Geotechnical Engineering Subsurface Investigation Report 15-SI-9-OI-1Page) 1637 Bank Street, Ottawa, ON. Yuri Mendez M. Eng, P. Eng.

Transcription

1 Geotechnical Engineering Page) 1637 Bank Street, Ottawa, ON Abstract: This report present the findings of the geotechnical investigation completed at 1637 Bank Street, Ottawa, ON, and issue the recommendations for the design phase of the proposed development (PD) of a multi-storey commercial building. It consists on a qualified interpretation of the subsurface conditions at a portion of the PIN property, in the City of Ottawa, from information compiled from sampling and testing conducted in boreholes and a subsequent laboratory testing program of soils. The information reviewed also includes a site reconnaissance, readily available geologic information from the Geological Survey of Canada (GSC), the City of Ottawa mapping and local climate data from Environment Canada. Geotechnical Investigation Plan (GP 15-SI-9-OI-1) presents the portion of PIN subject to this investigation with relevant information concerning topography, proposed and/or existing buildings, adjacent buildings, testholes, strata, etc. The subsurface information from the sampling and testing program is presented in the appendixes. Yuri Mendez M. Eng, P. Eng. 06/03/2015 March 6, 2015 Geotechnical Engineering 196 Britannia Road Ottawa, On. K2B 5W9 PO Box RPO Beechwood Ottawa, ON, K1M 2H9 Phone: info@geoseismic.ca

2 1 Technical Report Documentation 1. Report Number: 15-SI-9-OI-1 Contract No.: 4. Report Type: Subsurface Investigation Report 1637 Bank Street, Ottawa, ON 2. Client/Developer Ontario Inc Canotek Road, Ottawa, ON, K1J 9J5 Author: Yuri Mendez MEng, PEng. O/A Geoseismic 6. Municipal Address: 1637 Bank Street, Ottawa, ON 7. Proposed Development: Multi-Storey Commercial Building. One level of underground parking may be used. 3. Care of: 5. Date: March 6, Legal Description: PIN Frontage: m 9. Depth: Area: 1,036.9 m Key Plan: 12. Available Plans: A. Topographic Plan of Survey. Registered Plan M-23, City of Ottawa B Bank St. zoning provisions and preliminary site plan Site N o Source: Google Maps W o. Report Objective, Scope and Interpretation: This report aims to characterize the physical and mechanical properties of the soil strata beneath the ground surface based on the findings of a geotechnical investigation in order to insure that the underlying soil and rock can support the proposed facilities. Given the variability in soils the actual conditions may be found to vary at the time of construction and may require a new set of recommendations in the form of amendments to this investigation and/or report. This report is issued at a time in which details regarding the geometry and loads of the Proposed Development (PD) are not known and is based on the best available information at the present time. Geotechnical design is highly dependent on dimensions, geometry and depth of structures, as such, a geotechnical review of finalized plans and designs is in all cases recommended or may be requested by other designers when proposed variations deviate from the preliminary assumptions in this report. An adequate geotechnical inspection and quality control program is to supplement this report during construction. This report also provides an indication of the scope of pending geotechnical plan reviews, technical letters and quality control recommended for the PD. Restrictions: The copy rights of this report are released to Ontario Inc. for all purposes related to developments at 1637 Bank Street, Ottawa. No. of Pages: 25 Page 2 of 25

3 2 Table of Contents Page) Technical Report Documentation Sampling and Testing Physical Settings, Strata and Topography... 6 Geotechnical Plan Surface and Subsurface Materials Ground Water and Moisture Geotechnical Assessment Soil Strata and Properties Bedrock Ground Water Frost Susceptibility Plasticity Disturbance Borrow Materials Potential Settlements Soil Types Under Safety Regulations Excavations and Bedrock Removal Construction of Buildings Seismic Site Response Roadbed Soil Quality Special Issues or Difficult Soils: Liquefaction, Slope Stability, Organic, etc Geotechnical Design Assumptions Material Properties, Design Values and Local Conditions Grading/Terracing/Raise Foundations Load and Resistance Factors Bearing Capacity Settlements Page 3 of 25

4 6.4.4 Foundation Insulation Options for Shallow Footings Foundation Wall Damproofing and Drainage Seismic Design Design Spectral Accelerations Seismic Loads on Foundation Walls Pavement Traffic Classes Pavement Options Frost Heave Manholes, Catch Basins and Others Underground Corrosion Sulphate Attack on Concrete Temporary Soil Cut and Shoring Open Cut Water Inflow within Excavations Construction Safety and Precautions Construction and Excavation Along Nearby Structures and Property Boundaries Protection of Expansive Shale Recommended Specifications Specification Scope Striping Excavation to Undisturbed Soil Surface Fill Placement Compacted Lifts Thicknesses Equipment and Passes Compaction Guide for Passes and Level of Compaction Compaction General Compaction Specific Compaction Along Basement Walls and Retaining Walls Compaction Quality Control Recommended Geotechnical Services During Design and Construction Design Phase Supplemental Geotechnical Consultant Services for the Proposed Development 24 Page 4 of 25

5 9.2 Construction Phase Supplemental Geotechnical Consultant Services for the Proposed Development Contractor Designed Temporary Geotechnical Structures Page 5 of 25

6 3 Sampling and Testing The field and laboratory program set out in our proposal dated January 25, 2015, was completed in general accordance with the following standards: ASTM D Standard Guide to Site Characterization for Engineering Design and Construction Purposes, ASTM D Standard Guide for Field Logging of Subsurface Explorations of Soil and Rock, ASTM D Standard Test Method for Standard Penetration Test (SPT) and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils, ASTM D Standard Test Method for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass. The program also included: an elevation survey, a laboratory review of samples recovered from the field, a field review of surface topsoil using hand tools, selection of samples for water content determination as considered appropriate and one sample submitted to a local laboratory for soluble ions concentration, PH and resistivity. The test hole locations are shown in the geotechnical plan GP 15-SI-9-OI-1, the laboratory testing, the soil sampling and field testing at each location is shown in the soil profile testing and sampling logs in our appendices. 4 Physical Settings, Strata and Topography The surface topography and subsurface materials found during this investigation are shown in the geotechnical plan GP 15-SI-9-OI-1 in page 7. For ease of reference, in GP 15-SI-9-OI-1 the site is shown within a grid of Stations North and East. Generally, the site is underlain by shale bedrock at depths varying between 2.8 and 3.8 m. The overburden soils consist of layers of glacial till and silty clay overlain by clayey sand fill materials. The geology data base by Belanger J. R suggests 0 to 5 m of overburden soils underlain by shale bedrock. At the time of the investigation the site was snow covered. Page 6 of 25

7 1 Notes: The base plan for the Investigation Layout Plan View consists of the Topographic Plan of Survey. Registered Plan M-23, City of Ottawa by Farley, Smith and Denis Surveying. Cross sections are visual aids. Depths to strata and geometry are only accurate at the borehole locations. Cross sections construction is computer assisted using Strater 4 software and by joining lines of similar strata and extrapolation. Refer to the test hole logs in appendix A for details of dimensions, sampling and testing Elevations are referenced to benchmark geodetic elevations indicated in the available Plan of Survey Elevation data for the boreholes is approximate. This plan may vary, subject to future information. The site class C assigned at this time, may vary to Class B or A upon completion of a seismic survey. Geotechnical Plan 15-SI-9-OI-1 Portion of PIN Proposed multi-storey commercial building 1637 Bank Street, Ottawa, ON March 6, 2015 Drawing: YM

8 4.1 Surface and Subsurface Materials The arrangement of strata found in our investigation is shown in our borehole logs and presented graphically in the cross sections in GP 15-SI-9-OI-1. The brown coloration result from oxidation of iron in the parent minerals from which the soils are originated. The grey color in soils is indicative of materials below permanent ground water. Topsoil, is in general organic materials from vegetation, mixed to some degree with the parent underlying soil. At this site, topsoil materials varying in thickness from a few centimeters to up to 8 cms at BH1 were found by conducting a surficial survey using hand tools. Hard clays are fine grained plastic-cohesive soils and are characterized by their stiffness (shear strength). Their behavior is highly dependent on moisture content changes. They were found to be in a hard to very stiff state. At boreholes 2 and 3 they were noted to have sandy-silty seems. Glacial till consisting of dense sand with silt, clay and gravel was encountered alternating in layers with hard silty clay with sandy-silty seems. Where sampled, the bedrock was found to consist of the minerals indicated by the geological mapping as indicated in the cross sections and in the borehole logs. 4.2 Ground Water and Moisture Permanent water table levels are often evidenced by the transition of soil colour brown to grey as shown in GP 15-SI-9-OI-1. The grey colour of bedrock shown does not indicate water table. Note that both boreholes, 2 and 4, at a higher elevation than boreholes 1 and 3 suggest the water table at about 2.7 to 2.3 m depth as interpreted from soil colours. At borehole 1, which reached the lowest elevations at this site, the bottom portion of the overburden materials appeared wet. A measurement completed by CM3 Environmental in the well installed in borehole 1, previous to the issuance of this report indicate the water level at a depth of m below the ground surface (approximately m elevation). Moisture contents vary above the ground water table. Water contents are shown in the borehole logs in appendix A. 5 Geotechnical Assessment 5.1 Soil Strata and Properties Glacial till materials are considered of medium compactness based on standard penetration counts at this site, whereas the silty clay encountered at this site is considered stiff to very stiff. Page 8 of 25

9 5.2 Bedrock Shale bedrock may be subject to heave when exposed to oxygen. The shale bedrock which could be subject to heave is known as expansive shale. It is generally assumed that shale bedrock need to be protected from direct exposure to oxygen by providing a 50 mm layer of lean concrete or have the exposed surfaces covered with granular backfill within 48 hours of first exposure. 5.3 Ground Water The colour transitions suggest permanent ground water at about 89.8 m elevation along the easterly boundary. However, well data suggest permanent groundwater level at approximately 88.0 m elevation on the west portion of the site. 5.4 Frost Susceptibility The overburden soil materials at this site are frost susceptible. Frost heave and subsequent loss of strength upon thawing can be expected. Frost susceptibility generally influences these geotechnical recommendations with regard to pavement design, depth of foundations and the use of insulation for some structures. 5.5 Plasticity Clays in the majority of the geological environment in Ottawa consist of low to medium plasticity clays. At this site the clays are to be considered of medium plasticity. The silt to sandy silt component of the glacial till is of low to very low plasticity. The plasticity and in situ water content is highly influential on the potential use of borrow and in the mechanical and strength parameters for bearing capacity, pavement design, etc. 5.6 Disturbance Soils are considered undisturbed as they are in their natural environment. Disturbance may be induced by mechanical action, changes in moisture contents or by expossure to freezing temperatures. In some cases, the stresses induced by removal of lateral support due to excavations may induce changes in the mechanical properties and strength of soils. The mechanical actions of excavation equipment cause disturbance. As such, excavation methods and equipment operation intended to reach the vertical alignment (elevation) of the undisturbed soil surface must be selected and supervised to preserve its natural physical and mechanical properties. Also, for the clay materials encountered at this site, significant loss of strength can be expected upon exposure to increases in moisture content due to weather (rain) or construction operations. Equipment output will decrease when working in rainy weather conditions and improvement of working surfaces may be required. In general drying during extended periods of time also cause disturbance. For the weather conditions in Ottawa extended drying periods are not often an issue. Page 9 of 25

10 Exposure of of soils below the frost depth (1.5 to 2.0 m) to freezing temperatures will cause disturbance. Insulation or heating must be considered for winter construction. 5.7 Borrow Materials The soil materials encountered at this site are not to be considered for borrow. 5.8 Potential Settlements Limits are being established in this report to prevent settlements exceeding total of 25mm and differential of 20 mm. Generally these limits are being established in the bearing capacities and by providing restriction to grade raises. Significant grade raises are not expected for the proposed development. 5.9 Soil Types Under Safety Regulations For the purpose of the Occupational Health and Safety Act of Ontario (O. Reg. 213/91) the soils are to be considered Soil Type II for all trench excavations in at this site. The provisions for un-braced excavations in Soil Type II contained in O. Reg. 213/91 can be used for open cut excavations. This soil type assignment is highly relevant for the definition of safe open cut and braced excavations if required Excavations and Bedrock Removal Temporary soil cut and shoring will be designed to meet the Occupational Health and Safety Act (O. Reg. 213/91). It is also recommended that open cut for building construction follow O. Reg. 213/91 as applicable to soils type II at this site. Bedrock removal can be considered with hoe rammers at this site for construction with one level of underground parking. Where large quantities of bedrock need to be removed, drilling and blasting need to be used Construction of Buildings Depending on the building loads, conventional shallow foundations could bear on native soils or on bedrock for the commercial development considered at this site. Additional recommendations from the geotechnical stand point for the proposed development are as follows: I. The contents of this report II. Geotechnical design of foundations (or review) once the details and geometry of the proposed development are known. This geotechnical review may include additional design considerations as the actual design may differ from the assumptions made in this report. The review is to be provided in the form of design services or as an amendment to this report with extents depending on the scope of the review. III. A confirmatory geotechnical inspection program is completed during construction. Page 10 of 25

11 IV. A quality control program with testing is completed via standard practices in construction Seismic Site Response For the overburden stiff and dense materials, with bedrock at shallow depths, an average shear wave velocity within 30 m of the expected foundation elevation (Vs(30)), between 360 to 760 m/s is assigned for the purpose of site classification under section of the Ontario Building Code 2012 (OBC 2012). Further details are provided in the seismic design section Roadbed Soil Quality Roadbed denotes the materials beneath pavement structures. The general quality of the near surface undisturbed soil to serve as foundation for pavement structure at this site are to be considered very poor to fair, as defined in the AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures (AASHTO 1993). Where the roadbed will consist of fill banks placed as specified in this report, the roadbed soil quality is to be considered fair to very good depending on the type of materials Special Issues or Difficult Soils: Liquefaction, Slope Stability, Organic, etc. Our investigation did not reveal special concerns for the proposed development, such as slope stability, liquefaction, organic materials, etc. 6 Geotechnical Design 6.1 Assumptions It is understood that the proposed development is to consist of a six storey commercial building. Temporary soil cut will be designed such that the risk to health and safety of workers and the public is kept to an acceptable level and that adjacent properties or buildings are not damaged. Ontario Reg. 213/91 applies. 6.2 Material Properties, Design Values and Local Conditions NBCC PGA of 0.32 g, where g = 9.807m/s 2 Reference peak hazard values for spectral accelerations per 2010 National Building Code Seismic Hazard Calculation in appendix C. 100 year return period freezing index for the City of Ottawa of approximately 2,000 ο F-Days (1,100 ο C-Days) Frost penetration of 1.5 m on bare ground with moist topsoil. Will vary depending on soil cover. All soils at this site are characterized by in situ mass bulk density of 1,850 kg/m 3. Page 11 of 25

12 For the layered profile, the angle of internal friction is to be considered: 32 o for non yielding structures such as braced excavations and non yielding basement walls. 30 o for free standing retaining walls. Climatic region III as defined in the AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures (AASHTO 1993) 6.3 Grading/Terracing/Raise Significant great raises are not expected for the proposed development. Grade raises up to 1.0 m can be completed without further geotechnical review. 6.4 Foundations This section provides recommendations and bearing capacity for the placement of conventional shallow spread footings as a suitable foundation alternative for the proposed commercial development Load and Resistance Factors For the purpose of computations related to the service (SLS) and strength limits (ULS) note: A resistance factor of 0.6 is applied to the computed or estimated (nominal) bearing resistance to obtain the strength limit. An average load factor of 1.4 is assumed to compute the service limit Bearing Capacity For all soils at depths greater than 1.2 m, use 150 and 225 kpa at the service and strength limits respectively at underside of foundations. Where a granular pad having less than 12 % fines is provided to reach the bedrock depth or to adjust for the irregular bedrock surface use 320 and 460 kpa at the service and strength limits respectively at underside of foundations. For weathered bedrock use 820 and 1,100 kpa at the service and strength limits respectively. Where at least one meter of weathered have been removed, use 1,100 and 1,500 kpa at the service and strength limits respectively. On bedrock surfaces having small cracks, use 1,600 and 2,300 kpa at the service and strength limits respectively. This could be confirmed by a simple geotechnical inspection. Page 12 of 25

13 6.4.3 Settlements For the combination of grade raise and footing loads provided above building settlements for foundations on soils are not to exceed limiting values of 25 mm and 20 mm total and differential settlements respectively at this site. Settlements of building foundations placed on bedrock can be considered negligible Foundation Insulation Options for Shallow Footings For shallow footings supporting lightly loaded structures on the perimeter of buildings and unheated areas in otherwise heated buildings foundation insulation is highly recommended. Where foundation insulation is not provided, the foundations need to be advanced below the frost depth. 1.5 m is an adequate depth for heated structures and up to 2 m for isolated foundations away from the heated space. Different options and geometries require special insulation design considerations; as such it is impractical to provide insulation design without specific knowledge of the geometry proposed by the structural and architectural designers. Where insulation is installed under shallow footings for unheated space, the bearing capacity is limited by the allowable bearing capacity of the insulation. Additional geotechnical design services and reviews are required depending on the selected alternative. Contact the geotechnical specialist of your choice once the structural and architectural details become available. 6.5 Foundation Wall Damproofing and Drainage Refer to NRC Construction, Evaluation Reports CCMC R in appendix D of this report for damproofing and foundation wall drainage system details satisfying the provisions under OBC 2012 and suitable for the conditions set out in this report. Other available similar systems having the components shown in CCMC R may be used. Drainage must be provided to daylight or a positive outlet, or sump. 6.6 Seismic Design Details of the spectral and peak seismic hazard values applicable to this site are presented in the 2010 National Building Code Seismic Hazard Calculation in Appendix C. The details in Appendix C are being considered in this section Design Spectral Accelerations Figure 1 below presents the design spectral accelerations computed under section of the Ontario Building Code 2012 (OBC 2012) for the site class C assigned to this site. Page 13 of 25

14 S T S T 1637 Bank Street, Ottawa, ON Figure 1 Class C Design Spectral Accelerations T s S T Period s Note that site class A or B may be assigned provided seismic testing is completed. Site classes A or B, under OBC 2012 can only be assigned when seismic testing is completed to confirm Vs(30) greater than 760 m/s. Previous findings and experience indicate that in the balance probabilities, for buildings placed on bedrock site class A may apply. As a preliminary reference and for evaluation by other designers, the design spectral accelerations for site class A are presented in Fig. 2 below, however, structural design at this time, based on Fig. 2 is not recommended until confirmation of class A or B is completed. Figure 2 Class A Design Spectral Accelerations T s S T Period s Page 14 of 25

15 Note the substantial differences between the 2 spectrums. Seismic design for site class C at this site, imply a level of safety beyond the requirements and impose an unnecessary cost to building construction. Completion of a seismic test to confirm site class A or B is advised Seismic Loads on Foundation Walls After Wood 1973, a non yielding basement wall having 2.5 m height, measured between the basement floor and finished grade level can be design for the seismic condition having a load of 63 kn/m applied at a 1.2 m height from the base. Consult a geotechnical designer for different geometries. 6.7 Pavement The flexible pavement structures supplied in this report follow the guidelines set out in AASHTO 1993 for climatic Region III Traffic Classes Figure 3 below presents a schematic site plan differentiating example uses for five traffic classes developed by the Wisconsin Asphalt Pavement Association and presented in their Design Guide May, This report differentiate pavement designs using the same layout in figure 3 and use 20 year accumulated design Equivalent Single Axle 80 kn (18,000 pounds) load applications (ESALs) for each class, resulting from a literature review of North American research reports. Table 1 below presents design ESALs and a description of uses for each pavement structure in Tables 2 and 3. Page 15 of 25

16 Figure 3. Traffic Classes (Classes I to III relevant to this report) TC II-B TC II-B TC III TC II-A TC II-A TC II-A TC II-A TC II-A Table 1. Design ESALs (20 years) and uses for traffic classes Ontario Category Classes ESALs Uses A I 50,000 Residential dead end and parking lots 50 stalls or less. A II-A 100,000 Parking lots 51 to 500 stalls. B II-B 200,000 Residential streets, parking lots more than 500 stalls B III 400,000 Local streets and light industrial lots. Classes I and II-A consider design ESALs suiting the expected conditions for the entire subject development. Access lanes can be consider having design ESALs of Class II-A Pavement Options Depending on the final geometry of the subject development, the following options for pavement can be given consideration: Subgrade Consisting on Native Shallow Soils Where the roadbed (subgrade) consists of near surface native soils, the following pavement structures can be considered: Page 16 of 25

17 Table 2. Flexible Pavement Structure Classes I, II-A and II-B Classes Material Specification I II-A II-B III Class mm in mm in mm in mm in Surface course OPSS 1151 Superpave Surface course OPSS 1151 Superpave Binder course OPSS 1151 Superpave 19.0 Base OPSS 1010 Granular A Subbase OPSS 1010 Granular B Type II Subgrade Undisturbed In situ Soil L Subgrade Consisting of Native Soils at Depth (Parking Garage) Where the roadbed (subgrade) consist of native soils at depths greater than 1.2 m (In the event that pavement is considered for underground parking on nave soils), or on fill having more than 12 % fines placed as specified in this report, the following pavement structures can be considered: Table 3. Flexible Pavement Structure Classes I, II-A and II-B Classes Material Specification I II-A II-B III Class mm in mm in mm in mm in Surface course OPSS 1151 Superpave Surface course OPSS 1151 Superpave Binder course OPSS 1151 Superpave 19.0 Base OPSS 1010 Granular A Subbase OPSS 1010 Granular B Type II Subgrade Undisturbed In situ Soil L Subgrade Consisting of Newly Placed Fill Having 12 % or Less Fines Where the roadbed (subgrade) consist of fill having 12 % or less fines placed as specified in this report and compacted at 100% of Proctor Standard for the top 300 mm in two lifts, the pavement can be considered to have been provided with the subbase layer and the final pavement will consist on the base and asphalt layers indicated in Table 2. Page 17 of 25

18 6.7.3 Frost Heave Frost heave of founding materials for pavement induces reduction (serviceability losses) of the performance period (along with traffic ESALs) for which the structure was designed. Generally speaking, AASHTO 1993 does not provide for an increase in the thicknesses (structural number) for reduction of the losses, as such increase has very small influence in the detrimental effects of frost heave. Frost heave affects pavements by roughness induced by differential frost heave, i.e., if the longitudinal vertical alignment is all equally frost susceptible, there is negligible detrimental effect. This is difficult to achieve in urban developments in which services trenches are backfilled with non frost susceptible materials. For long lasting pavements on frost susceptible soils, the general guideline is, where possible; ensure that all soils serving as pavement foundation are equally frost susceptible. This could be achieved by providing frost susceptible backfill within 1.4 m of the pavement foundation in service trenches Manholes, Catch Basins and Others Manholes and catch basin type structures provide a cold bridge to a deeper portion of the soil profile and create localized areas prompt to pavement failure by excessive frost heave roughness in frost susceptible soils. This can be prevented by providing insulation extending downward around the structure and horizontally outward to create a transition from the varying pavement elevation to the more stable catch basin elevation. On the alternative, non frost susceptible backfill can be provided tapered outward from the structure to the surrounding pavement. 6.8 Underground Corrosion For the resistivity, PH and soluble ions concentrations found at this site and shown in the Paracel Laboratories certificate of analysis in appendix E, the soils are mildly corrosive. Resistivity, PH and soluble ions testing was completed in a representative sample at a 2.6 m depth in BH1. After Romanoff 1957, the following corrosion rates can be used: For carbon steel: 18 m/year for the first 2 years, 12 m/year, thereafter. For galvanized metal: 4 m/year for the first 2 years, 2.5 m/year until depletion of zinc, 12 m/year for carbon steel. Page 18 of 25

19 6.9 Sulphate Attack on Concrete For the sulphate content less than 150 ppm in soil encountered at this site, there are no restrictions to the cement type which can be used for underground structures. This refers to restrictions associated with sulphate attack only Temporary Soil Cut and Shoring Temporary soil cut and shoring will be designed to meet Ontario regulation O. Reg. 213/91, such that the risk to health and safety of workers and the public is kept to an acceptable level and that adjacent properties or buildings are not damaged. O. Reg. 213/91 provides definitions for the soil types and establishes the soil cut slopes and minimum shoring requirements for excavations up to 6 m depth with no hydrostatic pressure and establishes the conditions in which an engineered design is required. Temporary shoring is typically designed by the contractor. In general, the results and data in this report can be used for the design of shoring systems. Also, to account for the operation of equipment near trenches, a 12 kpa surcharge load need be considered for the design of shoring systems. Some key aspects of O. Reg. 213/91 applicable to the soil type II encountered at this site are the following: Safe open cut is 1vertical to 1 horizontal. Within 1.2 m of the bottom of open cut areas, the soil can be cut vertical. Shoring is not required where the above conditions are met Open Cut Use 213/91 for excavations that are not trenches as they relate to soil types and cuts for open cut conditions. Note that the provisions for shoring using braced systems do not apply as they cannot be braced. As such: Safe open cut is 1vertical to 1 horizontal. Within 1.2 m of the bottom of open cut areas, the soil can be cut vertical Water Inflow within Excavations Water inflow through shallow excavations in the layered strata encounter at this site can be controlled by pumping from open sumps. Water can also be perched within shallow soil materials causing significant temporary inflow of water upon initial excavation operations. Perched water amounts depend on seasonal variations, precipitation and soil conditions. Page 19 of 25

20 A Permit to Take Water (PTTW) may not be required for this development as suggested by ground conditions, expected precipitation, depth of foundations and building area. PTTWs are required under Ministry of Environment (MOE) where pumping from excavations exceed 50 m 3 per day. 7 Construction Safety and Precautions 7.1 Construction and Excavation Along Nearby Structures and Property Boundaries Excavations along nearby structures should follow some precautions from the geotechnical stand point to prevent damage to property or buildings. Adequate lateral support should be provided to soils supporting existing structures by either shoring or by allowing sufficient space between excavations exceeding the existing foundation depths. The required space to ensure sufficient lateral support can be defined by a plane whose edge runs at an offset of 200 mm along the edge and elevation of the underside of foundations and extending downward at a 1horizontal to 1 vertical. Refer to sections 6.10 and 6.11 for provisions associated with safety, design and construction. 7.2 Protection of Expansive Shale Protect shale bedrock from direct exposure to oxygen by providing a 50 mm layer of lean concrete or have the exposed surfaces covered with granular backfill within 48 hours of first exposure. Such protection is not required where concrete for foundations is poured within 48 hours of the expossure. 8 Recommended Specifications It is recommended that the following geotechnical specifications be included as part of the construction documents and/or plans for the PD. In the event that any of these specifications conflict with municipal and or provincial specifications, the most restrictive applies. For the case when products involving ground conditions are used, the manufacturer s specifications take precedence. 8.1 Specification Scope This is not an entire set of geotechnical specifications. 8.2 Striping Topsoil and existing fill must be removed from the perimeter of all structures, including buildings, pavement, parking areas and earth or fill banks for grading. Page 20 of 25

21 8.3 Excavation to Undisturbed Soil Surface All soil surfaces in which to commence construction for all structures are to be preserved in undisturbed condition (Undisturbed Soil Surface (USS)). Where rainy weather and/or equipment operation and/or labours make impractical or difficult the preservation of USS a working granular pad may be used. Use the compaction requirements and materials for trench foundation (stabilization). 8.4 Fill Placement Except as otherwise indicated for select borrow materials at this site, reinstatement of excavated soil is not allowed. When excavation exceeds the depth of the proposed USS, a granular pad using the material and compaction requirements for trench foundation will be used. It can be assumed that it is impractical to conduct excavations to an even USS. In such case a granular pad not less than 150mm thick must be used to remedy for irregularities caused by the operation of equipment Compacted Lifts Thicknesses Equipment and Passes Compacted lifts for non cohesive soils or specified granular will not exceed 200 mm and 150 mm for cohesive soils. For specified granulars, subject to test trials a maximum compacted lift of 300 mm may be accepted provided vibratory compaction equipment rated at 60,000 lb-f (27,300 kg-f) of dynamic force is used. For road construction passes are to overlap by 300 mm for full coverage. Where non vibratory pneumatic compactors with ballast an tire pressure of 100 psi (7 kg/cm 2 ) are used (9 or 13 ply) the compacted lift thicknesses will not exceed 150 mm for granular and 120 mm for cohesive soils. For services and culvert trenches, when using rammers and light vibratory plates weighing less than 115 kg (250 lbs) the compacted lift thicknesses will not exceed 100 and 125 mm respectively. For heavier trench equipment the compacted lifts for non cohesive soils or specified granular will not exceed 200 mm and 150 mm for cohesive soils. No heavy equipment will be operated above the crown of pipes or culverts unless 1.2 m of fill has been placed or the subgrade elevation has been reached. For all trenches below the water table, trench foundation not less than 200 mm will be provided as per materials and specification in Table 4. Materials lift placement beneath foundations, slabs or any placement not specified above must abide to the above specifications as they relate to the equipment being used. Page 21 of 25

22 8.5 Compaction Guide for Passes and Level of Compaction As guidelines, for equipment passes the contractor may consider not less than 6, 7 or 8 passes for 90, 95 or 100 % Proctor Standard compaction. The contractor acknowledges understanding that this can only be verified by actual testing and that he is solely responsible for decisions made on the assumptions that the compaction specified has been achieved. As guidelines, the loose lift thicknesses for granular materials may be approximately 150, 175, 235 and 350 mm for compacted lift thicknesses 125, 150, 200 and 300 mm respectively. The contractor acknowledges understanding that this can only be verified by trials and that he is solely responsible for decisions made on the assumptions that the compacted lift thicknesses for equipment type specified are not exceeded. As guidelines, the loose lift thicknesses for cohesive materials may be approximately 125, 190 and 250 mm for compacted lift thicknesses 100, 150 and 200 mm respectively. The contractor acknowledges understanding that this can only be verified by trials and that he is solely responsible for decisions made on the assumptions that the compacted lift thicknesses for equipment type specified are not exceeded. 8.6 Compaction General Table 4 presents Proctor Standard (PS) compaction requirements for specified placement and materials. Table 4 is the result of an extensive literature review of available reports associated with North American specifications for compaction and materials. Table 4. Compaction Requirements Material Placement Material Description % PS Base OPSS 1010 Granular A 100 Subbase OPSS 1010 Granular B Type II 100 Subgrade Backfill for trenches under pavement Backfill for trenches non traffic areas Cohesionless (with 12 % or less fines) and 100% passing mm sieve Cohesive 95 Cohesionless (with 12 % or less fines) and 100% passing mm sieve Cohesive 95 Cohesionless (with 12 % or less fines) and 100% passing mm sieve Cohesive 90 Under sidewalks top 200 mm Any OPSS 1010 Granular specification for which 100% passes the 26.5 mm sieve the 26.5 mm sieve 95 Page 22 of 25

23 1637 Bank Street, Ottawa, ON Table 4. Compaction Requirements Material Placement Material Description % PS Subgrade Cohesive 95 Under foundations Any OPSS 1010 Granular specification for which 100% 95 passes the 106 mm sieve except Granular B Type I Backfill under slabs Cohesionless (with 12 % or less fines) and 100% passing mm sieve Cohesive 95 Top 100 mm Crushed stone 9.5 to 19 mm (use one or several sizes) 90 Pipe bedding and cover (150 mm for bedding to 150 mm above the crown) Trench foundation (stabilization minimum 200 mm) Backfill for non building, non traffic and/or parking areas, Any OPSS 1010 Granular specification for which 100% passes the 26.5 mm sieve Any OPSS 1010 Granular specification for which 100% 95 passes the 106 mm sieve except Granular B Type I Cohesionless (with 12 % or less fines) and 100% passing mm sieve Cohesive Placement not specified above Cohesionless (with 12 % or less fines) and 100% passing mm sieve Cohesive Compaction Specific Compaction Along Basement Walls and Retaining Walls The consolidation zone is defined as the zone within 0.9 m of the exterior edge of basements or the interior edge of retaining walls. Compaction along the consolidation zone is to be conducted in 125 mm compacted lifts using 2 passes of light vibratory equipment. 8.8 Compaction Quality Control Provide moisture density relationships for Standard Proctor compaction for the proposed materials and source. Conduct one in situ test at randomly selected locations per 60 m 3 of fill. This is approximately one test, each 300 m 2 of lift in place. Nuclear density probes testing can be used. Page 23 of 25

24 9 Recommended Geotechnical Services During Design and Construction It is recommended that a geotechnical consultant (the consultant) be retained in order to insure that the recommendations in this report are implemented in the final design and construction. 9.1 Design Phase Supplemental Geotechnical Consultant Services for the Proposed Development The consultant services are expected to consist in additional design and plan reviews once draft plans defining details concerning grading, services, pavements and foundation dimensions, elevations, depth and loads become available. The design services may be requested in advance by other designers and depend on design decisions and/or plans differing from the assumptions in this report. The geotechnical designer is to produce at this stage technical letters and/or drawings supporting analyses and final design decisions. 9.2 Construction Phase Supplemental Geotechnical Consultant Services for the Proposed Development The consultant services for construction will consist on inspections and testing for quality control. The inspections may be visual examination only or in conjunction with testing. Inspection and quality control testing programs are tailored to include but not limited to: Confirmation of findings of the geotechnical investigation Monitor the performance of temporary geotechnical structures in time Satisfy the consultant that the physical and mechanical properties of existing and newly placed geotechnical materials meet the requirements in this report Satisfy the consultant that manufacturer specifications involving systems and materials interacting with ground conditions and ground water are being met Satisfy the consultant that performance measures and tolerances of geotechnical structures are being met (piles, anchors, etc.) Supplemental geotechnical services in this stage may include shop drawings review for contractor designed geotechnical structures (typically shoring, temporary soil cut and anchors) Page 24 of 25

25 9.3 Contractor Designed Temporary Geotechnical Structures Since excavations are recognized as a hazardous construction operation and contractors have control of the construction operations and safety, temporary slope cut stability and temporary shoring design are typically done by the contractor. The anchoring systems to shoring, dewatering systems and other applications are also done by the contractor except specified otherwise. In particularly sensitive ground water conditions dewatering systems may need to be designed by the geotechnical consultant. Temporary soil cut and shoring must be designed to meet O. Reg. 213/91. The general design requirement is that the risks to workers and the public be kept to acceptable levels and that adjacent properties and existing structures are not damaged. The consultant role is to conduct reviews of shop drawings defining details of temporary geotechnical structure designed by the contractor. It is expected that this investigation report be sufficient to supply the data required for temporary slope cut and shoring design. Page 25 of 25

26 15-SI-9-OI-1 Appendix A: Borehole Logs

27 Project: Multi-storey Commercial Building Client: Ontario Inc. Test Hole No.: BH1 of 4 Job No.: Test Hole Type: Borehole Date: SPT Hammer Type: Auto Hammer Logged By: Yuri Mendez Topsoil Fill: Brown clayey sand with gravel Brown silty clay with trace gravel and sand 12 8 Measured groundwater level at Elev. Glacial till: Dense clayey silt with sand and gravel Very weathered shale bedrock Weathered shale bedrock 23 >50 Augered Laboratory Tests Glacial till: Dense clayey sand with silt and gravel 0 Shear Strength (kpa) February 25, 2015 Moisture Content (%) 0.25 Material Description W a t e r Depth (m) Lithology and color Elevation (m) Depth (m) Drill Method: CME 750 Drill Rig Elevation (m) 112-SI-6-CR-1 Samples or Blows/Ft Location: 1637 Bank St., Ottawa, ON Refusal to augering on bedrock S = Sample for lab review and moisture content Interpreted ground water depth Other Lab Tests Other Lab Tests

28 Project: Multi-storey Commercial Building Client: Ontario Inc. Test Hole No.: BH2 of 4 Job No.: Test Hole Type: Borehole Date: SPT Hammer Type: Auto Hammer Logged By: Yuri Mendez Topsoil Fill: Brown clayey sand with gravel Brown silty clay with trace gravel and sand Grey silty clay with trace gravel and sand Weathered shale bedrock Standard Penetration Refusal on bedrock S = Sample for lab review and moisture content Laboratory Tests Brown silty clay with trace gravel and sand Glacial till: Dense clayey silt with sand and gravel 0 Shear Strength (kpa) Glacial till: Dense clayey silt with sand and gravel February 25, 2015 Moisture Content (%) Material Description W a t e r Depth (m) Lithology and color Elevation (m) Depth (m) Drill Method: CME 750 Drill Rig Elevation (m) 112-SI-6-CR-1 Samples or Blows/Ft Location: 1637 Bank St., Ottawa, ON > Interpreted ground water depth Other Lab Tests Other Lab Tests

29 Project: Multi-storey Commercial Building Client: Ontario Inc. Test Hole No.: BH3 of 4 Job No.: Test Hole Type: Borehole Date: SPT Hammer Type: Auto Hammer Logged By: Yuri Mendez Topsoil Fill: Brown clayey sand with gravel Glacial till: Dense clayey silt with sand and gravel Brown silty clay with silty sand and gravel seems Glacial till: Dense clayey silt with sand and gravel Weathered shale bedrock Standard Penetration Refusal on bedrock S = Sample for lab review and moisture content Shear Strength (kpa) Laboratory Tests February 25, 2015 Moisture Content (%) Material Description W a t e r Depth (m) Lithology and color Elevation (m) Depth (m) Drill Method: CME 750 Drill Rig Elevation (m) 112-SI-6-CR-1 Samples or Blows/Ft Location: 1637 Bank St., Ottawa, ON > Interpreted ground water depth Other Lab Tests Other Lab Tests

30 Project: Multi-storey Commercial Building Client: Ontario Inc. Test Hole No.: BH4 of 4 Job No.: Test Hole Type: Borehole Date: SPT Hammer Type: Auto Hammer Logged By: Yuri Mendez Topsoil Fill: Brown clayey sand with gravel Grey silty clay with trace gravel and sand Weathered shale bedrock Standard Penetration Refusal on bedrock S = Sample for lab review and moisture content Laboratory Tests Brown silty clay with silty sand and gravel seems 0 Shear Strength (kpa) Glacial till: Dense clayey silt with sand and gravel February 25, 2015 Moisture Content (%) Material Description W a t e r Depth (m) Lithology and color Elevation (m) Depth (m) Drill Method: CME 750 Drill Rig Elevation (m) 112-SI-6-CR-1 Samples or Blows/Ft Location: 1637 Bank St., Ottawa, ON > Interpreted ground water depth Other Lab Tests Other Lab Tests

31 15-SI-9-OI-1 Appendix B: NBCC Seismic Hazard

32 2010 National Building Code Seismic Hazard Calculation INFORMATION: Eastern Canada English (613) français (613) Facsimile (613) Western Canada English (250) Facsimile (250) Requested by:, Geoseismic c/o Ontario Inc Site Coordinates: North West User File Reference: 1637 Bank Street, Ottawa, ON February 23, 2015 National Building Code ground motions: 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years ( per annum) Sa(0.2) Sa(0.5) Sa(1.0) Sa(2.0) PGA (g) Notes. Spectral and peak hazard values are determined for firm ground (NBCC 2010 soil class C - average shear wave velocity m/s). Median (50th percentile) values are given in units of g. 5% damped spectral acceleration (Sa(T), where T is the period in seconds) and peak ground acceleration (PGA) values are tabulated. Only 2 significant figures are to be used. These values have been interpolated from a 10 km spaced grid of points. Depending on the gradient of the nearby points, values at this location calculated directly from the hazard program may vary. More than 95 percent of interpolated values are within 2 percent of the calculated values. Ground motions for other probabilities: Probability of exceedance per annum Probability of exceedance in 50 years Sa(0.2) Sa(0.5) Sa(1.0) Sa(2.0) PGA % % % References National Building Code of Canada 2010 NRCC no ; sections 4.1.8, , , , and Appendix C: Climatic Information for Building Design in Canada - table in Appendix C starting on page C-11 of Division B, volume 2 User s Guide - NBC 2010, Structural Commentaries NRCC no (in preparation) Commentary J: Design for Seismic Effects 45.5 N Geological Survey of Canada Open File xxxx Fourth generation seismic hazard maps of Canada: Maps and grid values to be used with the 2010 National Building Code of Canada (in preparation) See the websites and for more information Aussi disponible en français 76 W 75.5 W 45 N km

33 15-SI-9-OI-1 Appendix C: Construction, Evaluation Report CCMC R

34 Evaluation Report CCMC R Delta -MS Clear (Foundation Drainage) 1. Opinion MASTERFORMAT: Issued: Re-evaluated: Revised: Re-evaluation due: Re-evaluation in Progress It is the opinion of the Canadian Construction Materials Centre (CCMC) that Delta -MS Clear (Foundation Drainage), when used as a foundation wall drainage system in accordance with the conditions and limitations stated in Section 3 of this Report, complies with the Ontario Building Code 2006: Class "A" and "B" Drainage Systems Clause (1)(b), Division A, as an alternative solution that achieves at least the minimum level of performance required by Division B in the areas defined by the objectives and functional statements attributed to the following applicable acceptable solutions: Clause (2)(b) Foundation Wall Drainage This opinion is based on CCMC's evaluation of the technical evidence in Section 4.1 provided by the Report Holder. Ruling No (13197-R) authorizing the use of this product in Ontario, subject to the terms and conditions contained in the Ruling, was made by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing on pursuant to s.29 of the Building Code Act, 1992 (see Ruling for terms and conditions). This Ruling is subject to periodic revisions and updates. 2. Description The product is a transparent, high-density polyethylene, quasi-rigid plastic sheet membrane that is extruded in such a way that results in a dimpled surface on one side and a smooth surface on the other. The Delta -MS Clear sheets have dimples 8 mm high, and are rolled in sheets 0.6 mm thick, 20 m long and 1.0 m to 2.4 m wide. To ensure correct application, this drainage system includes a range of accessories such as fasteners, washers and molding strips. The product's drainage system and its installation details are illustrated in Figures 1 and 2. 1 of 6

35 Figure 1. Delta -MS Clear drainage system membrane dimpled face in contact with the wall 1. drainage tile 2. membrane 3. concrete foundation 4. minimum mm 5. caulking 2 of 6

36 Figure 2. Delta -MS Clear installation details dimpled face in contact with the wall 1. termination bar 2. caulking (behind membrane) 3. fastener 4. mould strip 5. concrete foundation 6. backfill 3. Conditions and Limitations CCMC's compliance opinion in Section 1 is bound by the Delta -MS Clear (Foundation Drainage) being used in accordance with the conditions and limitations set out below. The product is a dimpled membrane drainage system designed to act as a capillary breaking layer against the foundation wall (up to 3.7 m depths) to protect the wall against transient or intermittent water that may come in contact with the wall surface. As a Type 2 drainage product it has been evaluated for use at depths of up to 3.7 m below grade. The product is suitable for use in pervious and semi-pervious soil conditions that allow for some drainage through the soil. These soils are made up of very fine sand, organic and inorganic silts, mixtures of sand, silt and clay, glacial till, and stratified clay deposits that have a soil grain size defined by D 10 > mm, where D 10 is the sieve size that permits 10% of the soil by weight to pass through it in a sieve analysis test. The product is not to be used in practically impervious soil conditions (homogeneous clays below zone of weathering) where the soil grain size is D 10 < mm. The product has also been evaluated for its dampproofing characteristics (see CCMC Report R). 3 of 6