000O43 Slope Stake LineL42-LINE Centreline AlignmentL42-LINE Slope Stake LineMaximum Normal Reservoir Level (461.8 m)

$12

1:70,000

FIGURE 21 of 2SHEET NO.

405+000

405+500 406+000 406+500

407+000

407+500

408+000

LIMIT

OF CO

NSTR

UCTIO

N

406+

744.0

10

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

!A

!A

!A

!A

!A!A

!A

!A!A!A

!A!A

!A

!A

!A

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")")

")

")

")

Highway 29

Ca c h e

Cr e

ek

(See Note 1)

BH16-A-013 BH16-A-015

TP18-A-033

TP18-A-034

TP18-A-035TP18-A-036

TP18-A-037TP18-A-038

TP18-A-039 TP18-A-040

TP18-A-041

TP18-A-042

TP18-A-043

BH18-A-054

BH18-A-055BH18-A-056

BH18-A-057

BH18-A-058

BH18-A-059

BH18-A-060BH18-A-061

BH18-A-062BH18-A-063

TH18-A-043

TH18-A-044

PV16-024PV16-022

PV16-025

PV16-028

PV16-026

PV16-023

PV16-021PV16-020

PV16-019

PV16-027


a Division of Wood Canada Limited (Wood)Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions

PROJECTION:

DATUM:

CHK'D BY:

DWN BY:


CLIENT: DATE:

KX05280503

FEBRUARY 2020

A

SITE PLAN WITH ORTHOPHOTOGEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

HIGHWAY NO. 29BEAR FLAT CACHE CREEK

TITLE:

PROJECT:

UTM Zone 10

NAD 83

KS

BBPROJECT NO.:

REV NO.:

1:6,000S:\Internal\KX052805-GIS\4CacheCreek\CCEW-AlignGeotechInvest-DetDes-Fig2-SitePlan-Ortho.mxd

SCALE:

0 100 200 300 40050m

Notes:1. Hole location provided by handheld GPS.2. L4000O43 centreline alignment and slope stake lines provided by R.F. Binnie & Associates Ltd. CAD file 'ACAD-20200108 - Plan.dwg', received 27 January 2020.3. L42-LINE centreline alignment and slope stake lines provided by R.F. Binnie & Associates Ltd. CAD file 'ACAD-SECT-L42A10-BFCC-15-0674- Model.dwg', received 13 September 2019.4. Maximum Normal Reservoir Level (461.8 m) downloaded from BC Hydro SharePoint 11 April 2018.5. Orthophoto imagery (foreground) provided by BC Hydro 9 January 2018.6. Orthophoto imagery (background; 2009) provided by R.F. Binnie & Associates Ltd., received 1 June 2011.

BC HYDRO c/o R.F. BINNIE & ASSOCIATES LTD.Legend!A 2018 Borehole Location

") 2018 Test Pit Location

!A 2016/2017 Borehole Location") 2016/2017 Test Pit Location

") 2016 Pavement Core Location

L4000O43 Centreline AlignmentL4000O43 Slope Stake LineL42-LINE Centreline AlignmentL42-LINE Slope Stake LineMaximum Normal Reservoir Level (461.8 m)

$12

1:70,000

FIGURE 22 of 2SHEET NO.

403+900 404+000 404+100 404+200 404+300 404+400

470

480

490

470

480

490

403+950 404+050 404+150 404+250 404+350 404+450

Elevation (m

)

Station (m)

Elevation (m

)

403+850403+800

40

4+

26

0.0

00

LIM

IT

O

F

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

0.31

3.7

TSCL

GP

19152222

21 46

m

TP16-A-031WW PL LL

END

N/A

PROJECTION:

N/A

DATUM:

PROFILE

STATION 403+800 TO 404+450

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

PROJECT:

TITLE:

REV. NO.:

PROJECT NO.:

KX05280503

A

CLIENT:

DWN BY:

CHK'D BY:

FEBRUARY 2020

DATE:

SCALE:

KS

AS NOTED

BB

HIGHWAY NO. 29

BEAR FLAT CACHE CREEK


FIGURE 3

SHEET NO. 1 of 6

Notes:

1. SPT N values and associated laboratory testing data provided with the Sticklogs may not be presented

at representative elevations. Please refer to Appendix B – Investigation Logs for additional details.

2. L4000O43P6 centreline alignment profile and existing ground profile provided by R.F. Binnie &

Associates Ltd. CAD file 'ACAD-20200108 - Profile.dwg', received 8 January 2020.

Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions



BC HYDRO c/o R.F. BINNIE & ASSOCIATES LTD.

0m 25 50 75 100

H 1 : 2000

V 1 : 400

0m 5 10 15 20

Legend

L4000O43P6 Centreline Alignment Profile

Existing Ground Profile at Centreline

Maximum Normal Reservoir Level (461.8 m)

404+600 404+700 404+800 404+900 405+000 405+100

460

470

480

460

470

480

404+550 404+650 404+750 404+850 404+950 405+050

Elevation (m

)

Station (m)

Elevation (m

)

404+500404+450

TSCH

GP

END

0.31.2

4.9

232122

3

26 54

m

TP18-A-029WW PL LL

TSCL

GW

END

0.31

4.2

19122

4

m

TP18-A-030WW

TSCL GM1

SM1 BREND

0.20.31.71.82.8

181911

m

TP18-A-031WW TS

MLCH GC2

BREND

0.20.40.61.72.4

139

139

m

TP18-A-032WW

0.31.7

3.4

TSCH

GP

81351

79

191713151422

30 57

m

TH16-A-032N WW PL LL

0.3

3

TS

GP28

R

R

2031

3

m

TH16-A-033

N WW

END

END

(See Note 1)

N/A

PROJECTION:

N/A

DATUM:

PROFILE

STATION 404+450 TO 405+100


PROJECT:

TITLE:

REV. NO.:

PROJECT NO.:

KX05280503

A

CLIENT:

DWN BY:

CHK'D BY:

FEBRUARY 2020

DATE:

SCALE:

KS

AS NOTED

BB

HIGHWAY NO. 29



FIGURE 3

SHEET NO. 2 of 6





0m 25 50 75 100

H 1 : 2000

V 1 : 400

0m 5 10 15 20

Notes:

1. Hole location provided by handheld GPS.





Legend




405+200 405+300 405+400 405+500 405+600 405+700

470 470

405+250 405+350 405+450 405+550 405+650 405+750

Elevation (m

)

Station (m)

Elevation (m

)

405+100 405+150

480 480

460 460

450 450

440 440

430 430

TSGP-GM

BR

END

0.11.1

4.4

1632

62RRR

71817151095

m

BH18-A-054N WW SP

GP

BREND

Water Level6/7/2018

3.5

7.89

24364029424341

27

27

R

2333443

3

886

m

BH18-A-055N WW

TS

GP

END

0.1

3.23.4

5

43

10

m

TP18-A-033WW

TS

GP

END

0.2

5

56

4

4

4

m

TP18-A-034WW TS

SM2

GP-GM

0.10.2

5

444

44

m

TP18-A-035WW

TS

GP

END

0.1

4.9

34

544

m

TP18-A-036WW

BREND

TS

GP

BR

0.2

5.2

41.5

12

50

34

R

R

R

0.06 / 0.19

0.15 / 0.27

0.08 / 0.23

0.10 / 0.31

0.06 / 0.32

0.18 / 0.59

0.07 / 0.62

0.14 / 0.38

0.03 / 0.48

0.13 / 0.76

0.09 / 0.73

0.18 / 0.56

1.30 / 1.78

0.15 / 1.24

0.25 / 0.70

0.17 / 0.49

0.49 / 0.89

0.16 / 0.36

0.13 / 0.97

0.13 / 0.97

0.65 / 0.83

m

BH16-A-013N WW Is50Is50

Dia/Axial

END

(MPa)

0.06 / 0.19

N/A

PROJECTION:

N/A

DATUM:

PROFILE

STATION 405+100 TO 405+750


PROJECT:

TITLE:

REV. NO.:

PROJECT NO.:

KX05280503

A

CLIENT:

DWN BY:

CHK'D BY:

FEBRUARY 2020

DATE:

SCALE:

KS

AS NOTED

BB

HIGHWAY NO. 29



FIGURE 3

SHEET NO. 3 of 6





0m 25 50 75 100

H 1 : 2000

V 1 : 400

0m 5 10 15 20

Notes:





Legend




405+900 406+000 406+100 406+200 406+300 406+400

470

480

470

480

405+850 405+950 406+050 406+150 406+250 406+350

Elevation (m

)

Station (m)

Elevation (m

)

405+800405+750

490 490

TS

GP

END

0.4

3.7

33

44

m

TP18-A-041WW

TS

GP-GM

GP

BREND

0.2

4.4

7.4

9.1

69R78

125R534767

R

R

R

832232

2

910

8

m

BH18-A-056N WW

TS

GP

GP-GM

GM1

BREND

Water Level5/19/2018

0.21.4

7.3

11.9

13.5

526945575249

64

R

92R

46

R

R

233423

2

6

9

8

9

12

m

BH18-A-057N WW

TSSM4

GP

END

0.10.2

4.6

71

2

2

m

TP18-A-037WW TS

GW

END

0.1

4.4

2

2

34

m

TP18-A-038WW

TSSM1

GP

END

0.10.1

4.4

2

24

3

m

TP18-A-039WW TS

GP

END

0.1

5.5

228343

4

m

TP18-A-040WW

N/A

PROJECTION:

N/A

DATUM:

PROFILE

STATION 405+750 TO 406+400


PROJECT:

TITLE:

REV. NO.:

PROJECT NO.:

KX05280503

A

CLIENT:

DWN BY:

CHK'D BY:

FEBRUARY 2020

DATE:

SCALE:

KS

AS NOTED

BB

HIGHWAY NO. 29



FIGURE 3

SHEET NO. 4 of 6





0m 25 50 75 100

H 1 : 2000

V 1 : 400

0m 5 10 15 20

Notes:





Legend




406+500 406+600 406+700 406+800 406+900 407+000

430

440

450

460

470

430

440

450

460

470

420 420

406+550 406+650 406+750 406+850 406+950 407+050

Elevation (m

)

Station (m)

Elevation (m

)

406+400 406+450

480 480

406+744.010

LIMIT OF

CONSTRUCTION

C a c h e C r e e k

Cross Section

Station 406+744.010

See Figure 4 Sheet 1

MNRL

TS

GPBR

END

0.21.4

3.13.8

73R3329

82RR

196

1269

12

mN WW

TS

SPCLSPBR

0.3

2.12.33.74.7

45R432572R

45

118

125

m

BH18-A-061

N WW

TS

GP

END

0.2

3.7

23

43

m

TP18-A-042WW

TS

GPCLGP

BREND

0.2

2.12.3

4.85.9

287561162064

R

32

2172689

12

m

BH18-A-058N WW

TS

GP

BREND


0.2

7.4

8.9

70R5450564330

57

R

R

312222

10

71011

m

BH18-A-059N WW

TS

GP

BR

END

0.2

5.3

55

4465R85282115

62R

R

645534

13

11N/A / N/A0.36 / 0.77

N/A / N/A

N/A / N/A

N/A / N/A

N/A / N/A

N/A / N/A

N/A / N/A

0.29 / 0.22

0.27 / 0.00

0.29 / 0.42

0.28 / 0.33

0.34 / 0.39

0.31 / 0.35

0.34 / 0.42

1.08 / 1.43

0.95 / 1.28

0.56 / 1.09

0.43 / 0.65

0.18 / 0.55

0.38 / 0.38

0.44 / 0.63

0.42 / 0.45

0.37 / 0.37

0.36 / 0.51

0.30 / 0.61

0.42 / 0.46

0.57 / 0.76

0.52 / 0.82

0.78 / 0.67

0.48 / 0.39

0.22 / 0.64

m

BH18-A-062NWWIs50

Dia/AxialGP

SPBR

Water Level9/23/20183.4

3.74.6

34297

12R

4332811

m

TH18-A-043NWW TS

SP-SMSP

GM1

BR

END

0.21.22.3

3.8

21.4

16131949RR

268957

159

0.06 / 0.310.40 / 0.51

0.27 / 0.41

0.12 / 0.36

0.33 / 0.56

0.37 / 0.25

0.16 / 0.36

0.33 / 0.36

0.06 / 0.58

0.41 / 0.40

0.50 / 0.47

m

TH18-A-044NWWIs50

Dia/Axial

(MPa) (MPa)


SM2

BH18-A-060

END

TS

GP -GC

BR

0.2

5.9

51.1

14

R

67

41

R

1913

2

0

5

0.01 / 0.24

0.05 / 0.24

0.06 / 0.18

0.28 / 0.34

0.14 / 0.45

0.07 / 0.25

2.21 / 1.84

0.24 / 0.64

0.11 / 0.41

0.13 / 0.52

2.24 / 1.87

0.17 / 0.41

0.60 / 1.39

0.66 / 1.21

0.27 / 0.56

0.1 / 0.25

0.24 / 0.29

0.15 / 0.25

0.17 / 0.36

0.19 / 0.36

0.21 / 0.7

0.02 / 0.52

0.06 / 0.43

0.11 / 0.85

0.10 / 0.38

0.25 / 0.44

m


Dia/Axial

END

(MPa)

N/A

PROJECTION:

N/A

DATUM:

PROFILE

STATION 406+400 TO 407+050


PROJECT:

TITLE:

REV. NO.:

PROJECT NO.:

KX05280503

A

CLIENT:

DWN BY:

CHK'D BY:

FEBRUARY 2020

DATE:

SCALE:

KS

AS NOTED

BB

HIGHWAY NO. 29



FIGURE 3

SHEET NO. 5 of 6





0m 25 50 75 100

H 1 : 2000

V 1 : 400

0m 5 10 15 20

Notes:





Legend




480

Elevation (m

)

42+125

Station (m)

475

42+10042+07542+05042+02542+000

470

42+22542+20042+17542+150

480

Elevation (m

)

475

470

465 465

460 460

Cross Section

Station 42+140

See Figure 4 Sheet 2

42+

230.000

LIM

IT

O

F

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

42+

000.000

LIM

IT

O

F

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

GP-GM

CL

GP

BR

8.4

9.6

11.1

12.5 END


51

24

24

36

33

37

25

31

26

52

R

2

6

3

7

4

6

7

4

287

9

11

23 46

m

BH18-WS-004N WW PL LL

GP-GM

CL

GP-GM

BR

7.9

8.7

10.5

15.2 END


44

43

31

10

27

21

29

28

58

82

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

4

712

N/A / N/A

N/A / N/A

N/A / N/A

0.22 / 1.06

m

BH18-WS-005N WW Is50Is50

Dia/Axial

(MPa)

GP

BR

0.5

2.9

3

17

23

m

TP18-WS-002WW

END

TS

GP

0.3

5

3

2

m

TP16-A-025WW

END

N/A

PROJECTION:

N/A

DATUM:

PROFILE

STATION 42+000 TO 42+230.2


PROJECT:

TITLE:

REV. NO.:

PROJECT NO.:

KX05280503

A

CLIENT:

DWN BY:

CHK'D BY:

FEBRUARY 2020

DATE:

SCALE:

KS

AS NOTED

BB

HIGHWAY NO. 29



FIGURE 3

SHEET NO. 6 of 6





Notes:



2. L42-LINE centreline alignment profile and existing ground profile at centreline provided by R.F. Binnie

& Associates Ltd. CAD file 'ACAD-SECT-L42A10-BFCC-15-0674-Model.dwg', received 13 January

2020.

Legend

L42-LINE Centreline Alignment Profile


5 1510 20 25 300m

H 1 : 750

V 1 : 150

1 32 4 5 60m

-30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

470

35

470

Elevation (m

)

Elevation (m

)

Offset (m)

460 460

450 450

440 440

430 430

420 420

℄L4000O43

406+744.010

40

TSSP

CLSPBR

0.32.12.33.74.7

45R432572R

45118125

m


Dia/Axial TS

GP

BR

0.3

5.96.6


332216129R3438

87545

912

m


Dia/AxialTS

GP

BR

0.2

5.3

55 END

4465R85282115

62R

R

645534

13

11 N/A / N/A0.36 / 0.77

N/A / N/A

N/A / N/A

N/A / N/A

N/A / N/A

N/A / N/A

N/A / N/A

0.29 / 0.22

0.27 / 0.00

0.29 / 0.42

0.28 / 0.33

0.34 / 0.39

0.31 / 0.35

0.34 / 0.42

1.08 / 1.43

0.95 / 1.28

0.56 / 1.09

0.43 / 0.65

0.18 / 0.55

0.38 / 0.38

0.44 / 0.63

0.42 / 0.45

0.37 / 0.37

0.36 / 0.51

0.30 / 0.61

0.42 / 0.46

0.57 / 0.76

0.52 / 0.82

0.78 / 0.67

0.48 / 0.39

0.22 / 0.64

m


Dia/Axial

END

(MPa) (MPa) (MPa)

N/A

PROJECTION:

N/A

DATUM:

CROSS SECTION

STATION 406+744.010


PROJECT:

TITLE:

REV. NO.:

PROJECT NO.:

KX05280503

A

CLIENT:

DWN BY:

CHK'D BY:

FEBRUARY 2020

DATE:

SCALE:

KS

AS NOTED

BB

HIGHWAY NO. 29



Legend

Typical Cross Section Based on L4000O43 Centerline Alignment


FIGURE 4

SHEET NO. 1 of 2

Notes:



2. Typical cross section based on L4000O43 centerline alignment and existing ground profile at

centreline provided by R.F. Binnie & Associates Ltd. CAD file 'ACAD-20200108 - Cross Sections-

Model.dwg', received 16 January 2020.





0m 2 4 6 8 10

H 1 : 250

V 1 : 500

0m 4 8 12 16 20

-20 -10 0 10 20 30

Elevation (m

)

Offset (m)

480

40 50 60

475

470

465

70 80 90 100-30

Elevation (m

)

480

475

470

465

GP-GM

CL

GP-GM

BR

7.9

8.7

10.5

15.2 END


44

43

31

10

27

21

29

28

58

82

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

4

712

N/A / N/A

N/A / N/A

N/A / N/A

0.22 / 1.06

m

BH18-WS-005N WW Is50Is50

Dia/Axial

GP

BR

0.5

2.9

3

17

23

m

TP18-WS-002WW

(MPa)

℄L42-LINE

N/A

PROJECTION:

N/A

DATUM:

CROSS SECTION

STATION 42+140


PROJECT:

TITLE:

REV. NO.:

PROJECT NO.:

KX05280503

A

CLIENT:

DWN BY:

CHK'D BY:

FEBRUARY 2020

DATE:

SCALE:

KS

AS NOTED

BB

HIGHWAY NO. 29



FIGURE 4

SHEET NO. 2 of 2





Note:



2. Typical cross section based on L42-LINE centerline alignment and existing ground profile at centreline

provided by R.F. Binnie & Associates Ltd. CAD file 'ACAD-SECT-L42A10-BFCC-15-0674-Model.dwg',

received 12 September 2019.

3. Additional existing ground surface (approximate) processed from LIDAR received from BC Hydro 9

January 2018.

Legend

Typical Cross Section Based on L42-LINE Centerline Alignment


0m 4 8 12 16

H 1 : 400

V 1 : 200

0m 2 4 6 8

Limitations



Project # KX05280503| 2/19/2020

‘Wood’ is a trading name for John Wood Group PLC and its subsidiaries

Limitations

1. The work performed in the preparation of this report and the conclusions presented are subject

to the following:

a. The Standard Terms and Conditions which form a part of our Professional Services

Contract;

b. The Scope of Services;

c. Time and Budgetary limitations as described in our Contract; and

d. The Limitations stated herein.

2. No other warranties or representations, either expressed or implied, are made as to the

professional services provided under the terms of our Contract, or the conclusions presented.

3. The conclusions presented in this report were based, in part, on visual observations of the Site

and attendant structures. Our conclusions cannot and are not extended to include those portions

of the Site or structures, which are not reasonably available, in Wood’s opinion, for direct

observation.

4. Where testing was performed, it was carried out in accordance with the terms of our contract

providing for testing. Other substances, or different quantities of substances testing for, may be

present on-site and may be revealed by different or other testing not provided for in our contract.

5. The utilization of Wood’s services during the implementation of any remedial measures will allow

Wood to observe compliance with the conclusions and recommendations contained in the report.

Wood’s involvement will also allow for changes to be made as necessary to suit field conditions as

they are encountered.

6. This report is for the sole use of the party to whom it is addressed unless expressly stated

otherwise in the report or contract. Any use which any third party makes of the report, in whole or

the part, or any reliance thereon or decisions made based on any information or conclusions in

the report is the sole responsibility of such third party. Wood accepts no responsibility whatsoever

for damages or loss of any nature or kind suffered by any such third party as a result of actions

taken or not taken or decisions made in reliance on the report or anything set out therein.

7. This report is not to be given over to any third party for any purpose whatsoever without the

written permission of Wood.

8. Provided that the report is still reliable, and less than 12 months old, Wood will issue a third-party

reliance letter to parties that the client identifies in writing, upon payment of the then current fee

for such letters. All third parties relying on Wood’s report, by such reliance agree to be bound by

our proposal and Wood’s standard reliance letter. Wood’s standard reliance letter indicates that in

no event shall Wood be liable for any damages, howsoever arising, relating to third-party reliance

on Wood’s report. No reliance by any party is permitted without such agreement.

geotechnical assessment and design · geotechnical assessment and design bear flat cache creek...

Documents