Geotechnical Investigation

Transcription

1 Geotechnical Investigation New 4 Storey Mixed Use Building Henderson Ave. and 65 Templeton St. Ottawa, Ontario Prepared for: W. Elias & Associates 204 Borealis Crescent Ottawa, Ontario K1K 4V1 Attention: Sam Elias, P. Eng LRL File No.: January, 2017

2 Ottawa, Ontario i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROCEDURE SUBSURFACE SOIL AND GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS General Fill/Possible Fill Silt and Sand Till Refusal at Inferred Boulder/Shale Bedrock Groundwater Conditions SITE PREPARATION VIBRATION CONSIDERATION FIELD SURVEY GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS Foundation Design Parameters Strip and Spread Footings Deep Foundations Structural Fill Slab-on-grade Construction Foundation Walls Backfill Lateral Earth Pressure on Foundation/Subsurface Wall Settlement Seismic Potential for Soil Liquefaction Frost Protection Foundation Drainage Retaining Walls and Shoring Sulphate Attack and Corrosivity Analysis on Buried Concrete EXCAVATION AND BACKFILLING REQUIREMENTS Excavation Temporary Shoring Requirements...11

3 Ottawa, Ontario ii 9.3 Groundwater Control Pipe Bedding Requirements Trench Backfill REUSE OF ON-SITE SOILS RECOMMENDED PAVEMENT STRUCTURE Paved Areas & Subgrade Preparation INSPECTION SERVICES REPORT CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS...16 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Gradation Analysis Summary....3 Table 2 Bearing Values and Corresponding Footing Founding Depths... 5 Table 3 Material Properties for Shoring and Permanent Wall Design (Static). 9 Table 4 Material Properties for Shoring and Permanent Wall Design (Seismic) Table 5 Recommended Pavement Structure...15 APPENDICES Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Site and Borehole Location Plans Borehole Logs Symbols and Terms Used in Borehole Logs Lab Results Site Photographs

4 Ottawa, Ontario Page 1 of 17 1 Introduction LRL Associates Ltd. (LRL) was retained by W. Elias & Associates to perform a geotechnical investigation for a proposed multi-storey mixed use building titled New 4 Storey Mixed Use Building, located at Henderson Avenue, and 65 Templeton Street Ottawa, Ontario. The purpose of the investigation was to identify the subsurface conditions across the site and groundwater conditions by the completion of a limited borehole drilling program. Based on the visual and factual information obtained, this report will provide guidelines on the geotechnical engineering aspects for the design and construction of the proposed development. More specifically, recommendations on foundation type, allowable bearing pressure, groundwater control, excavation and backfill, temporary shoring, slab-on-grade construction, permanent drainage requirement, seismic considerations and pavement structures were to be provided. This report has been prepared in consideration of the terms and conditions noted above and with the assumption that the design of the project will satisfy any applicable codes and standards. Should there be any changes in the design features or during construction, which may relate to the geotechnical recommendations provided in the report, LRL should be advised in order to review the report recommendations. 2 Site and Project Description The site under investigation is made up of six (6) separate lots, two (2) of the lots are occupied by single family dwellings, three (3) lots are occupied by a triplex, and one (1) is unoccupied. All of the lots are rectangular in shape, and combine to have 34.5 m of frontage along Henderson Avenue, for a total surface area of m 2 (about 0.27 acre). The terrain is considered to be relatively flat, and was snow covered at the time of the field investigation. The site is civically located at 213, 217, 221, 221.5, 223 Henderson Avenue, and 65 Templeton Street, in the City of Ottawa, Ontario. It is our understanding that the existing dwellings will be demolished, and a new four (4) storey, 33 unit residential complex, with two (2) underground parking levels namely Parking 1 and Parking 2 will be constructed to accommodate a total of 29 parking for cars and 44 parking for bicycles. It is assumed that the new building will be serviced with the available existing utilities and services. 3 Procedure The fieldwork for this investigation was carried out on January 5, Prior to the fieldwork, the site was cleared for the presence of any underground services and utilities. A total of three (3) boreholes, labelled BH1 through BH3, were drilled inside the property where it was possible to do so. The approximate locations of the boreholes are shown on a site plan included in Appendix A. The boreholes were advanced using a truck mount drill rig equipped with 200 mm diameter continuous flight hollow stem auger supplied and operated by George Downing Estate Drilling Inc. A two man crew experienced with geotechnical drilling operated the drill rig and equipment.

5 Ottawa, Ontario Page 2 of 17 Sampling of the overburden materials encountered in the boreholes was carried out at regular depth intervals using a 50.8 mm diameter drive open conventional spoon sampler in conjunction with standard penetration testing (SPT) N values. The SPT were conducted following the method ASTM D1586 and the results of SPT, in terms of the number of blows per 0.3 m of split-spoon sampler penetration after the first 0.15 m designated as N value. The boreholes were advanced to depths ranging between 8.79 and 9.45 m below ground surface (bgs). Upon completion, the boreholes were backfilled and compacted using a combination of silica sand, bentonite, and overburden cuttings. The fieldwork was supervised throughout by a member of our engineering staff who oversaw the drilling activities, cared for the samples obtained and logged the subsurface conditions encountered within each of the boreholes. All soil samples collected from the boreholes were placed and sealed in plastic bags to prevent moisture loss. The recovered soil samples collected from the boreholes were classified based on visual examination of the materials recovered and the results of the in-situ field testing. All soil samples were transported to our office for further examination by our geotechnical engineer. 4 Subsurface Soil and Groundwater Conditions 4.1 General A review of local surficial geology maps provided by the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources Canada suggest that the surficial geology for this area consist of stratified, yellowish-brown medium grained sand; unfossiliferous; locally reworked into dunes. The subsurface conditions encountered in the boreholes were classified based on visual and tactile examination of the materials recovered from the boreholes and the results of in-situ laboratory testing. The soil descriptions presented in this report are based on commonly accepted methods of classification and identification employed in geotechnical practice. Classification and identification of soil were conducted according to the procedure ASTM D2487 and judgement, and LRL does not guarantee descriptions as exact, but infers accuracy to the extent that is common in current geotechnical practice. The subsurface soil conditions encountered at boreholes are given in their respective logs presented in Appendix B. A greater explanation of the information presented in the borehole logs can be found in Appendix C of this report. These logs indicate the subsurface conditions encountered at a specific test location only. Boundaries between zones on the logs are often not distinct, but are rather transitional and have been interpreted as such. 4.2 Fill/Possible Fill Fill/possible fill was encountered at the surface of all boring locations, and extended to depths ranging from 1.5 to 2.9 m bgs. In BH1 and BH3 it can generally be described as brownish grey sand-silt, some black organics, trace to some gravel. In BH2, and underlying the sand-silt fill material in BH1 and BH3, brownish grey sand-silt-clay, trace gravel, trace organics was encountered. Standard penetration test was carried out in the fill material and the SPT N was found ranging from 7 to 42 blows per 0.3 m of sampler penetration which reflect a highly variable, loose to dense in relative density. The natural water content of fill/possible fill material was ranged from 8 to about 37%, indicating moist to wet condition.

6 Ottawa, Ontario Page 3 of Silt and Sand Till Underlying the fill material in all boring locations, a deposit of silt and sand till, was encountered, and extended to depths ranging from about 8.8 and 9.5 m bgs. It generally consisted of trace to some gravel, trace clay and grey to dark grey in colour. The SPT N value in this deposit ranged from 3 to 86, indicating very loose to very dense in relative density. The natural moisture content was found to be varying from 5 to 12%, indicating moist condition. Laboratory sieve and particle-size analyses was conducted on the selected sample collected from BH2 at a depth between 2.3 and 2.7 m bgs following the procedure ASTM D422. Based on laboratory test results, the borehole sample revealed that the soil matrix is comprised of about 7.9% fine gravel, 46.0 % sand, 36.4% silt, and 9.8% clay. According to the Unified Soil Classification System, the soil would be classified as Silt and Sand Till, trace gravel, trace clay. Details of laboratory analyses are reflected in Table 1 Table 1: Gradation Analysis Summary Sample Location No. Depth (m) Percent for Each Soil Gradation Gravel (%) Sand (%) Silt (%) Clay (%) Hydraulic Conductivity K (cm/s) BH2 SS x 10-5 The results of the laboratory test are summarized in the boring logs at the corresponding sample depths. Detail laboratory test results are presented in Appendix D of this report. 4.4 Refusal at Inferred Boulder/Shale Bedrock Auger refusal over inferred large boulder or shale bedrock was encountered in all three boreholes at depths ranged from 8.8 to 9.45 m bgs. The auger refusal was further confirmed when SPT N values 50 blows were recorded for 0 to 10 cm of sampler penetration in first 15 cm. 4.5 Groundwater Conditions Groundwater was carefully observed during this field investigation. Immediately after completion of drilling, water levels were found to be 2.95, 3.1, and 3.2 m bgs in BH1, BH2, and BH3 respectively. BH1 and BH2 were left open for about 1.5 hours after completion of drilling, and water levels were measured to be 2.05 and 1.9 m bgs respectively. No piezometer or standpipe was installed for long term groundwater level observation. It should be noted that groundwater levels could fluctuate with seasonal weather conditions, (i.e.: rainfall, droughts, spring thawing) and due to construction activities at or in the vicinity of the site. 5 Site Preparation For constructing the new four (4) storey mixed use building with two (2) levels of underground parking, it is our understanding the existing structure/dwellings will be demolished and the new mixed use building will take place as detailed in the site plans developed by Soma Pro Designs, dated December 09, The demolishing of existing structures shall be carried out in accordance with subsection of OBC 2012 or any updated version.

7 Ottawa, Ontario Page 4 of 17 6 Vibration Consideration Demolition and construction operations could also cause vibration, and possibly the source of disturbance or nuisance to the adjacent community. Therefore, maximum efforts to reduce/maintain the vibration levels should be considered during construction activities following the standard code of practice from the City of Ottawa and/or designated approving authority/organizations. 7 Field Survey The borehole locations were selected by LRL geotechnical team to provide a general guideline of the proposed development. LRL s field personnel determined the existing grade elevations at the borehole locations through an elevation survey, carried out using THE TOP OF GRATE OF THE EXISTING CATCHBASIN LOCATED AT THE SOUTH EDGE OF THE NORTH SIDE WALK ALONG TEMPLETON STREET (ABOUT 9.0 M EAST OF HENDERSON AVENUE CENTRE LINE) as a Temporary Bench Mark (TBM). The geodetic elevation of the TBM was obtained as m from the Service Plan (S-1) prepared by W. Elias and Associates dated December 07, Respective ground surface elevation at boring locations of BH1 through BH3 are shown on the boreholes logs. 8 Geotechnical Design Considerations This section of the report provides general geotechnical recommendations for the design aspect of the project based on our interpretation of the information gathered from the boreholes performed at this site and from the project requirements. As outlined in section 2, it is understood the development is proposed to construct a new four (4) storey mixed use building with two (2) levels of underground parking. Based on the localized borings, the subsurface found at this site consisted of fill/possible fill to depths ranged from 1.5 to 2.9 m overlying the very loose to very dense native silt and sand till deposit. The compact or medium silt and sand till deposit encountered at this site is suitable to support the proposed new four (4) storey mixed use building with two (2) levels of underground parking on conventional strip and spread footings. Therefore, all fill/possible fill including very loose to loose native silt and sand till material should be removed from the proposed building s footprint down to the relatively stable, undisturbed compact silt and sand till deposit to depths about m bgs. 8.1 Foundation Design Parameters Strip and Spread Footings From the information available to date, it is our understanding that the development will consist of two (2) levels of underground parking and the underside of the footing elevation for level-2 parking is anticipated to be 52.4 m, geodetic datum. Conventional strip and column footings founded over the undisturbed native silt and sand till deposit may be designed using the following bearing resistances provided in Table 2.

8 Ottawa, Ontario Page 5 of 17 Table 2: Bearing Values and Corresponding Footing Founding Depths Location Ground Surface Elevation (Geodetic), m BH BH BH Footing Founding Depth Below Existing Grade, m Bearing Pressure at Serviceability Limit State (SLS), (kpa) Bearing Pressure at Ultimate Limit State (ULS), (kpa Elevation (Geodetic), m Soil Type at Footing Founding Level Silt and Sand Till Silt and Sand Till Silt and Sand Till A geotechnical resistance factor of 0.5 was applied to the bearing resistance at ULS. This bearing capacity limits the allowable grade raise to m. This bearing capacity also allows for a strip footing of width minimum 0.6 to maximum 0.9 m, and a pad footing of width minimum 1.0 to maximum 1.8 m on any side. In-situ test (dynamic cone penetration) may be required to check the stability of the footing subgrade. Any incompetent subgrade areas as identified from in-situ testing must be subexcavated and backfilled with approved structural fill. Similarly, any soft or wet areas should also be sub-excavated and backfilled with approved structural fill only. Prior to placing the approved structural fill, the subgrade comprised of sandy silt till deposit should be inspected and approved by geotechnical engineer or a representative of geotechnical engineer. The bearing pressure is contingent on the water level being 0.3 m below the underside footing elevation in order to have stable and dry footing subgrade. All the footings founded on approved structural fill, as well as foundation walls supported by such footings should be reinforced to bridge anomalies soft areas in the material, in consultation with the project structural engineer. Footing and foundation walls shall be reinforced, especially at segments where footing founding soils are comprised of partly structural fill and partly undisturbed native soil. If the strip footings need to be founded at different level, it is recommended to use the step footings specification as recommended in Clause of OBC 2012 or any updated version. Footings which are to be founded at different elevations should be located such that the higher footing is set below a line drawn up at 10 horizontal to 7 vertical from the near edge of the lower footing. If the footings are wider or founded at shallow depth, or if the grade raise is greater than that mentioned above, the above allowable bearing pressure at serviceability limit state may have to be reduced.

9 Ottawa, Ontario Page 6 of 17 At the time of LRL s preparation of this geotechnical report the structural details for the proposed four (4) storey mixed use building had not been provided for review. However, it is our understanding that the above bearing pressures would be sufficient to resist the proposed structural and associated loads Deep Foundations If a higher bearing pressure is required, consideration should be given for deep foundation design. The design method for a particular deep foundation depends on the surrounding and founding soil type and end-bearing or toe resistance pressure. The most common and cost-effective deep foundations are driven steel piles and drilled cast-in-place concrete piles or caisson. Details on deep foundation can be provided later upon request, provided that more extensive field investigation and laboratory testing will be required. 8.2 Structural Fill Unshrinkable concrete of compressive strength 0.7 MPa (28-Day) shall be used to fill the voids resulted from sub-excavation around the footings area. In order to allow the spread of load beneath the footings and to prevent under mining during construction, the structural fill should extend minimum 1.0 m beyond the outside edges of the footings and then outward and downward at 1 horizontal to 1 vertical (1H: 1V) profile (or flatter) over a distance equal to the depth of the structural fill below the footings. 8.3 Slab-on-grade Construction The proposed parking level-2 floor slab may be constructed as slab-on-grade, rest over undisturbed competent silt and sand till or structural fill only. Therefore, all fill including organic or otherwise deleterious material shall be removed from the building s footprint. The exposed native subgrade surface should then be inspected and approved by geotechnical personnel. Any underfloor fill needed to raise the general floor grade shall consist of OPSS Granular B Type I material or an approved equivalent, compacted to 95% of its SPMDD. The final lift shall be compacted to 98% of its SPMDD. A 200 mm thick layer of Granular A meeting the OPSS 1010 shall be placed underneath the slab and compacted to 100% of its SPMDD. Alternatively, if wet condition persists, 200 mm thickness of 19 mm clear stone meeting the OPSS 1004 requirements shall be used instead of Granular A. Effective compacting effort shall be utilized to consolidate the clear stone. Also, within any unheated areas and entrances, 50 mm Styrofoam insulation should be provided below the floor slab to protect against frost heave. It is also recommended that area of extensive exterior slab-on-grade (sidewalks, ramp etc.) shall be constructed using Granular B subbase of thickness 300 mm and Granular A base of thickness 150 mm with incorporating subdrain facilities. The modulus of subgrade reaction (ks) for the design of the slabs set over compact native soil/structural fill is 22.0 MPa/m. 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 saw cut depth should be about one quarter of the thickness of the slab. In order to minimize and control cracking, the floor slab should be provided with wire mesh reinforcement and construction or control joints. The construction or control joints should be spaced equal distance in both directions and should not exceed 4.5 m. The wire mesh reinforcement should be carried through the joints.

10 Ottawa, Ontario Page 7 of 17 To prevent the build-up of possible hydrostatic pressures, the subdrain tile consisting of 100 mm diameter weeping tile wrapped around, with a filter cloth are required to be installed underneath the floor slab, with invert to be at least 300 mm below the underside of the floor slab in parallel rows at about 5.0 m spacing in one direction, and connected to the frost-free outlet independent of the exterior weeping tile. The spacing of underfloor drainage should be confirmed at the time of excavation when water infiltration can be better assessed. The drains should be geotextile filter wrapped and provided with a 150 mm thick surround of 20 mm minus clear stone conforming to OPSS 1004 gradation requirements. If any areas of the proposed four (4) storey mixed use building area are to remain unheated during the winter period, thermal protection of the slab-on-grade may be required. Proper moisture barrier with vapour retarder should be used for any slab on grade where the floor will be covered by moisture sensitive flooring material or equipment will exist. The Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction, ACI 302.1R-04 is recommended to follow for the design and construction of vapour retarders below the floor slab. Further details on the insulation requirements could be provided, if necessary. 8.4 Foundation Walls Backfill To prevent possible foundation frost jacking and lateral loading, the backfill material against any foundation walls, grade beams, isolated walls, or piers should consist of free draining, non-frost susceptible material such as sand and gravel meeting OPSS Granular B Type I or equivalent gradation requirements. The foundation wall backfill should be compacted to minimum 95% of its SPMDD using light compaction equipment, where no loads will be set over top. The compaction shall be increased to 98% of its SPMDD under walkways, slabs or paved areas close to the foundation or retaining walls. Backfilling against foundation walls should be carried out on both sides of the wall at the same time where applicable. To minimize infiltration of surface water, the upper 600 mm of backfill should comprise compacted relatively impervious material sloped away from the building. 8.5 Lateral Earth Pressure on Foundation/Subsurface Wall The following equation should be used to estimate the intensity of the lateral earth pressure against any earth retaining structure, foundation or subsurface walls. Where; P = K (γh + q) P = Earth pressure at depth h; K = Appropriate coefficient of earth pressure; γ = Unit weight of compacted backfill, adjacent to the wall; h = Depth (below adjacent to the highest grade) at which P is calculated; q = Intensity of any surcharge distributed uniformly over the backfill surface (usually surcharge from traffic, equipment or soil stockpiled and typically considered 12 kpa).

11 Ottawa, Ontario Page 8 of 17 The coefficient of earth pressure at rest (K 0) should be used in the calculation of the earth pressure on the storm water manhole/foundation walls, which are expected to be rather rigid and not to deflect. The above expression assumes that the effective perimeter tile drain system will be incorporated to prevent the build-up of any hydrostatic pressure behind the subsurface or foundation wall. 8.6 Settlement The estimated total settlement of the shallow foundations, designed using the recommended serviceability limit state capacity value, as well as other recommendations given above, will be less than 25 mm. The differential settlement between adjacent column footings is anticipated to be 15 mm or less. The above given statements have considered that the terrain will not be raised by more than 0.6 m above the current elevations. If and when a greater grade raise are required, a more intensive geotechnical review will be required to ensure that the settlement will not exceed under the current load condition. 8.7 Seismic There have been no shear wave velocity measurement carried out at this site and therefore, SPT N values are used to determine the Site Classification for Seismic Site Response. Based on the limited information of this geotechnical investigation and in accordance with the Ontario Building Code 2012 (table A.) and Canadian Foundation Engineering Manual (4 th edition), the site can be classified for Seismic Site Response Site Class D. The above classifications were recommended based on conventional method exercised for Site Classification for Seismic Site Response and in accordance with the generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice. It should be noted that a greater seismic site response may be obtained by conducting a seismic velocity testing using a Multichannel Analysis of Surface Wave (MASW). 8.8 Potential for Soil Liquefaction Based on the subsurface soil conditions established at this site, the foundations will be founded over compact silt and sand till or approved structural fill. As such, it is anticipated that soil liquefaction will not be a concern for constructing shallow foundation at depth around 6.0 m bgs. Soil liquefaction, if any, will possibly be mitigated through appropriate sump pumping/lowering groundwater table. 8.9 Frost Protection All exterior footings located in any unheated portions of the proposed building should be protected against frost heaving by providing a minimum of 1.5 m of earth cover. Areas that are to be cleared of snow (i.e. sidewalks, paved areas, etc.) should be provided with at least 1.8 m of earth cover for frost protection purposes. Alternatively, the required frost protection could be provided using a combination of earth cover and extruded polystyrene insulation. Detailed guidelines for footing insulation frost protection can be provided upon request. In the event that foundations are to be constructed during winter months, the foundation soils are required to be protected from freezing temperatures using suitable construction

12 Ottawa, Ontario Page 9 of 17 techniques. The base of all excavations should be insulated from freezing temperatures immediately upon exposure, until heat can be supplied to the building interior and the footings have sufficient soil cover to prevent freezing of the subgrade soils Foundation Drainage Permanent perimeter drainage is required to be installed surrounding the foundation or subsurface wall, elevator pits and places wherever any open spaces located below the finished ground are being considered. A perforated corrugated polyethylene drainage pipe (100 mm minimum) pre-wrapped with geotextile knitted sock, conforming to OPSS 1840, should be embedded in a 300 mm layer of 19 mm clear stone wrapped in a geotextile and set adjacent to the perimeter footings. The drainage pipe should be connected positively to a suitable outlet, such as sump pit from which the water is pumped. The exterior of the foundation walls should be damp-proofed following the requirements stated in Section 9.13 of Ontario Building Code (OBC) 2012 or any updated. Roof water should be controlled by a roof drainage system that directs water away from the building to prevent ponding of water adjacent to the foundation wall. The exterior grade should be sloped away from the building to promote water drainage away from the foundation walls Retaining Walls and Shoring The following Table 3 below provides the suggested soil parameters for the design of retaining wall and/or shoring systems. For excavations near existing services and structures, the coefficient of earth pressure at rest (K o) should be used. Table 3: Material Properties for Shoring and Permanent Wall Design (Static) Pressure Coefficient Combined static and seismic active earth pressure coefficient Type of Material Bulk Density (kn/m 3 ) Angle of internal friction At Rest (K 0) Active (K A) Passive (K P) (K AE) Granular A Granular B Type I Granular B Type II Silt and Sand Till The above values are for a flat surface behind the wall, a straight wall and a wall friction angle of 0 degree. The designer should consider any difference between these coefficients, and make appropriate corrections for a sloped surface behind the wall, angled wall or wall friction as required. The bearing capacity for the design of a retaining wall are the same as provided for the building structure provided it is founded over the same soil stratum. Retaining walls should also be designed to resist the earth pressures produced under seismic conditions. The Canadian Building Code recommends the use of combined coefficients of static and seismic earth pressure, referred to as K AE for active conditions and K PE for passive conditions for routine design purposes.

13 Ottawa, Ontario Page 10 of 17 The total active and passive loads under seismic conditions can be calculated using the following two equations; Where; P AE = ½ K AE γ H 2 (1-k V) P PE = ½ K PE γ H 2 (1-k V) K AE = Combined static and seismic active earth pressure coefficient K PE = Combined static and seismic passive earth pressure coefficient H = Total height of the wall (m) K h = Horizontal acceleration coefficient K v = Vertical acceleration coefficient γ = Bulk density (kg/m 3 ) These equations are based on a horizontal slope behind the wall and a vertical back of the retaining wall and zero wall friction. For this site, the following design parameters were used to develop the recommended K AE and K PE values. A = Zonal acceleration ratio = 0.2 K h = Horizontal acceleration coefficient = 0.1 K V = Vertical acceleration coefficient = The above value of K h corresponds to ½ of the A value and the value K V of corresponds to 0.67 of the K h value. The angle of friction between the soil and the wall has been set at 0 o to provide a conservative estimate. The total active thrust P AE can be divided into a static component, P and a dynamic (seismic) component P AE (i.e. P AE = P+ P AE ) and may be considered to act at a height, h (m), from the base of the wall, h = [P (H/3) + P AE (0.6H)]/ P AE The following Table 4 provides the parameters for seismic design of retaining structures. Table 4: Material Properties for Shoring and Permanent Wall Design (Seismic) Parameter OPSS Granular B Type I OPSS Granular B Type II OPSS Granular A Bulk Unit Weight, γ (kn/m 3 ) Effective Friction Angle (degrees) Angle of Internal Friction Between wall and Backfill (degrees) Yielding Wall Active Seismic Earth Pressure Coefficient (KAE) Passive Seismic Earth Pressure Coefficient (KPE)

14 Ottawa, Ontario Page 11 of Sulphate Attack and Corrosivity Analysis on Buried Concrete No chemical analyses were conducted during this limited geotechnical investigation but should be confirmed prior to proceeding with proposed development works. 9 EXCAVATION AND BACKFILLING REQUIREMENTS 9.1 Excavation It is anticipated that the depth of excavation for the proposed four (4) storey mixed use building with two (2) levels of underground parking and underground services will not extend below 6.4 m bgs. Following the completion of the anticipated shoring system, excavation for foundation of underground parking level-2 may be carried out using conventional heavy duty equipment/excavator. Excavation will encounter fill/possible fill, rubble fill, possible old foundation and slabs. Most of the excavation being carried out will be through fill/possible fill and native silt and sand till. According to the Ontario s Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA), Ontario Regulation 213/91 and its amendments, the surficial overburden expected to be excavated into at this site can be classified as Type 3 soils for fully drained (not saturated). Therefore, shallow temporary excavations in overburden soil can be cut at 1 horizontal to 1 vertical for a fully drained excavation starting at the base of the excavation and as per requirements of the OHSA regulations. Soils in a saturated condition must be treated as Type 4 soil. Type 4 soils must be excavated from the bottom of the excavation at a minimum gradient of 3 horizontal to 1 vertical. The existing native silt and sand till encountered in all three boreholes in an undisturbed and drained state (not saturated), would be classified also as Type 3 soils and must be excavated at a minimum gradient of 1 horizontal to 1 vertical. In the event that the aforementioned slopes are not possible to achieve due to space restrictions, the excavation shall be shored according to OHSA O. Reg. 213/91 and its amendments. A geotechnical engineer shall design and approve the shoring and establish the shoring depth under the excavation profile. Refer to the parameters provided in Table 3 and 4 in Section 8.11 for use in the design of any shoring structures. Any excavated material stockpiled near an excavation or trench should be stored at a distance equal to or greater than the depth of the excavation/trench and construction equipment traffic should be limited near open excavation. 9.2 Temporary Shoring Requirements Temporary shoring may be required to complete the required excavations where insufficient room is available for open cut method. The shoring requirements will depend on the depth of the excavation, the proximity of the existing underground services, structures and the depth of the adjacent existing building foundations. However, where some movement is acceptable, a temporary shoring system consisting of tie-back, timber lagging and soldier piles or interlocking steel sheet piling is expected to provide a suitable support to the vertical faces of the excavation, and anticipated to limit the horizontal and vertical movement of the adjacent structure, properties and roadways etc. Any additional loading due to street traffic, construction equipment and adjacent structures should be added to calculate the earth pressure. The shoring system for the project must be designed on the basis of the state-of-the-art information given in the Fourth Edition of the Canadian Foundation Engineering Manual

15 Ottawa, Ontario Page 12 of 17 (CEFM). Earth pressure acting on the shoring system may be calculated using the soil parameters as follows: a) Earth Pressure Coefficients for Silt and Sand Till Where movement must be minimal, K = 0.47 Where minor movement (0.002H) can be tolerated, K = 0.31 Passive earth pressure on soldier piles, k p = 3.25 for Silt and Sand Till b) For Stability Check Angle of internal friction, ɸ = 32 degree for non-cohesive soils. Cohesion, c = 0 for non-cohesive soil. Approximate unit weight of soil, γ = 18.5 kn/m 3 Surcharge to be determined by shoring contractor c) For Earth Anchors Bond value = 100 kpa for non-cohesive soils (Compact Silt and Sand Till); All tie-back holes should be temporarily cased to minimize the risk of possible caving. During winter season, the shoring system should be covered with thermal blankets to prevent frost penetration which may cause for unacceptable movements. The above recommended design parameters should be confirmed by load testing to a number of anchors (at least one anchor on each side) to 200% of design load in accordance with the CFEM (4 th Edition or any updated version). The design of the production anchor should then be modified based on the test results, where applicable. All remaining anchors must be installed in similar procedure and proof test to be carried out to 1.33 times of the design load. LRL geotechnical engineer should be retained to review the shoring design, to monitor the installation, testing and monitor of the shoring system during all phases of excavation. Careful monitoring is required during excavation and shoring, especially when a building/structure or underground utility services are present in close proximity of the anchoring system. 9.3 Groundwater Control No major groundwater control requirements are expected for construction of the underground parking level-2 at anticipated elevation 52.4 m, geodetic datum. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered at this site, groundwater seepage or infiltration from the native soil into shallow temporary excavations (less than 1.9 m or at elevation about 56.0 m) during construction should be negligible and minor to moderate at depth below 1.9 to footing founding depth (or elev. 52.4m). Seepage or infiltration from perched water during excavation in the fill layer is expected, and should be possible to control and removing the ponding water using a conventional dewatering technique. However, based on hydraulic conductivity of the soils encountered at this site, it is anticipated that pumping from open sumps will be sufficient to control groundwater inflow through the vertical face of excavations. Any groundwater seepage or infiltration entering the excavation should be removed from the excavation by pumping from sumps within the excavations. Surface water runoff into the excavation should be minimized and diverted away from the excavation.

16 Ottawa, Ontario Page 13 of 17 Should deeper excavations within the native overburden be anticipated as part of this development, it is recommended that a more detailed investigation be carried out with regards to potential groundwater constraints, pumping and permit requirements. A permit to take water (PTTW) is required from Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC), Ontario Reg. 387/04, if more than 400,000 litres per day of groundwater will be pumped during a construction period less than 30 days. Based on our observation during this limited field investigation, it is anticipated that pumping of groundwater will not exceed the MOECC s per day limit. As such, no PTTW is considered necessary for the proposed development at this site. 9.4 Pipe Bedding Requirements It is anticipated that the underground services required as part of this project will be founded over native silt and sand till, or approved structural fill. Alternately, underground services may be founded over properly prepared and approved structural fill, where excavation below the invert is required. Consequently all organic and fill material should be removed down to a suitable bearing layer. Any sub-excavation of disturbed soil should be removed and replaced with a unshrinkable concrete/granular B Type I laid in loose lifts of no more than 200 mm thick and compacted to 95% of its SPMDD. Bedding, thickness of cover material and compaction requirements for watermains and sewers should conform to the manufacturers design requirements and to the requirements and detailed installations outlined in the Ontario Provincial Standard Specifications (OPSS), Ontario Provincial Standard Drawing (OPSD) and any applicable standards or requirements from the City of Ottawa, Ontario. It is anticipated that the watermains and sewers will be founded above the groundwater table. If and when watermains and sewers are required to be founded below the groundwater table and sand-silt will constitute the founding soil below the groundwater, it may be sensitive to disturbances and may also be susceptible to piping and scouring from water pressure at the base of the excavation. Therefore, special precautions should be taken in these areas to stabilize and confine the base of the excavation such as using recompression (thicker bedding) and/or dewatering methods (pre-pumping). In order to properly compact the bedding, the water table should be kept at least 300 mm below the base of the excavation at all time during the installation of the watermains and sewers. As an alternative to Granular A bedding and only where wet conditions are encountered, the use of clear stone bedding, such as 19 mm clear stone conforming to OPSS 1004, may be considered only in conjunction with a suitable geotextile filter (terrafix 270R or approved equivalent). Without proper filtering, there may be entry of fines from native soils and trench backfill into the bedding, which could result in loss of support to the pipes and possible surface settlements. The sub-bedding, bedding and cover materials should be compacted in maximum 200 mm thick lifts to at least 95% of its SPMDD with ±2% of its optimum moisture content using suitable vibratory compaction equipment. 9.5 Trench Backfill All service trenches should be backfilled using compactable material, free of organics, debris and large cobbles or boulders. Acceptable native materials (if encountered and where possible) should be used as backfill between the roadway subgrade level and the depth of seasonal frost penetrations (i.e. 1.8 m below finished grade) in order to reduce the potential for differential frost heaving between the new excavated trench and the adjacent section of roadway. Where native backfill is used, it should match the native materials exposed on the trench walls.

17 Ottawa, Ontario Page 14 of 17 Any boulders larger than 150 mm in size should not be used as trench backfill. Backfill below the zone of seasonal frost penetration could consist of either acceptable native material or imported granular material conforming to OPSS Granular B Type I or approved equivalent. To minimize future settlement of the backfill and achieve an acceptable subgrade for the roadway, the trench should be compacted in maximum 300 mm thick lifts to at least 95% SPMDD. The specified density may be reduced where the trench backfill is not located within or in close proximity to existing roadways or any other structures. For trenches carried out in existing paved areas, transitions should be constructed to ensure that proper compaction is achieved between any new pavement structure and the existing pavement structure to minimize potential future differential settlement between the existing and new pavement structure. The transition should start at the subgrade level and extend to the underside of the asphaltic concrete level (if any) at 1 horizontal to 1 vertical (1H:1V) slope. This is especially important where trench boxes are used and where no side slopes is provided to the excavation. Where asphaltic concrete is present, it should be cut back to a minimum of 150 mm from the edge of the excavation to allow for proper compaction between the new and existing pavement structures. 10 Reuse of On-site Soils The existing surficial overburden soils consist mostly of fill, and silt and sand till. The overburden soil is considered to be frost susceptible and should not be used as backfill material directly against foundation walls or underneath unheated concrete slabs. However, these could be reused as general backfill material (service trenches, general landscaping/backfilling) if it can be compacted according to the specifications outlined herein at the time of construction and found free from any waste, topsoil and debris. Any imported material shall conform to OPSS Granular C, Granular B Type I or approved equivalent. It should be noted that the adequacy of any material for reuse as backfill will depend on its moisture content at the time of its use and on the weather conditions prevailing prior to and during that time. Therefore, all excavated materials to be reused shall be stockpiled in a manner that will prevent any significant changes in their moisture content, especially during wet conditions. Any excavated materials proposed for reuse should be stockpiled in a manner to promote drying and should be inspected and approved for reuse by a geotechnical engineer. 11 Recommended Pavement Structure Construction of new parking and access lanes could be considered on undisturbed native soil, structural fill or compacted fill material, if complete removal of fill material is not feasible. The native silt and sand till must be compacted using a suitable heavy duty compacting equipment and approved by a geotechnical engineer prior to placing any structural fill/granular subbase as part of the pavement structure. If the pavement structure is considered to be constructed on fill material, it is recommended to remove the fill material to a minimum depth of 1.2 m and compact the remaining fill using an approved heavy duty vibrating smooth drum roller. The subgrade comprised of structural fill or sand-silt-clay fill must be compacted using also a heavy duty vibratory roller and approved by geotechnical engineer prior to placing the structural fill for grade raise.

18 Ottawa, Ontario Page 15 of 17 Considering the wet soil condition at the subgrade level, the subgrade soil Resilient Modulus is 34.5 MPa and the calculated minimum Granular Base Equivalency (GBE) is 630. The following Table 5 presents the recommended pavement structures to be constructed over a stable subgrade along the proposed roadways/access lane and parking areas as part of this project. Table 5: Recommended Pavement Structure Course Material Thickness (mm) Light Duty Parking Area (Cars) (mm) Heavy Duty Parking Area (Access Roads, Fire Routes and Trucks) (mm) GBE Surface HL3 A/C Binder HL8 A/C - 50 Base course Granular A Sub base Granular B Type II Total: Performance Graded (PG) Asphaltic Cement is recommended for this project. The base and subbase granular materials shall conform to OPSS 1010 material specifications. Any proposed materials shall be tested and approved by a geotechnical engineer prior to delivery to the site and shall be compacted to 100% SPMDD. Asphaltic concrete shall conform to OPSS 1150 and be placed and compacted to at least 97% of the Marshall Density. The mix and its constituents shall be reviewed, tested and approved by a geotechnical engineer prior to delivery to the site Paved Areas & Subgrade Preparation The proposed access lanes shall be stripped of surficial fill, deleterious and other obvious objectionable material, if any. Following the backfilling and satisfactory compaction of any underground service trenches up to the subgrade level, the subgrade shall be shaped, crowned and proof-rolled using a heavy duty roller with any resulting loose/soft areas being sub-excavated down to an adequate bearing layer and replaced with approved backfill. Any material used as select subgrade should be approved by the geotechnical engineer before placement within the roadway. These materials should be placed in maximum 300 mm thick loose lifts and be compacted to at least 95% of its SPMDD using suitable compaction equipment. Following approval of the preparation of the subgrade, the pavement structure may be placed. The preparation of subgrade shall be scheduled and carried out in manner so that a protective cover of overlying granular material (if required) is placed as quickly as possible in order to avoid unnecessary circulation by heavy equipment, except on unexcavated or protected surfaces. Frost protection of the surface shall be implemented if works are carried out during the winter months. The performance of the pavement structure is highly dependent on the subsurface groundwater conditions and maintaining the subgrade and pavement structure in a dry condition. To intercept excess subsurface water within the pavement structure granular materials, sub-drains with suitable outlets should be installed below the pavement area s

19 Ottawa, Ontario Page 16 of 17 subgrade if adequate overland flow drainage is not provided. The surface of the pavement should be properly graded to direct runoff water towards suitable drainage features. It is recommended that the lateral extent of the subbase and base layers not be terminated vertically immediately behind the curb/edge of pavement line but be extended beyond the curb. 12 Inspection Services The engagement of the services of the geotechnical consultant during construction is recommended to confirm that the subsurface conditions throughout the proposed site 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 footing areas and any engineered or structural fill areas for the proposed structures should be inspected by LRL s representative to ensure that a suitable subgrade has been reached and properly prepared. The placing of unshrinkable concrete or any granular materials beneath the foundations and slab-on-grade should be inspected and tested to ensure that the materials used meet the grading and specifications from a strength/compaction point of view. The subgrade for the pavement areas and underground services should be inspected and approved by geotechnical personnel. In-situ density testing should be carried out on the pavement granular materials, pipe bedding and backfill to ensure the materials meet the specifications for required compaction. If footings are to be constructed during winter months, the footing subgrade should be protected from freezing temperatures using suitable construction techniques. 13 Report Conditions and Limitations It is stressed that the information presented in this report is provided for the guidance of the designers and is intended for this project only. The use of this report as a construction document or its use by a third party beyond the client specifically listed in the report is neither intended nor authorized by LRL Associates Ltd. 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 for this project include only the geotechnical aspects of the subsurface conditions at this site. The presence or implications of possible 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 off-site sources are outside the terms of reference for this report. The recommendations provided in this report are based on subsurface data obtained at the specific test locations only. Boundaries between zones presented on the borehole are often not distinct but transitional and were interpreted. Experience indicates that the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions can vary significantly between and beyond the boring locations. For this reason, the recommendations given in this report are subject to a field verification of the subsurface soil conditions at the time of construction.

20 Ottawa, Ontario Page 17 of 17 The report recommendations are applicable only to the project described in the report. Any changes to the project will require a review by LRL Associates Ltd., to insure compatibility with the recommendations contained in this project. 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 the undersigned. Yours truly, LRL Associates Ltd. MZ 2017/01/27 Mohammed Zamshad, M.Eng., P.Eng Senior Geotechnical Engineer Stéphane Leclerc, P.Eng. Principal Engineer W:\FILES 2012\120955\3-Reports\Geotech 2016\ Geotechnical Investigation-Proposed Residential Building.docx

21 APPENDIX A Site and Borehole Location Plan

22 PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION NEW 4 STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING HENDERSON AVE OTTAWA, ONTARIO 5430 Canotek Road Ottawa, ON, K1J 9G2 (613) DRAWING TITLE SITE LOCATION SOURCE: Map Data 2016 Google CLIENT W. ELIAS & ASSOCIATES DATE JANUARY 6, 2017 PROJECT FIGURE 1

23 PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION NEW 4 STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING HENDERSON AVE OTTAWA, ONTARIO 5430 Canotek Road Ottawa, ON, K1J 9G2 (613) DRAWING TITLE BOREHOLE LOCATION SOURCE: Imagery 2016 Google, DigitalGlobe Map Data CLIENT W. ELIAS & ASSOCIATES DATE JANUARY 6, 2017 PROJECT FIGURE 2 BH1 BH3 BH2

24 APPENDIX B Borehole Logs

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

31 APPENDIX C Symbols and Terms used in Borehole Logs

32 Symbols and Terms Used on Borehole and Test Pit Logs The following explains the data presented in the borehole and test pit logs. 1. Soil Description The soil descriptions presented in this report are based on commonly accepted methods of classification and identification employed in geotechnical practice. Classification and identification of soil involves some judgement and LRL Associates Ltd. does not guarantee descriptions as exact, but infers accuracy to the extent that is common in current geotechnical practice. Boundaries between zones on the logs are often not distinct but transitional and were interpreted. a. Proportion The proportion of each constituent part, as defined by the grain size distribution, is denoted by the following terms: Term Proportions trace 1% to 10% some 10% to 20% prefix 20% to 35% (i.e. sandy silt) and 35% to 50% (i.e. sand and gravel) b. Compactness and Consistency The state of compactness of granular soils is defined on the basis of the Standard Penetration Test. See Section 2c for more details. The consistency of clayey or cohesive soils is based on the shear strength of the soil, as determined by field vane tests and by a visual and tactile assessment of the soil strength. The state of compactness of granular soils is defined by the following terms: State of Compactness Granular Soils Standard Penetration Number N Very loose 0 4 Loose 4 10 Compact or medium Dense Very dense over - 50 The consistency of cohesive soils is defined by the following terms: Consistency Cohesive Soils Undrained Shear Strength (Cu) (kpa) Very soft under 10 Soft Medium or firm Stiff Very stiff Hard over Sample Data a. Elevation depth This is a reference to the geodesic elevation of the soil or to a benchmark of an arbitrary elevation at the location of the borehole or test pit. The depth of geological boundaries is measured from ground surface. b. Type Symbol Type Letter Code c. Sample Number Auger Split spoon Shelby tube Rock Core AU SS ST RC Each sample taken from the borehole is numbered in the field as shown in this column. LETTER CODE (as above) Sample Number d. Blows (N) or RQD This column indicates the Standard Penetration Number (N) as per ASTM D This is used to determine the state of compactness of the soil sampled. It corresponds to the number of blows

33 Symbols ad Terms used on Borehole and Test Pit Logs Page 2 of 2 required to drive 300 mm of the split spoon sampler using a 622 kg*m/s 2 hammer falling freely from a height of 760 mm. For a 600 mm long split spoon, the blow counts are recorded for every 150 mm. The N index is obtained by adding the number of blows from the 2 nd and 3 rd count. Technical refusal indicates a number of blows greater than 50. In the case of rock, this column presents the Rock Quality Designation (RQD). The RQD is calculated as the cumulative length of rock pieces recovered having lengths of 10 cm or more divided by the length of coring. The qualitative description of the bedrock based on RQD is given below. Rock Quality Designation (RQD) (%) e. Recovery (%) Description of Rock Quality 0 25 very poor poor fair good excellent For soil samples this is the percentage of the recovered sample obtained versus the length sampled. In the case of rock, the percentage is the length of rock core recovered compared to the length of the drill run. 3. General Monitoring Well Data Stick up Well Cap Top of Riser Soil Cuttings Grout PVC Riser Pipe Bentonite Water Level Date Monitored PVC Screen Silica Sand End cap Flush Mount Casing Ground Surface LRL Associates Ltd.

34 APPENDIX D Lab Results

35

36 APPENDIX E Site Photographs

37 SITE VISIT PHOTOGRAPHS Our File Ref.: Client: W. Elias & Associates Project: 4 Storey Mixed Use Building Site Location: Henderson Ave, Ottawa ON Photograph No. 1 Date: 1/26/2017 Description Existing Buildings to be Demolished, Henderson Ave. Photograph No. 2 Date: 1/26/2017 Description Existing Building to be Demolished, view from Templeton Street.