geotechnical structural environmental hydrogeology 210 ... · hydrogeology 210 prescott street,...

Civil Geotechnical Structural Environmental

Hydrogeology

210 Prescott Street, Unit 1 (613) 860-0923 P.O. Box 189 Kemptville, Ontario K0G 1J0 FAX: (613) 258-0475

Professional Engineers Ontario

Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.

REPORT ON

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT

KEVLAR COMMERCIAL PLAZA 3000 COUNTY ROAD 19

MUNICIPALITY OF NORTH GRENVILLE, ONTARIO

Project # 160947

Submitted to:

Kevlar Developments Inc. 3663 Twin Elm Road Richmond, Ontario

K0A 2Z0

DISTRIBUTION 4 copies Kevlar Developments Inc. 1 copy Kollaard Associates Inc. Revision 0 - Issued for Site Plan Control January 31, 2017

Civil Geotechnical Structural Environmental

Hydrogeology

210 Prescott Street, Unit 1 (613) 860-0923 P.O. Box 189 Kemptville, Ontario K0G 1J0 FAX: (613) 258-0475

Professional Engineers Ontario

Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.

January 31, 2017 160947

Kevlar Developments Inc. 3663 Twin Elm Road Richmond, Ontario K0A 2Z0

RE: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT KEVLAR COMMERCIAL PLAZA

3000 COUNTY ROAD 19 MUNICIPALITY OF NORTH GRENVILLE, ONTARIO

Dear Sirs:

This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation carried out for the above noted

proposed commercial development at the site. The purpose of the investigation was to identify the

subsurface conditions at the site based on a limited number of boreholes. Based on the factual

information obtained, Kollaard Associates Inc. was to provide guidelines on the geotechnical

engineering aspects of the project design; including construction considerations, which could

influence design decisions.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND SITE GEOLOGY

The proposed development site is triangular shaped with the base and sides of the triangle oriented

along County Road 43 to the north and County Road 19 to the west. The hypotenuse of the

triangle (here after referred to as the southeast side) is located along an abandoned rail bed. The

Kevlar Commercial Plaza development proposed by Kevlar Developments Inc. will be constructed

in three phases. The first phase to be developed will consist of the north east will contain a

commercial strip mall

Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Various Commercial Developments

3000 County Road 19 Kevlar Developments Inc. Municipality of North Grenville, Ontario January 31, 2017 -2- 160947

Civil • Geotechnical • Structural • Environmental • Hydrogeology

The occupancy of the remaining two phases has not been finalized but will likely consists of a gas

station and stand alone building in phase 2 and either two stand alone buildings or one strip mall in

phase 3. The proposed plaza will be serviced by a main street accessed from County Road 19.

The main street will be connected to County Road 43 where it will have right in/right out access

only. A second entrance to the site is proposed in Phase 3 at the south corner of the site.

It is understood that preliminary plans indicate that the proposed commercial spaces will be single

storey wooden or steel framed structures with conventional concrete spread footing foundations

and concrete slab-on-grade construction. All of the proposed buildings will be serviced by municipal

water and sanitary services.

The site was formerly occupied by Harvex Agromart who was a fertilizer distributer. In addition the

southeast about 27 metres of the site is occupied by a former railway easement and contains the

rail bed. While the site was occupied by Harvex Agromart, significant quantities of granular fill were

placed on the native subgrade. In December of 2016, topsoil and overgrowth was stripped from the

northern half of the site and sand fill was placed and compacted. Inspections before and during

placement of the sand fill were completed by Kollaard Associates Inc.

Based on a review of the surficial geology map for the site area, it is expected that the site is

underlain by fine to medium grained sand. Bedrock geology maps indicate that the bedrock

underlying the site consists of dolomite or limestone of the Oxford Formation. Based on a review of

topographical maps, it is expected that upper groundwater flow is to the west, towards Kemptville

Creek, which exists about 500 metres east of the site.

PROCEDURE

The field work for this investigation was carried out on January 23, 2017 at which time three

boreholes, numbered BH1 to BH3 were put down at the site using a track mounted drill rig equipped

with a hollow stem auger owned and operated by OGS Drilling of Almonte, Ontario.

Sampling of the overburden materials encountered at the boreholes was carried out at regular 0.75

metre depth intervals using a 50 millimetre diameter drive open conventional split spoon sampler in

conjunction with standard penetration testing to depths of about 6.7 to 7.2 metres below the existing




ground surface (ASTM D-1586 – Penetration Test and Split Barrel Sampling of Soils and ASTM D-

1587 – Thin Walled Tube Sampling of Soils). In situ vane shear testing (ASTM D-2573 Standard

Test Method for Field Shear Test in Cohesive Soil) was carried out in the cohesive materials

encountered at both boreholes. BH1 was continued below 6.7 metres as a probe hole using

dynamic cone penetration testing.

The subsurface soil conditions at the boreholes were identified based on visual examination of the

samples recovered (ASTM D2488 - Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils

(Visual-Manual Procedure), the results of the in situ vane shear testing and standard penetration

tests as well as laboratory test results on select samples. Groundwater conditions at the borehole

was noted at the time of drilling. The boreholes were loosely backfilled with the auger cuttings upon

completion of drilling.

One soil sample was submitted for Atterberg Limits testing (ASTM D4318) and moisture content

(ASTM D2216). One soil sample from BH1, BH3 and BH5 were also delivered to a chemical

laboratory for testing for any indication of potential soil sulphate attack and soil corrosion on buried

concrete and steel.

The field work was supervised throughout by a member of our engineering staff who located the

boreholes in the field, logged the boreholes and cared for the samples obtained. A description of

the subsurface conditions encountered at the boreholes are given in the attached Record of

Borehole Sheets. The results of the laboratory testing of the soil samples are presented in the

Laboratory Test Results section and Attachment A following the text in this report. The approximate

location of the boreholes are shown on the attached Site Plan, Figure 2.

Previously Conducted Field Work

Kollaard Associates Inc visited the site on November 23, 2016 to observe the excavation of four test

pits put down at the site by means of a rubber tire mounted backhoe. The purpose of the test pits

was to observe the consistency of the topsoil below the existing fill material.

Kollaard Associates Inc completed a subsurface investigation on September 27, 2016 as part of a

partial phase 2 environmental site assessment. During that time four test pits were advanced to




between 1.5 and 1.8 metres below the existing ground surface using a rubber tire mounted

backhoe. The field work was supervised throughout by a member of our engineering staff who

located the test pits in the field, logged the test pits and cared for the samples obtained. A

description of the subsurface conditions encountered at the test pits are given in the attached

Record of Test pit Sheets.

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

General

As previously indicated, a description of the subsurface conditions encountered at the boreholes

are provided in the attached Record of Borehole and Test Pit Sheets following the text of this report.

The test hole logs indicate the subsurface conditions at the specific drill locations only. Boundaries

between zones on the logs are often not distinct, but rather are transitional and have been

interpreted. Subsurface conditions at locations other than borehole locations may vary from the

conditions encountered at the boreholes.

The soil descriptions in this report are based on commonly accepted methods of classification and

identification employed in geotechnical practice. Classification was in general completed by visual-

manual procedures in accordance with ASTM 2488 - Standard Practice for Description and

Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure) with select samples being classified by laboratory

testing in accordance with ASTM 2487. Classification and identification of soil involves judgement

and Kollaard Associates Inc. does not guarantee descriptions as exact, but infers accuracy to the

extent that is common in current geotechnical practice.

The groundwater conditions described in this report refer only to those observed at the location and

on the date the observations were noted in the report and on the borehole logs. Groundwater

conditions may vary seasonally, or may be affected by construction activities on or in the vicinity of

the site.

The following is a brief overview of the subsurface conditions encountered at the boreholes.




Fill

From the surface, fill materials consisting of yellow sand and gravel with a trace of silt were

encountered at all of the borehole locations and extended to between 0.9 metres below the existing

ground surface and consists of the fill placed in 2016. This upper layer of yellow sand and gravel was

underlain by about 0.6 metres of crushed sand and gravel fill placed during the former Harvex

Agromart development of the site. The fill materials were fully penetrated at the borehole locations.

Topsoil

A layer of sandy topsoil, ranging between about 0.13 to 0.2 metres in thickness, was encountered

beneath the fill materials at all of the boreholes and test pit locations. The material was classified as

topsoil based on colour only and based on visual and tactile examination did not contain a

significant amount of organic material. The identification of the topsoil layer is for geotechnical

purposes only and does not constitute a statement as to the suitability of this layer for cultivation

and sustainable plant growth.

Sand/Silty Sand

A layer of yellow brown to grey brown to grey silty sand was encountered beneath the fill and/or

topsoil layer at all of the boreholes. The silty sand layer thickness ranged from about 1.1 to 1.7

metres below the existing ground surface. The results of standard penetration testing carried out in

the silty sand material, ranged from 2 to 17 blows per 0.3 metres with an average value of 11 blows

per 0.3 metres, indicating a very loose to compact state of packing.

Silty Clay

A deposit of grey silty clay was encountered beginning at about 2.7 to 3.2 metres below the existing

ground surface at all of the boreholes. In situ vane shear tests carried out in the silty clay deposit

gave undrained shear strength values ranging from about 26 kilopascals to greater than 100

kilopascals. The results of the in situ vane shear testing and tactile examination carried out for the

silty clay material indicate that the silty clay is mostly firm to stiff in consistency.




The results of Atterberg Limits tests conducted on a soil sample of silty clay are presented in Table I

and in Attachment A at the end of the report. The tested silty clay sample classifies as inorganic

clays of high plasticity (CH) in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System.

Table I – Atterberg Limit and Water Content Results

Sample Depth(metres) LL (%) PL (%) PI (%) W (%) BH2-SS6 4.57 – 5.18 57.8 24.0 33.8 57.2

LL: Liquid Limit PL: Plastic Limit Pl: Plasticity Index w: water content

CH: Clay of High Plasticity

The results are located in Attachment A.

Glacial Till / Bedrock

Borehole 1 was further advanced using dynamic cone penetration testing below a depth of about

6.7 metres below the existing ground surface. The dynamic cone penetration test carried out at BH1

gave values ranging from WH to 100 blows per 0.3 metres between the depths of about 6.7 and

16.3 metres below the existing ground surface. The dynamic cone penetration test values increased

with depth below about 13.7 metres and ranged from 5 to 100 blows per 0.3 metres. At a depth of

some 16.3 metres below the existing ground surface at BH1, refusal to cone penetration was

encountered. It is considered likely that the increase in blow count at about 13.7 metres depth

indicates the possible presence of glacial till materials and that practical refusal to cone penetration

indicates either a large boulder or bedrock in BH1 at about 16.3 metres below the existing ground

surface.

Groundwater

Groundwater seepage was observed within all of the boreholes at a depth of about 1.7 metres

below the existing ground surface at the time of drilling on January 23, 2017. It should be noted that

the groundwater levels may be higher during wet periods of the year such as the early spring.

Corrosivity on Reinforcement and Sulphate Attack on Portland Cement




The results of the laboratory testing of a soil sample for submitted for chemistry testing related to

corrosivity is summarized in the following table.

Item - BH2(1.5-2.1) Threshold of Concern

Test Result Comment

Chlorides (Cl) Cl > 0.04 % 0.0009 Negligible

pH 5.0 < pH 7.57 Neutral/Slightly Basic Negligible concern

Resistivity R < 15000 ohm-cm 9820 Moderate Sulphates (SO4) SO4 > 0.1% <0.01 Negligible concern

The chemical sulphate content analyses for the representative soil samples tested indicates a

sulphate concentration of less than 200 ug/g or 0.02 % in soil, respectively, from the borehole. The

results were compared with Canadian Standards Association (CSA) Standards A23.1 for sulphate

attack potential on concrete structures and posses a "negligible" risk for sulphate attack on concrete

materials and accordingly, conventional GU or MS Portland cement may be used in the construction

of the proposed concrete elements.

The pH value for the soil sample was reported to be at 7.57 indicating a negligible to slightly basic

corrosion potential. This value was evaluated using Table 2 of Building Research Establishment

(BRE) Digest 362 (July 1991).The pH is greater than 5.5 indicating the concrete will not be exposed

to attack from acids. The chloride content of the sample was also compared with the threshold level

and present moderately corrosion potential. Soil resistivity was found to be 98.2 ohm-m for the

sample analyzed.

Consideration to increasing the specified strength and/or adding air entrainment into any reinforced

concrete in contact with the soil should be given. Special protection is required for reinforcement

steel within the concrete walls below grade.

PROPOSED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT BUILDING FOUNDATIONS

General

This section of the report provides engineering guidelines on the geotechnical design aspects of the

project based on our interpretation of the information from the test holes and the project




requirements. It is stressed that the information in the following sections is provided for the

guidance of the designers and is intended for this project only. Contractors bidding on or

undertaking the works should examine the factual results of the investigation, satisfy themselves as

to the adequacy of the information for construction, and make their own interpretation of the factual

data as it affects their construction techniques, schedule, safety and equipment capabilities.

The professional services retained for this project include only the geotechnical aspects of the

subsurface conditions at this site. The presence or implications of possible surface and/or

subsurface contamination resulting from previous uses or activities at this site or adjacent

properties, and/or resulting from the introduction onto the site of materials from offsite sources are

outside the terms of reference for this report and have not been investigated or addressed.

The results of this investigation indicate that the site is mostly underlain by a deposits of silty sand

underlain by silty clay followed by glacial till and/or bedrock with depth beneath some imported sand

fill materials and sand topsoil layer. Based on the geotechnical investigation, it is expected that fill

materials and/or topsoil will be encountered at all of the proposed building locations. It is expected

that the total fill materials and topsoil, in general, will be about 1.5 to 1.7 metres in thickness

followed by loose silty sand with a high water table.

Proposed Building Foundations

In view of the thickness and inconsistency of the fill materials and topsoil encountered at the site

and in order to provide frost protection for the buildings, it is considered that the proposed buildings

may be founded at a minimum depth of 1.5 metres below the finished grade adjacent the buildings

on a conventional strip footing foundation bearing on an approved undisturbed silty sand subgrade

or on an engineered fill placed on undisturbed silty sand.

It is suggested that the excavation for the proposed building be completed as follows:

Remove 0.6 metres of the existing fill material from the entire area of the building footprint.

Stock pile the excavated material for reuse as granular fill within the building foundation to

support the proposed slab and for backfill material around the exterior of the building.

Further excavate as required within the footing footprint to the required subgrade level to

support the proposed building foundations.




The allowable bearing pressure for any footings depends on the depth of the footings below original

ground surface, the width of the footings, and the height above the original ground surface of any

landscape grade raise adjacent to the dwelling foundation.

Strip footings, a width of 0.76 metres (30 inches) bearing on the native undisturbed silty sand or on

an engineered pad place on undisturbed silty sand at a founding depth of a maximum of 1.0 metres

below the original ground surface and above the groundwater level may be designed using a

maximum allowable bearing pressure of 60 kilopascals for serviceability limit states and 100

kilopascals for the factored ultimate bearing resistance.

The above allowable bearing pressure is subject to a maximum grade raise of 1.2 metres above the

fill materials placed during the Harvex Agromart Development.

Provided that any loose and/or disturbed soil is removed from the bearing surfaces prior to pouring

concrete, the total and differential settlement of the footings should be less than 25 millimetres and

20 millimetres, respectively.

Excavations

Any excavation for the proposed structures will likely be carried out through surficial fill material

consisting of imported sand, sandy topsoil and native saturated sands. The sides of the excavation

should be sloped in accordance with the requirements of Ontario Regulation 213/91, s. 226 under

the Occupational Health and Safety Act. According to the Act, the soils at the site can be classified

as Type 3 soil, however this classification should be confirmed by qualified individuals as the site is

excavated and if necessary, adjusted. It is expected that the side slopes of the sands will be stable

in the short term at an inclination of 1 horizontal to 1 vertical to depths of approximately 4 metres.

As previously indicated, significant groundwater inflow into trenches carried down below the

groundwater level should be expected. It should be possible to control the groundwater inflow by

pumping from sumps in the excavation. The groundwater removed from the excavation should be

discharged into temporary settling ponds to allow for the settlement of suspended sand particles prior

to discharge from the site.




PERMIT TO TAKE WATER Significant groundwater inflow into the service trench if carried out below the groundwater level

should be expected. As such a Category 2 permit to take water should be obtained from the

Ministry of Environment under Ontario Regulation O. Reg 387/04 prior to commencing site works.

Engineered Fill

Where fill material is encountered below proposed founding level, the fill material should be

removed and replaced with compacted granular material (engineered fill). The engineered fill should

be separated from the approved subgrade by means of a 6 ounce non-woven geotextile fabric such

as Mirafi 160N or approved alternative. The engineered fill should consist of granular material

meeting Ontario Provincial Standards Specifications (OPSS) requirements for Granular A or

Granular B Type II and should be compacted in maximum 300 millimetre thick loose lifts to at least

95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density. To allow the spread of load beneath the

footings, the engineered fill should extend out from the edges of the footing a horizontal distance of

0.5 metres and then down and out at 1 horizontal to 1 vertical, or flatter. The excavations for the

proposed buildings should be sized to accommodate this fill placement. Currently, OPSS

documents allow recycled asphaltic concrete to be used in Granular A and Granular B Type II

materials. If the source of recycled material cannot be verified, it is suggested that any granular

materials used below the founding level be composed of virgin materials only.

The subgrade surface should be inspected by geotechnical personnel prior to the placement of

engineered fill material and concrete. Field density testing should be carried out on the engineered

fill during placement.

Slab on Grade Support

It is expected that the proposed foundations will bear on undisturbed native silty sand or engineered

fill.

As previously indicated, the existing subsurface conditions beneath the proposed floor slabs consist

of about 0.9 metres of sand fill followed by about 0.6 metres of sand and gravel fill underlain by

about 0.15 metres of topsoil.




In order to ensure predictable performance of the any proposed concrete floor slabs the following is

recommended:

The upper 0.6 metres of the fill material below the proposed slab area should be removed.

The exposed surface should be compacted and proof rolled or tested to ensure a minimum

compaction of 95% standard proctor maximum dry density.

The excavated fill can be replaced in 300 mm lifts compacted to 95% SPMDD to 0.45 m below

the proposed floor slab.

If sufficient excavated fill material is not available, sand, or sand and gravel meeting the OPSS

for Granular B Type I, or crushed stone meeting OPSS grading requirements for Granular B

Type II, or other material approved by the Geotechnical Engineer to raise subgrade to 0.45

metres below the floor slab.

The remaining fill materials below the proposed concrete floor slab on grade should consist of a

minimum of 150 millimetre thickness of crushed stone meeting OPSS Granular A immediately

beneath the concrete floor slab followed by sand, or sand and gravel meeting the OPSS for

Granular B Type I, or crushed stone meeting OPSS grading requirements for Granular B Type

II.

All fill materials below the floor slab should be compacted in maximum 300 millimetre thick lifts

to at least 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density.

It is recommended that a standard 8 millimetre polyethylene vapour barrier be placed below the

concrete floor slab.

The proposed "Granular A' or 'Granular B' fill beneath the concrete floor slab can be replaced with

approval by the geotechnical engineer with recycled crushed concrete meeting the grading

requirements for 50 mm minus OPSS Granular B Type II.

The concrete floor slab should be saw cut at regular intervals to minimize random cracking of the

slab due to shrinkage of the concrete. The crack control cuts should be placed at a grid spacing not

exceeding the lesser of 25 times the slab thickness or 4.5 metres. The slab should be cut as soon

as it is possible to work on the slab without damaging the surface of the slab.

Under slab drainage is not considered necessary provided that the floor slab level is everywhere

above the finished exterior ground surface level. If any areas of the proposed buildings are to




remain unheated during the winter period, thermal protection of the slab on grade may be required.

Further details on the insulation requirements could be provided, if necessary.

Frost Protection Requirements for Foundations

All exterior foundation elements and those in any unheated parts of the proposed buildings should

be provided with at least 1.5 metres of earth cover for frost protection purposes. Isolated, unheated

foundation elements adjacent to surfaces, which are cleared of snow cover during winter months

should be provided with a minimum 1.8 metres of earth cover. Where less than the required depth

of soil cover can be provided, the foundation elements should be protected from frost by using a

combination of earth cover and extruded polystyrene rigid insulation. A typical frost protection

insulation detail could be provided upon request, if required.

Building Basement Foundation Walls and Drainage

As previously indicated, provided the underside of the floor slab is everywhere above the exterior

finished grade, underslab and perimeter foundation drainage is not required.

The native soils encountered at the site are considered to be frost susceptible. To prevent possible

foundation frost jacking due to frost adhesion, the backfill against the foundation walls or isolated

walls or piers should consist of free draining, non-frost susceptible material such as sand or sand

and gravel meeting OPSS Granular B Type I grading requirements. Alternatively, foundations could

be backfilled with native material in conjunction with the use of an approved proprietary drainage

layer system such as "System Platon" against the foundation wall. It is pointed out that there is

potential for possible frost jacking of the upper portion of some types of these drainage layer

systems if frost susceptible material is used as backfill. This could be mitigated by backfilling the

upper approximately 0.6 metres with non-frost susceptible granular material. Should native material

be used for backfill, all cobbles and boulders in excess of 200 millimetres should be sorted from the

backfill prior to placement.

Where the backfill material will ultimately support a pavement structure or walkway, it is suggested

that the foundation wall backfill material be compacted in 250 millimetre thick lifts to 95 percent of




the standard Proctor dry density value. In that case any native material proposed for foundation

backfill should be inspected and approved by the geotechnical engineer.

Seismic Design for the Proposed Mixed Use Building

For seismic design purposes, in accordance with the 2012 OBC Section 4.1.8.4, Table 4.1.8.4.A.,

the site classification for shallow foundations for seismic site response is Site Class D.

SITE SERVICES

Excavation

The excavations for the installation of the site services will be carried out through fill, saturated

sands and sensitive silty clay. The sides of the excavations in overburden materials should be

sloped in accordance with the requirements in Ontario Regulation 213/91 under the Ontario

Occupational Health and Safety Act.

Where space constraints dictate, the excavation and backfilling operations should be carried out

within a tightly fitting, braced steel trench box. In accordance with O.Reg 213/91, s. 226, the upper

soils at this site can be considered to be Type 3 soil, however, this classification should be

confirmed by qualified individuals as the site is excavated and if necessary, adjusted. It is expected

that the side slopes of the sands will be stable in the short term at an inclination of about 3 horizontal

to 1 vertical. The silty clay should be stable in the short term at an inclination of 1 horizontal to 1

vertical to depths of approximately 4 metres.

As previously indicated, significant groundwater inflow into trenches carried down below the

groundwater level should be expected. It should be possible to control the groundwater inflow by

pumping from sumps in the excavation. The groundwater removed from the excavation should be

discharged into temporary settling ponds to allow for the settlement of suspended sand particles prior

to discharge from the site.




Pipe Bedding and Cover Materials

It is suggested that the service pipe bedding material consist of at least 150 millimetres of granular

material meeting OPSS requirements for Granular A. A provisional allowance should, however, be

made for sub-excavation of any existing fill or disturbed material encountered at subgrade level.

Granular material meeting OPSS specifications for Granular B Type II could be used as a sub-

bedding material. The use of clear crushed stone as bedding or sub-bedding material should not

be permitted.

Cover material, from pipe spring line to at least 300 millimetres above the top of the pipe, should

consist of granular material, such as OPSS Granular A.

The sub-bedding, bedding and cover materials should be compacted in maximum 200 millimetre

thick lifts to at least 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density using suitable vibratory

compaction equipment.

Trench Backfill

The general backfilling procedures should be carried out in a manner that is compatible with the

future use of the area above the service trenches. It will not be possible to re-use the sensitive silty

clay as trench backfill due to its high moisture content and sensitivity. However, it should be possible

to re-use the native moist sands obtained from above the groundwater level as trench backfill above

the cover material.

In areas where the service trench will be located below or in close proximity to existing or future

pavement areas, acceptable native materials should be used as backfill between the pavement

subgrade level and the depth of seasonal frost penetration (i.e. 1.8 metres below finished grade) in

order to reduce the potential for differential frost heaving between the area over the trench and the

adjacent section of roadway.

Where native backfill is used, it should match the native materials exposed on the trench walls.

Should the native materials not be re-usable for backfill, frost tapers should be incorporated along the

length of the trenches. To minimize future settlement of the backfill and achieve an acceptable sub-




grade for the roadways, sidewalks, etc., the trench should be compacted in maximum 300 millimetre

thick lifts to at least 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density.

PARKING LOT AND ACCESS ROADWAY PAVEMENTS Subgrade Preparation

Based on the results of the boreholes, the subsurface conditions in the access roadway and parking

areas consist of imported sand fill followed by a thin layer of sandy topsoil overlying native silty sand

followed by silty clay. The imported sand fill and thin layer of sandy topsoil are considered adequate

to supported the proposed pavement and can be left in place. However, it is considered that the

sand fill should be compacted and proof rolled or tested to ensure a minimum compaction of 95%

standard proctor maximum dry density.

For any areas of the site that require the subgrade to be raised to proposed roadway area subgrade

level, the material used should consist of OPSS select subgrade material or OPSS Granular B Type

I or Type II. Any materials proposed for this use should be approved by the geotechnical engineer

before placement within the roadway. Materials used for raising the sub-grade to proposed roadway

area sub-grade level should be placed in maximum 300 millimetre thick loose lifts and be compacted

to at least 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density using suitable compaction

equipment.

The sub-grade surface should be inspected and approved by geotechnical personnel and any soft

areas evident should be sub-excavated and replaced with suitable earth borrow or granular crushed

stone approved by the geotechnical engineer. The sub-grade should be shaped and crowned to

promote drainage of the roadway area granular. Following approval of the preparation of the sub-

grade, the pavement granulars may be placed.

The pavement areas subject to cars and light trucks, the pavement should consist of:

50 millimetres of hot mix asphaltic concrete (HL3) or Superpave 12.5 asphaltic concrete

150 millimetres of OPSS Granular A base over

300 millimetres of OPSS Granular B, Type II subbase

(50 or 100 millimetre minus crushed stone)




The asphaltic concrete thickness along the main street of the development be increased to 90

millimetres and consist of 50 mm of HL8 overlain by 40 mm of HL3.

Performance grade PG 58-34 asphaltic concrete should be specified. Compaction of the granular

pavement materials should be carried out in maximum 300 millimetre thick loose lifts to 98 and 100

percent, respectively, of the standard Proctor maximum dry density value using suitable vibratory

compaction equipment.

Compaction of the asphaltic concrete should be carried out using suitable equipment to 95% ± 2%.

The above pavement structures will be adequate on an acceptable sub-grade, that is, one where

any roadway fill and service trench backfill has been adequately compacted. If the roadway sub-

grade is disturbed or wetted due to construction operations or precipitation, the granular

thicknesses given above may not be adequate and it may be necessary to increase the thickness of

the Granular B Type II subbase and/or incorporate a non-woven geotextile separator between the

roadway sub-grade surface and the granular sub-base material. The adequacy of the design of the

pavement thickness should be assessed by the geotechnical personnel at the time of construction.

CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

The engagement of the services of the geotechnical consultant during construction is

recommended to confirm that the subsurface conditions throughout the proposed development do

not materially differ from those given in the report and that the construction activities do not

adversely affect the intent of the design.

All foundation areas and any engineered fill areas for the proposed buildings should be inspected

by Kollaard Associates Inc. to ensure that a suitable subgrade has been reached and properly

prepared. The placing and compaction of any granular materials beneath the foundations should

be inspected to ensure that the materials used conform to the grading and compaction

specifications.

The subgrade for the site services, access roadway and parking areas should be inspected and

approved by geotechnical personnel. In situ density testing should be carried out on the service




pipe bedding and backfill and the pavement granular materials to ensure the materials meet the

specifications from a compaction point of view.

The native silty sand/sandy silt and silty clay deposits at this site will be sensitive to disturbance

from construction operations, from rainwater or snow melt, and frost. In order to minimize

disturbance, construction traffic operating directly on the subgrade should be kept to an absolute

minimum and the subgrade should be protected from below freezing temperatures.

We trust this report provides sufficient information for your present purposes. If you have any

questions concerning this report or if we may be of further services to you, please do not hesitate to

contact our office.

Regards,

Kollaard Associates Inc.

Dean Tataryn, B.E.S., EP. Steve deWit, P.Eng.

Attachments: Record of Boreholes Figures 1 and 2 Laboratory Test Results for Chemical Properties Laboratory Test Results for Physical Properties – Stantec Laboratory Test Results

for Soils

Jan 31.2017

RECORD OF BOREHOLE

PROJECT: PROJECT NUMBER:

CLIENT: DATE OF BORING:

LOCATION:

PENETRATION TEST HAMMER:

SHEET 1 of 2

DATUM:

LOGGED:DEPTH SCALE:

BORING METHOD: AUGER TYPE: CHECKED:

SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES

D

EP

TH

SC

AL

E

(m

ete

rs)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

DESCRIPTION

ST

RA

TA

PL

OT

ELEV. DEPTH

(M)

NU

MB

ER

T

YP

E

B

LO

WS

/0.3

m

DYNAMIC CONE PENETRATION

TEST

A

DD

ITIO

NA

L

L

AB

TE

ST

ING

PIEZOMETER ORSTANDPIPE

INSTALLATION

BH1

Proposed Commercial Development 160947

Kevlar Developments January 23, 2017

3000 Wellington Road, Municipality of North Grenville, Ontario

63.5kg, Drop, 0.76mm Geodetic

Ground Surface

Yellow brown sand and gravel, trace silt (FILL)

Sandy TOPSOIL

Grey SILTY SAND

Grey SILTY CLAY

Borehole continued as Probe Hole probably grey silty clay, then grey silty sand with some gravel, cobbles and boulders (GLACIAL TILL)

90.680.00

89.191.49

87.583.10

83.986.70

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

9

23

6

17

1

WH

WH

20 40 60 80Cu, kPa

REM. SHEAR STRENGTH

20 40 60 80Cu, kPa

UNDIST. SHEAR STRENGTH

10 30 50 70 90

blows/300 mm

DT1 to 50

Power Auger 200 mm Hollow Stem DT

Water measured in borehole on January 23, 2017 at about 1.7 metres below existing ground surface.

RECORD OF BOREHOLE



LOCATION:


SHEET 1 of 1

DATUM:

LOGGED:DEPTH SCALE:



D

EP

TH

SC

AL

E

(m

ete

rs)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

DESCRIPTION

ST

RA

TA

PL

OT

ELEV. DEPTH

(M)

NU

MB

ER

T

YP

E

B

LO

WS

/0.3

m


TEST

A

DD

ITIO

NA

L

L

AB

TE

ST

ING


INSTALLATION

BH2





Ground Surface


Sandy TOPSOIL

Yellow brown SILTY SAND

Grey SILTY SAND

Grey SILTY CLAY

End of Borehole

90.620.00

89.161.46

88.921.70

87.423.20

83.926.70

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

12

10

16

12

WH

WH

WH

20 40 60 80Cu, kPa

REM. SHEAR STRENGTH

20 40 60 80Cu, kPa


10 30 50 70 90

blows/300 mm

DT1 to 50

Power Auger 200 mm Hollow Stem SD


RECORD OF BOREHOLE



LOCATION:


SHEET 1 of 1

DATUM:

LOGGED:DEPTH SCALE:



D

EP

TH

SC

AL

E

(m

ete

rs)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

DESCRIPTION

ST

RA

TA

PL

OT

ELEV. DEPTH

(M)

NU

MB

ER

T

YP

E

B

LO

WS

/0.3

m


TEST

A

DD

ITIO

NA

L

L

AB

TE

ST

ING


INSTALLATION

BH3





Ground Surface


Sandy TOPSOIL

Yellow brown SILTY SAND

Grey SILTY SAND

Grey SILTY CLAY

End of Borehole

90.620.00

89.151.47

87.932.69

83.307.32

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

49

30

13

2

WH

1

WH

20 40 60 80Cu, kPa

REM. SHEAR STRENGTH

20 40 60 80Cu, kPa


10 30 50 70 90

blows/300 mm

DT1 to 50

Power Auger 200 mm Hollow Stem SD


RECORD OF BOREHOLE



LOCATION:


SHEET 2 of 2

DATUM:

LOGGED:DEPTH SCALE:



D

EP

TH

SC

AL

E

(m

ete

rs)

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

DESCRIPTION

ST

RA

TA

PL

OT

ELEV. DEPTH

(M)

NU

MB

ER

T

YP

E

B

LO

WS

/0.3

m


TEST

A

DD

ITIO

NA

L

L

AB

TE

ST

ING


INSTALLATION

BH1





End of borehole, refusal on large boulder or bedrock

74.3816.30

20 40 60 80Cu, kPa

REM. SHEAR STRENGTH

20 40 60 80Cu, kPa


10 30 50 70 90

blows/300 mm

DT1 to 50

Power Auger 200 mm Hollow Stem DT

�

Record of Test PitsSoil Sampling and Testing for Partial Phase II ESA

3000 Wellington Road Kemptville, Ontario

October 2016 File No. 160714

Civil • Geotechnical • Structural • Environmental • Materials Testing

TABLE I

RECORD OF TEST PITS

TEST PIT DEPTH NUMBER (METRES) DESCRIPTION TP1 0.00 – 0.81 Topsoil, sand, gravel, stones (FILL) 0.81 – 0.86 TOPSOIL

0.86 – 1.22 Red brown fine to medium sand, trace silt

1.22 – 1.78 Grey fine to medium SAND, trace

silt 1.78 End of test pit

Water observed in excavation at about 1.72 metres below existing ground surface, September 27, 2016. TP2 0.00 – 0.15 Topsoil (FILL)

0.15 – 0.81 Red brown fine to medium SAND,

trace silt (FILL)

0.81 – 0.89 TOPSOIL 0.89 – 1.52 Grey fine to medium SAND, trace


Water observed in excavation at about 1.52 metres below existing ground surface, September 27, 2016.

�

Record of Test PitsSoil Sampling and Testing for Partial Phase II ESA

3000 Wellington Road Kemptville, Ontario

October 2016 File No. 160714

Civil • Geotechnical • Structural • Environmental • Materials Testing

TP3 0.00 – 0.15 Topsoil (FILL)

0.15 – 0.81 Red brown fine to medium SAND,

gravel (FILL)



Water observed in excavation at about 1.52 metres below existing ground surface, September 27, 2016. TP4 0.00 – 0.66 Topsoil, grey sand (FILL)



Water observed in excavation at about 1.52 metres below existing ground surface, September 27, 2016.

Project No.________________

Date _____________________

KEY PLAN

FIGURE 1

NOT TO SCALE

160947

January 2017

North Approximate Site

� Kevlar Developments January 31, 2017

Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Commercial Development

3000 County Road 19, Municipality of North Grenville, Ontario 160947


Laboratory Test Results for Chemical Properties

www.paracellabs.com1-800-749-1947

Ottawa, ON, K1G 4J8300 - 2319 St. Laurent Blvd

Attn: Brian PrevostOttawa, ON K2C 3G41331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Ottawa)

Certificate of Analysis

This Certificate of Analysis contains analytical data applicable to the following samples as submitted:

Paracel ID Client ID

Order #: 1704214

Order Date: 25-Jan-2017 Report Date: 30-Jan-2017

Client PO: Kollaard Associates, File# 160947

Custody: Project: 122410003

1704214-01 BH 2, SS-3, 5'-7'

Any use of these results implies your agreement that our total liabilty in connection with this work, however arising, shall be limited to the amount paid by you for this work, and that our employees or agents shall not under any circumstances be liable to you in connection with this work.

Approved By:

Page 1 of 7

Lab Supervisor

Mark Foto, M.Sc.

Order #: 1704214

Project Description: 122410003

Certificate of AnalysisClient:

Report Date: 30-Jan-2017

Order Date: 25-Jan-2017


Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Ottawa)

Analysis Summary Table

Analysis Method Reference/Description Extraction Date Analysis Date

EPA 300.1 - IC, water extraction 27-Jan-17 27-Jan-17AnionsEPA 150.1 - pH probe @ 25 °C, CaCl buffered ext. 28-Jan-17 28-Jan-17pH, soilEPA 120.1 - probe, water extraction 28-Jan-17 28-Jan-17ResistivityGravimetric, calculation 27-Jan-17 27-Jan-17Solids, %

Page 2 of 7

Order #: 1704214







Client ID: BH 2, SS-3, 5'-7' - - -Sample Date: ---23-Jan-17

1704214-01 - - -Sample ID:MDL/Units Soil - - -

Physical Characteristics

% Solids ---83.80.1 % by Wt.

General Inorganics

pH ---7.570.05 pH Units

Resistivity ---98.20.10 Ohm.m

Anions

Chloride ---95 ug/g dry

Sulphate ---135 ug/g dry

Page 3 of 7

Order #: 1704214







Method Quality Control: Blank

Analyte ResultReporting

Limit UnitsSourceResult %REC

%RECLimit RPD

RPDLimit Notes

AnionsChloride ND 5 ug/g Sulphate ND 5 ug/g

General InorganicsResistivity ND 0.10 Ohm.m

Page 4 of 7

Order #: 1704214







Method Quality Control: Duplicate


Limit UnitsSourceResult %REC

%RECLimit RPD

RPDLimit Notes

AnionsChloride 8.4 5 ug/g dry 8.8 205.3Sulphate 12.2 5 ug/g dry 12.9 205.0

General InorganicspH 7.82 0.05 pH Units 7.85 100.4Resistivity 22.8 0.10 Ohm.m 23.1 201.2

Physical Characteristics% Solids 92.2 0.1 % by Wt. 93.3 251.2

Page 5 of 7

Order #: 1704214







Method Quality Control: Spike


Limit Units SourceResult

%REC %RECLimit

RPDRPDLimit Notes

AnionsChloride 101 8.8 92.3 78-1135 ug/g Sulphate 116 12.9 103 78-1115 ug/g

Page 6 of 7

Order #: 1704214







Qualifier Notes :None

Sample Data RevisionsNone

Work Order Revisions / Comments :

None

Other Report Notes :

MDL: Method Detection Limit

n/a: not applicable

Source Result: Data used as source for matrix and duplicate samples%REC: Percent recovery.RPD: Relative percent difference.

ND: Not Detected

Soil results are reported on a dry weight basis when the units are denoted with 'dry'.Where %Solids is reported, moisture loss includes the loss of volatile hydrocarbons.

Page 7 of 7

� Kevlar Developments January 31, 2017

Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Commercial Development

3000 County Road 19, Municipality of North Grenville, Ontario 160947


Laboratory Test Results for Physical Properties

geotechnical structural environmental hydrogeology 210 ... · hydrogeology 210 prescott street,...

Documents