geotechnical investigation report proposed … · to determine the engineering properties of the...

geotechnics

construction materials testing

90 scarsdale road telephone: (905) 474-5265

toronto, ontario fax: (416) 444-3179

M3B 2R7 e-mail: [email protected]

Report Ref. No. CT2397.04

November 28, 2017

Prepared For:

Marshall Homes (Finch) Ltd.

1295 Wharf Street, Unit 9

Pickering, ON

L1W 1A2

Prepared By:

Alston Associates

A division of Terrapex Environmental Ltd.

Distribution:

Digital Copy - Marshall Homes (Finch) Ltd.

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT

390 AND 398 FINCH AVENUE

PICKERING, ONTARIO

alston associates Reference CT2397.04

A division of Terrapex Environmental Ltd. November 28, 2017


390 AND 398 FINCH AVENUE, PICKERING, ONTARIO

MARSHALL HOMES (FINCH) LTD.

i

CONTENTS

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

2 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................... 1

3 FIELDWORK ......................................................................................................................................... 2

4 LABORATORY TESTS ............................................................................................................................ 3

5 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ............................................................................................... 3

5.1 Site Description ...................................................................................................................................... 4

5.2 Topsoil ..................................................................................................................................................... 4

5.3 Fill Material ............................................................................................................................................. 4

5.4 Native Soils ............................................................................................................................................. 4

5.4.1 Silty Sand ................................................................................................................................... 4

5.4.2 Gravelly Sand ........................................................................................................................... 5

5.4.3 Sandy Silt (Till) ............................................................................................................................ 5

5.4.4 Clayey Silt (Till) .......................................................................................................................... 6

5.5 Groundwater .......................................................................................................................................... 6

6 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................... 7

6.1 Excavation.............................................................................................................................................. 7

6.2 Groundwater Control ............................................................................................................................ 8

6.3 Foundation Design ................................................................................................................................. 9

6.4 Concrete Slab-on-Grade ................................................................................................................... 10

6.5 Reuse of On-site Excavated Soil as a Compacted Backfill ............................................................ 10

6.6 Service Trenches .................................................................................................................................. 11

6.7 Pavement Design ................................................................................................................................ 12

6.8 Earthquake Design Parameters ......................................................................................................... 13

6.9 Lateral Earth Pressure .......................................................................................................................... 14

6.10 Chemical Characterization of Subsurface Soil ................................................................................ 15

7 LIMITATIONS OF REPORT .................................................................................................................. 16






ii

APPENDICES .

APPENDIX A LIMITATIONS OF REPORT

APPENDIX B BOREHOLE LOCATION PLAN AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

APPENDIX C BOREHOLE LOG SHEETS

APPENDIX D LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

APPENDIX E TYPICAL PERIMETER AND UNDERFLOOR DRAINAGE SYSTEM

APPENDIX F CERTIFICATE OF CHEMICAL ANALYSES

alston associates Reference CT2397.04 A division of Terrapex Environmental Ltd. November 28, 2017

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT 390 AND 398 FINCH AVENUE, PICKERING, ONTARIO MARSHALL HOMES (FINCH) LTD.

1

1 INTRODUCTION

Alston Associates (AA) has been retained by Marshall Homes (Finch) Ltd. to carry out a geotechnical investigation for a proposed residential development located at 390 and 398 Finch Avenue in Pickering, Ontario. Authorization to proceed with this study was given by Mr. Dugald Wells of Marshall Homes (Finch) Ltd.

We understand that it is proposed to develop the site with a residential subdivision consisting of single family homes with basement construction; to be serviced with municipal services and an access road to Finch Avenue.

A grading plan was not available at the time of the investigation, and accordingly the recommendations provided in this report are considered to be preliminary in nature, subject for review and revision upon completion of proposed grading plans.

The fieldwork for the geotechnical study was conducted in conjunction with environmental investigation. The environmental condition at the site is reported under separate cover by Terrapex Environmental Ltd. (Terrapex).

The purpose of this investigation was to characterize the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions, to determine the engineering properties of the various soil deposits underlying the site, and to provide preliminary geotechnical engineering recommendations pertaining to the proposed development.

This report presents the results of the investigation performed in accordance with the general terms of reference outlined above and is intended for the guidance of the client and the design architects or engineers only. It is assumed that the design will be in accordance with the applicable building codes and standards.

2 BACKGROUND We understand that it is proposed to develop the properties with the municipal addresses of 390, 398, 402, 414, and 422 Finch Avenue with a residential subdivision consisting of 33 single family homes with basement construction; to be serviced with municipal services and an access road to Finch Avenue. The layout of the proposed development is shown on the Potential Development Plan dated November 1, 2017 prepared by Design Plan Services Inc. and provided for our use by Marshall Homes; shown on Drawing 2 attached in Appendix B of this report.

A geotechnical investigation was carried out by AA at 414 and 422 Finch Avenue during March, 2017 consisting of 7 boreholes (designated as Boreholes MW1, MW2, BH3, BH4, MW5, MW6 and BH7) extended to an approximate depth of 6.5 m below ground surface (mbgs). Groundwater monitoring wells were installed in three of the boreholes (MW1, MW2 and MW6). The locations of the boreholes are shown on Drawing 2 attached in Appendix B of this report.

The boreholes revealed that the subsurface stratigraphy generally comprises surficial topsoil underlain by native soil consisting of very loose to loose silty sand, compact to dense sand, and compact sand and gravel, followed by glacial till soils consisting of compact to very dense sand and silt (till) and very stiff sandy silty clay (till). The sand and silt till was encountered at approximate depths ranging from 0.7






2

to 2.7 mbgs.

Groundwater was measured upon completion of the boreholes and in the monitoring wells at

approximate depths ranging from 0.2 to 2.7 mbgs. Based on the groundwater measurements, the

indications were that the water was perched in the near surface sandy soils above the till soil.

A supplementary geotechnical investigation was carried out by AA in the north section of 402 Finch

Avenue on August 2, 2017, consisting of 5 exploratory test pits. The test pits were advanced to depths

ranging from 1.6 to 2.2 m. The locations of the test pits (TP1 through TP5) are also shown on Drawing 2

attached in Appendix B of this report.

The test pits revealed that the near surface soil profile is uniform across the site. It consists of a thin layer

of topsoil, underlain by a layer of silty sand or gravelly sand, followed by dense to very dense sand and

silt till. The sand and silt till was encountered at depths of 1.6 m below grade at TP1, 1.7 m below grade

at TP2, and 1.1 m below grade at TP 3, TP4 and TP5.

Groundwater seepage occurred into test pits TP1, TP4 and TP5, perched in the sand immediately above

the till soil. Only a limited volume; less than 2 Litres of water seeped into TP2, and then stopped. Test Pit

TP3 remained dry during excavation and approximately one hour thereafter.

The soil and groundwater conditions encountered in these test pits are similar to those encountered in

the boreholes advanced at the property to the east; 414 and 422 Finch Avenue properties.

Accordingly the recommendations included in Section 5; Discussion and Recommendations section of

the geotechnical report dated April 7, 2017 prepared for 414 and 422 Finch Avenue also applied to 402

Finch Avenue property.

We understand that Marshall Homes (Finch) Ltd. is contemplating purchase of the properties with the

municipal address of 390 and 398 Finch Avenue, subject of the current investigation to add to their

proposed development for the lands to the north and east; 402, 414, and 422 Finch Avenue.

3 F IELDWORK

The fieldwork for this investigation was carried out on November 15, 2017. It consisted of six (6) boreholes,

advanced by a drilling contractor commissioned by AA. The locations of the boreholes were chosen

by AA to provide general coverage of the site for the proposed development. The boreholes were

designated MW101, MW102, BH103, BH104, BH105 and MW106. They are shown on Drawing 1 (Borehole

Location Plan) enclosed in Appendix B.

The boreholes were advanced to depths ranging from 5 to 8.1 mbgs. Three (3) of the boreholes;

MW101, MW102, and MW106 were instrumented with monitoring wells, to determine the long term

groundwater table at the site and permit sampling of the groundwater for chemical analyses

undertaken by Terrapex.

The ground surface elevations at the borehole locations were referenced to a survey pin located on

the southwest corner of the site. According to a survey plan dated July 28, 2017 and titled “Plan of Part

of Lot 32 Concession 2, City of Pickering” prepared by Askan Piller Corporation Ltd., the ground surface

at this location has a geodetic elevation of 138.75 m.






3

Standard penetration tests were carried out in the course of advancing the boreholes to take

representative soil samples and to measure penetration index values (N-values) to characterize the

condition of the various soil materials. The number of blows of the striking hammer required to drive the

split spoon sampler to 300 mm depth was recorded and these are presented on the logs as penetration

index values. Results of SPT are shown on the borehole log sheets in Appendix C of this report.

Groundwater level observations were made in the boreholes upon completion of each of their

advancement, and in the monitoring wells on November 15, 17, 20, and 26, 2017. The results of the

groundwater measurements are discussed in Section 4.5 of this report.

The fieldwork for this project was carried out under the supervision of an experienced geotechnical

technician from this office who laid out the positions of the boreholes in the field; arranged locates of

buried services; effected the drilling, sampling and in situ testing; observed groundwater conditions;

and prepared field borehole log sheets.

4 LABORATORY TESTS

The soil samples recovered from the split spoon sampler were properly sealed, labelled and brought to

our laboratory. They were visually classified and water content tests were conducted on all soil samples

retained from Boreholes MW101, BH103, and MW106. The results of the classification, water contents,

and Standard Penetration Tests are presented on the borehole logs sheets attached in Appendix C of

this report.

Grain-size analyses were carried out on three (3) native soil samples; Atterberg Limits test was performed

on one soil sample. The results of these tests are presented as Figures D-1 through D-4 in Appendix D.

In addition, two (2) soil samples were submitted to an analytical laboratory for chemical analyses for

pH and soluble sulphate tests. The results of these tests are enclosed in Appendix F; discussed in Section

6.10 of this report.

5 S I TE AND SUBSURFACE CONDIT IONS

Full details of the subsurface and groundwater conditions at the site are given on the borehole Log

sheets attached in Appendix C of this report.

The following paragraphs present a description of the site and a commentary on the engineering

properties of the various soil materials contacted in the boreholes.

It should be noted that the boundaries of soil types indicated on the borehole logs are inferred from

non-continuous soil sampling and observations made during drilling. These boundaries are intended to

reflect transition zones for the purpose of geotechnical design, and therefore, should not be construed

as exact planes of geological change.






4

5.1 Site Descript ion

The site is located on the north side of Finch Avenue in Pickering, Ontario. Its western boundary is

situated approximately 400 m east of Altona Road. It is approximately rectangular in shape with

dimensions of about 52 m and 68 m.

The southern section of the property is developed with two residential houses; two gravel driveways

provide access to the houses. The remaining area of the site is vacant and covered with vegetation

and some trees; located predominantly at the north and central sections of the property.

The ground surface topography of the site is relatively level. The ground surface elevations at the

borehole locations ranged between 140.44 m at Borehole MW102 and 139.57 m at Borehole BH104.

5.2 Topsoi l

Topsoil was encountered in all boreholes. The thickness of the topsoil at the boreholes varies between

approximately 150 and 450 mm.

It should be noted that the topsoil thickness will vary between boreholes. Thicker topsoil than that found

in the boreholes may be present in places.

5.3 Fi l l Material

Fill material is present in Borehole BH103 below the surficial topsoil. The soil consists of silty sand with trace

of gravel and pieces of brick; extending to about 0.9 mbgs. It is brown in color and moist in

appearance.

SPT carried out in the fill material measured N-value of 1; indicating very loose consistency.

5.4 Native Soi ls

The soil stratum below the fill material in Borehole BH103, and underneath the surficial topsoil in the

remaining boreholes is the native soil consisting of variable silty fine sand, sand, gravelly sand, sandy silt

(till), and clayey silt (till) soils.

5 .4 .1 Si l ty Sand

A deposit of silty sand is present underneath the fill material in Borehole BH103 and below the topsoil in

the remaining boreholes. The silty sand extends to approximate depths ranging from 1.4 to 3.3 mbgs.

The silty sand unit is brown in color and generally has a damp to moist appearance. The water content

of the silty sand samples in Boreholes MW101, BH103, and MW106 is about 9 to 21% by weight.

SPT carried out in the silty sand unit had N-values ranging from 1 to 30, indicating very loose to compact

compactness conditions.

Sieve grain size analysis was carried out on two silty sand soil samples. The test results are enclosed in






5

Appendix D as Figures D-1 and D-2, and summarized below.

Borehole

Number

Sample Depth

(mbgs) and No.

Sample

Description

Gravel

%

Sand

%

Silt/Clay

%

MW101 1.5 (Sample 3) Brown silty sand 0 92 8

MW102 2.3 (Sample 4) Brown silty sand 0 84 16

Based on the grain size analysis results, the Coefficient of Permeability (k) of the sand soil is estimated

to be in the range of 4x10-3 to 6x10-3 cm/sec; high relative permeability.

5 .4 .2 Gravel ly Sand

A deposit of gravelly sand is present below the silty sand in Boreholes MW102, BH103, BH104, and

MW106. The gravelly sand soil extends to depths ranging from approximately 1.8 to 4.1 mbgs.

The gravelly sand soil is brown in colour at shallow depths; becoming grey at approximate depths

ranging from 1.8 to 3.7 mbgs. It generally has a wet appearance; water bearing in this regard. The

water content of the gravelly sand samples in Boreholes BH103, and MW106 is about 10% by weight.

The measured N-values of the gravelly sand unit ranged from 21 to 50/50 mm penetration, indicating

compact to very dense compactness conditions.

5 .4 .3 Sandy S i l t (T i l l )

A sandy silt (till) stratum is present in all the boreholes except Borehole BH103; positioned below the silty

sand in Boreholes MW101 and BH105, and below the gravelly sand in Boreholes MW102, BH104, and

MW106.

The sandy silt is a glacial deposit and consists of a random mixture of soil particles ranging from clay to

gravel, with the sand and silt being the predominant fractions. Standard Penetration Tests in the sandy

silt (till) provided N-values ranging from 14 to 50/100 mm penetration, indicating that its compactness

condition is compact to very dense.

The sandy silt (till) is generally grey in color. The water content of the tested samples of the sandy silt

(till) from Boreholes MW101, BH103, and MW106 ranged from approximately 5 to 10% by weight;

generally moist to wet in appearance.

Sieve and hydrometer grain size analyses and Atterberg Limits test were carried out on one

representative sample obtained from Borehole MW106 at 2.3 mbgs (Sample 4). The test revealed that

the soil consists of 39% sand, 33% silt, 14% clay, and 14% gravel; its Liquid Limit is 16.5 and Plasticity Index

is 5.8. According to Figure 3.1 of the CFEM (4th Edition), the soil is classified as “Inorganic silt of low

plasticity”. The test results are enclosed in Appendix D as Figures D-3 and D-4.

Based on the grain size analysis results, the k value of the sandy silt (till) is estimated to be less than 10-7

cm/sec, corresponding to low relative permeability. The sandy silt (till) soil is interspersed with

occasional sand layers and sand seams at various depths.






6

5 .4 .4 Clayey S i l t (T i l l )

A clayey silt (till) stratum is present underneath the gravelly sand unit in Borehole BH103 and below

sandy silt (till) in Boreholes MW102, BH105, and MW106; positioned at approximate depths of 3.7 to 5.5

mbgs.

The clayey silt is also a glacial till. The soil consists of a random mixture of soil particles ranging from clay

to gravel. It is grey in colour and generally has a moist appearance. The water content of the tested

samples of the clayey silt (till) from Boreholes BH3 and MW6 ranged from approximately 11 to 23% by

weight. Standard penetration tests in the clayey silt till provided N-values ranging from 11 to 29,

indicating stiff to very stiff consistency.

5.5 Groundwater

Groundwater level and cave-in of the unlined side walls of the boreholes were measured during the

course of the borehole drilling and upon completion of the boreholes. The groundwater measurements

are shown on the individual borehole logs and summarized in the following table.

Borehole No. Groundwater Depth (m) Cave-in Level (mbgs)

MW101 1.5 4.3

MW102 2.5 4

BH103 2.1 2.5

BH104 1.8 2.5

BH105 3.7 4

MW106 5.2 Open

Groundwater levels in the monitoring wells were measured on November 15, 17, and 20, 2017. The

groundwater measurement results are shown in the following table.

Borehole No. Ground Elevation (m) Date Groundwater Depth

(mbgs)

Groundwater Elevation

(mbgs)

MW01 139.63

November 15 1.79 137.84

November 17 1.80 137.83

November 20 1.68 137.95

November 26 1.71 137.92

MW102 140.44

November 15 2.70 137.74

November 17 2.75 137.69

November 20 2.71 137.73

November 26 2.64 137.80

MW106 139.90

November 15 1.78 138.12

November 17 1.81 138.09

November 20 1.77 138.13

November 26 1.80 138.10






7

It should be noted that groundwater levels are subject to seasonal fluctuations. A higher groundwater

level condition will likely develop in the spring and following significant rainfall events.

6 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The following discussions and recommendations are based on the factual data obtained from the

boreholes advanced at the site by AA and are intended for use by the client and design architects

and engineers only.

We understand that the proposed development will include the construction of single family houses

with basements, a service road, and municipal services. It is anticipated that only minor re-grading will

be required for the proposed development. The two houses present at the site will have to be

demolished, the existing buried services decommissioned, and the excavations left behind will need to

be engineered.

Contractors bidding on this project or conducting work associated with this project should make their

own interpretation of the factual data and/or carry out their own investigations.

6.1 Excavation

Based on the field results, excavations for foundations, basements, sewer trenches and utilities are not

expected to pose any difficulty. Excavation of the soils at this site can be carried out with hydraulic

excavators.

All excavations must be carried out in accordance with Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA).

With respect to OHSA, the near surface fill, very loose to loose silty sand, compact sand and gravel,

and loose to compact sand above the water table are expected to conform to Type 3 soils. The very

dense sand and silt (till) soil and very stiff sandy silty clay soils are classified as Type 2 soils. Sandy soils

lying below the water table are classified as Type 4 soil.

For excavations through multiple soil types, the side slope geometry is governed by the soil with the

highest number designation. Excavation side-slopes should not be unduly left exposed to inclement

weather. Excavation slopes consisting of sandy soils will be prone to gullying in periods of wet weather,

unless the slopes are properly sheeted with tarpaulins.

Temporary excavations for slopes in Type 3 soil should not exceed 1.0 horizontal to 1.0 vertical. In the

event very loose and/or soft soils are encountered at shallow depths or within zones of persistent

seepage, it will be necessary to flatten the side slopes as necessary to achieve stable conditions. In

wet sandy soils it may be necessary to slope the excavation at an inclination of 1.0 vertical to 2.0

horizontal or 1.0 vertical to 3.0 horizontal. Excavations in Type 2 soil may be cut with vertical side-walls

within the lower 1.2 m height of excavation and 1.0 horizontal to 1.0 vertical above this height.

It will be necessary to depress the water table below the base of the excavation in advance of

excavation.

Where workers must enter excavations extending deeper than 1.2 m below grade, the excavation side-






8

walls must be suitably sloped and/or braced in accordance with the Occupational Health and Safety

Act and Regulations for Construction Projects.

It should be noted that glacial deposit is non-sorted sediment and therefore may contain boulders.

Provisions must be made in the excavation and foundation installation contracts for the removal of

possible boulders.

Excavations resulting from demolition of the existing buildings and removal of old utilities would need

to be backfilled with an engineered fill material if the fill is to support underground services and the

pavement structure. Care should be taken during the demolition of the structures such that surrounding

soils are not mixed in with the construction debris; if this were to occur these soils would not be

considered suitable fill material for engineered fill and would likely have to be disposed of off-site as

waste.

6.2 Groundwater Control

Based on observations made during the drilling of the boreholes, close examination of the soil samples

extracted from the boreholes, and groundwater measurements made in the monitoring wells,

groundwater will be encountered within the presumed excavation depths.

The groundwater table at the site is situated at depths ranging from 1.8 to 2.7 mbgs. It should be noted

that the groundwater level will fluctuate seasonally. Under wet conditions, the upper sand and silty

sand soils are expected to flow in open excavations resulting in unstable condition of the excavation.

Accordingly, it will be necessary to lower the water table below the proposed excavation depth in

advance of excavation.

The boreholes revealed that the silty sand and gravelly sand units extend to depths ranging from 1.8 to

4.1 mbgs. The silty sand and gravelly sand soils have a medium to high permeability. The groundwater

yield from these deposits is expected to be moderate. It is anticipated that it should be possible to use

filtered sumps to provide the required dewatering for excavations extending up to 0.3 m below the

groundwater level using a series of filtered pumps in the base of the excavation. In the event

excavations are required to extend to greater depths below the groundwater level, a more elaborate

dewatering system may be required to depress the groundwater level to at least 0.5 m below the

excavation base in order to maintain basal stability as well as dry working condition.

The glacial till deposits are expected to have low permeability coefficients; the groundwater yield from

these soils is expected to be very small.

Surface water should be directed away from open excavations.

It will be necessary to determine the construction dewatering requirements and to collect the

information required for the application for Permit to Take Water (PTTW), should this be deemed

necessary.

It is recommended that the basement floor is positioned as high as possible, preferably a minimum of

0.5 m above the groundwater level.






9

6.3 Foundation Design

We understand that the proposed sub-division will consist of residential houses with basements. It is

anticipated that there will be some minor modifications to site grading, but this has not been

established at the time of reporting. The provided recommendations are considered to be preliminary

in nature, subject for review and revision upon completion of proposed grading plans.

It is recommended that the basement floor slabs of the buildings be set above the groundwater level.

The borehole findings reveal that the native soil (below the surficial loose sand) throughout the site is

considered suitable for the support of building foundations. Locally, it will be necessary to deepen the

foundations where the native soil is less competent in strength.

Conventional spread and wall footings may be used to support the proposed buildings. The

foundations may be designed based on bearing resistance of 100 KPa at Serviceability Limit States

(SLS), and factored geotechnical bearing resistances at Ultimate Limit States (ULS) of 150 kPa.

The geotechnical bearing resistances recommended above are for vertical loads (no inclination) and

no eccentricity. The total and differential settlements of spread footing foundations designed in

accordance with the recommendations provided in this report should not exceed the conventional

limits of 25 mm and 19 mm respectively. Typical footing dimensions for these applications include a

minimum strip footing width of 500 mm and an isolated column footing dimension of not less than 900

mm.

Due to variations in the consistency of the founding soils and/or loosening caused by to excavating

disturbance and/or seasonal frost effects, all footing subgrade must be evaluated by the Geotechnical

Engineer prior to placing formwork and foundation concrete to ensure that the soil exposed at the

excavation base is consistent with the design geotechnical bearing resistance.

In the event necessary, the stepping of the footings at different elevations should be carried out at an

angle no steeper than 2 horizontal (clear horizontal distance between footings) to 1 vertical (difference

in elevation) and no individual footing step should be greater than 0.6 m.

Rainwater or groundwater seepage entering the foundation excavations must be pumped away (not

allowed to pond). The foundation subgrade soils should be protected from freezing, inundation and

equipment traffic at all times. If unstable subgrade conditions develop, AA should be contacted in

order to assess the conditions and make appropriate recommendations.

If construction proceeds during freezing weather conditions, adequate temporary frost protection for

the footing bases and concrete must be provided. All exterior footings and footings in unheated areas

should be provided by at least 1.2 m of soil cover or equivalent artificial thermal insulation for frost

protection purposes.

The native soils tend to weather and deteriorate rapidly on exposure to atmosphere or surface water,

so construction scheduling should consider the amount of excavation left exposed to the elements,

during foundation preparation. AA recommends that footings placed on the exposed native soil

should be poured on the same day as they are excavated, after removal of all unsuitable founding

materials and approval of the bearing surface. Alternatively, a concrete mud slab could be used to

protect a bearing surface where footing construction is to be delayed.






10

6.4 Concrete Slab-on-Grade

It is expected that the subgrade below the basement floors will consist of undisturbed sand, gravelly

sand or sandy silt (till). These soils are suitable for slab-on-grade construction.

Subgrade preparation should include the removal of any wet, soft/loose and disturbed soils. After

removal of all unsuitable materials, the subgrade should be inspected and adjudged as satisfactory

before preparing the granular base course. Any soft or unsuitable subgrade areas should be sub-

excavated and replaced with suitable approved compacted backfill; placed in maximum lifts of 200

mm thickness and compacted to at least 98% of SPMDD.

It is recommended that a combined moisture barrier and a levelling course, having a minimum

thickness of 150 mm and comprised of free draining material such as 19 mm clear stone (OPSS 1004)

compacted by vibration to a dense state be placed under the floor slab.

The basements of the proposed buildings must be provided with perimeter drainage. The perimeter

drainage system should consist of weeping pipes 100 mm in diameter placed adjacent to the exterior

wall footing, below the underside of the basement floor slab. The weeping tiles must be wrapped with

filter fabric and covered with a minimum of 150 mm of clear stone.

The basement wall backfill for a minimum lateral distance of 0.6 m out from the wall should consist of

free-draining material such as OPSS Granular ‘B’ Type I. The native soil may be used to backfill

excavations along foundation walls provided that a suitable alternative drainage cellular media is

placed on the wall. Damp proofing must be applied to the exterior basement walls.

Sub-floor drains are also likely to be required below the basement of the houses for this development.

A decision in this regard must be made once final grades and basement floor elevations have been

established. It is recommended that in order to minimize the volume of water entering the perimeter

and sub-floor drainage system, the basement floor slabs be set above the level of the groundwater

table at the site.

The perimeter foundation and sub-floor drains must be connected to a positive frost free outlet from

which the water can be removed, or connected to a sump located in the basement. The water from

the sump must be pumped out to a suitable discharge point.

The installation of the perimeter drains as well as the outlet must conform to the applicable plumbing

code requirements.

Part 9 of the Ontario Building Code, “Housing and Small Buildings” should be referred to for standard

practices.

6.5 Reuse of On-si te Excavated Soi l as a Compacted Backfi l l

On-site excavated inorganic native soils are considered suitable for reuse as backfill material within the

roadways and pipeline trench excavations, provided their water content is within 2% of their optimum






11

water contents (OWC) as determined by Standard Proctor test, and the materials are effectively

compacted with a smooth drum compaction rollers.

While the quality of the native soils are considered suitable for backfilling; the moisture content of

the soils and the lift thickness for compaction must be properly controlled during the backfilling.

Alternatively, imported suitable material should be used.

Measured water content within the upper silty sand and gravelly sand soils ranges from approximately

4 to 21%, averaging to about 12%. These water contents are generally close to and locally on the wet

side of the material’s OWC. On-site native soils that are wetter than their OWC should be dried

sufficiently prior to use as backfill in order to achieve the specified degree of compaction. Spreading

the material in a wide area and air drying will be required to achieve the specified compaction of the

native material. Thorough vertical mixing of the excavated soils will be required to provide a material

that can be adequately compacted.

6.6 Service Trenches

Based on the assumed site grades, sewer pipes and water mains will probably be supported on

undisturbed native sand, gravelly sand and silt (till) soils which are considered suitable for supporting

water mains, sewer pipes, manholes, catch basins and other related structures

The type of bedding depends mainly on the strength of the subgrade immediately below the invert

levels.

Normal Class ‘B’ bedding is recommended for underground utilities. Granular ‘A’ or 19 mm crusher-run

limestone can be used as bedding material; all granular materials should meet OPS 1010

specifications. The bedding material should be compacted to a minimum of 95% Standard Proctor

Maximum Dry Density. Bedding details should follow the applicable governing design detail (i.e. City

of Pickering, OPSD). Trenches dug for these purposes should not be unduly left exposed to inclement

weather.

Pipe bedding and backfill for flexible pipes should be undertaken in accordance with OPSD 802.010.

Pipe embedment and cover for rigid pipes should be undertaken in accordance with OPSD 802.030.

If unsuitable bedding conditions occur, careful preparation and strengthening of the trench bases prior

to sewer installation will be required. The subgrade may be strengthened by placing a thick mat

consisting of 50 mm crusher-run limestone. Field conditions will determine the depth of stone required.

Geotextiles and/or geogrids may be helpful and these options should be reviewed by AA on a case

by case basis.

Sand cover material should be placed as backfill to at least 300 mm above the top of pipes. Placement

of additional granular material (thickness dictated by the type of compaction equipment) as required

or use of smaller compaction equipment for the first few lifts of native material above the pipe will

probably be necessary to prevent damage to the pipe during the trench backfill compaction.

It is recommended that service trenches be backfilled with on-site native materials such that at least

95% of Standard Proctor Maximum Dry Density (SPMDD) is obtained in the lower zone of the trench and

98% of SPMDD for the upper 1000 mm.






12

In areas of narrow trenches or confined spaces such as around manholes, catch basins, etc., the use

of aggregate fill such as Granular ‘B’ Type I (OPSS 1010) is required if there is to be post-construction

grade integrity.

6.7 Pavement Design

Based on the existing topography of the site and the presumption that there will be minor re-grading,

it is anticipated that the sub-grade material for the pavement will generally comprise of native soil or

engineered fill.

The subgrade should be thoroughly proof-rolled and re-compacted to ensure uniformity in subgrade

strength and support. Lift thicknesses should not exceed 200 mm in a loose state and the excavated

site material should be compacted using heavy vibratory rollers. As an alternative, if suitable on-site

native material is not available, the upper part of the subgrade could be improved by placing

imported granular material.

If construction is carried out in inclement weather, there is a likelihood that some amount of road

sub-base supplement will be required (i.e. some sub-excavation followed by granular

replacement).

Given the frost susceptibility and drainage characteristics of the subgrade soils, and the City of

Pickering requirements, the pavement design presented below is recommended.

Recommended Asphaltic Concrete Pavement Structure Design

(Minimum Component Thicknesses)

Pavement Layer Compaction Requirements House Driveways Local Residential Road

Surface Course

Asphaltic Concrete 97% Marshall Density 35 mm Hot-Laid HL3 35 mm Hot-Laid HL3

Binder Course

Asphaltic Concrete 97% Marshall Density 40 mm Hot-Laid HL8 50 mm Hot-Laid HL8

Granular Base 100% SPMDD* 200 mm compacted depth

Granular A

150 mm compacted depth

Granular A

Granular Sub-Base 100% SPMMD* - 300 mm compacted depth

Granular B

* Standard Proctor maximum Dry Density (ASTM-D698)

The subgrade must be compacted to at least 98% of SPMDD for at least the upper 600 mm and 95%

below this level. The granular base and sub-base materials should be compacted to a minimum of

100% SPMDD.

The long-term performance of the proposed pavement structure is highly dependent upon the

subgrade support conditions. Stringent construction control procedures should be maintained to

ensure that uniform subgrade moisture and density conditions are achieved as much as practically

possible when fill is placed and that the subgrade is not disturbed and weakened after it is exposed.






13

Control of surface water is a significant factor in achieving good pavement life. Grading adjacent to

the pavement areas must be designed so that water is not allowed to pond adjacent to the outside

edges of the pavement or curb. In addition, the need for adequate drainage cannot be over-

emphasized. The subgrade must be free of depressions and sloped (preferably at a minimum gradient

of three percent) to provide effective drainage toward subgrade drains. Sub-drains are

recommended to intercept excess subsurface moisture at the curb lines and catch basins. The invert

of sub-drains should be maintained at least 0.3 m below subgrade level.

Additional comments on the construction of pavement areas are as follows:

As part of the subgrade preparation, the proposed pavement areas should be stripped of

vegetation, topsoil, unsuitable earth fill and other obvious objectionable material. The

subgrade should be properly shaped and sloped as required, and then proof-rolled. Loose/soft

or spongy subgrade areas should be sub-excavated and replaced with suitable approved

material compacted to at least 98% of SPMDD.

Where new fill is needed to increase the grade or replace disturbed portions of the subgrade,

excavated inorganic soils or similar clean imported fill materials may be used, provided their

moisture content is maintained within 2 % of the soil’s optimum moisture content. All fill must be

placed and compacted to not less than 98% of SPMDD.

The most severe loading conditions on pavement areas and the subgrade may occur during

construction during wet and un-drained conditions. Consequently, special provisions such as

restricted lanes, half-loads during paving etc., may be required, especially if construction is

carried out during unfavourable weather.

For fine-grained soils, as encountered at the site, the degree of compaction specification alone

cannot ensure distress free subgrade. Proof-rolling must be carried out and witnessed by AA

personnel for final recommendations of sub-base thicknesses.

In the event that pavement construction takes place in the spring thaw, the late fall, or

following periods of significant rainfall, it should be anticipated that an increase in thickness of

the granular sub-base layer will be required to compensate for reduced subgrade strength.

6.8 Earthquake Design Parameters

The 2012 Ontario Building Code (OBC) stipulates the methodology for earthquake design analysis, as

set out in Subsection 4.1.8.7. The determination of the type of analysis is predicated on the importance

of the structure, the spectral response acceleration and the site classification.

The parameters for determination of the Site Classification for Seismic Site Response are set out in Table

4.1.8.4.A of the 2012 OBC. The classification is based on the determination of the average shear wave

velocity in the top 30 metres of the site stratigraphy, where shear wave velocity (vs) measurements

have been taken. In the absence of such measurements, the classification is estimated on the basis of

empirical analysis of undrained shear strength or penetration resistance. The applicable penetration

resistance is that which has been corrected to a rod energy efficiency of 60% of the theoretical

maximum or the (N60) value.

Based on the borehole information, the subsurface stratigraphy generally comprises surficial topsoil

underlain by native soil consisting of very loose to compact silty sand, compact to very dense gravelly






14

sand, followed by glacial till soils consisting of compact to very dense sandy silt (till) and stiff to very stiff

clayey silt (till). Based on the above, the site designation for seismic analysis is Class D according to

Table 4.1.8.4.A from the quoted code.

The site specific 5% damped spectral acceleration coefficients, and the peak ground acceleration

factors are provided in the 2012 Ontario Building Code - Supplementary Standards SB-1 (September 14,

2012), Table 1.2, location Pickering, Ontario.

6.9 Lateral Earth Pressure

Parameters used in the determination of earth pressure acting on temporary shoring walls are defined

below.

Soil Parameters

Parameter Definition Units

Φ’ angle of internal friction degrees

γ bulk unit weight of soil kN/m3

Ka active earth pressure coefficient (Rankine) dimensionless

Ko at-rest earth pressure coefficient (Rankine) dimensionless

Kp passive earth pressure coefficient (Rankine) dimensionless

The appropriate un-factored values for use in the design of structures subject to unbalanced earth

pressures at this site are tabulated as follows:

Soil Parameter Values

Soil Parameter

Φ’ γ Ka Kp K0

Fill Material 28° 18 0.36 2.77 0.53

Very Loose to Loose Silty Sand 28° 18 0.36 2.77 0.53

Compact to Dense Sand /

Compact Gravelly Sand 32° 19 0.31 3.23 0.47

Dense Sandy Silt Till 35° 21.5 0.27 3.69 0.43

Compact Sandy Silt Till and

Clayey Silt Till 32° 21.5 0.31 3.25 0.47

The design earth pressures in compacted backfill should be augmented with the dynamic effects of

the compaction efforts, which typically are taken as a uniform 12 kPa pressure over the entire depth

below grade where the calculated earth pressure based on the above earth pressure factors is less

than 12 kPa. However, this dynamic effect should be ignored when calculating the passive resistance

for thrust blocks, or other instances where the general stability of the structure relies on the passive

resistance.

Walls or bracings subject to unbalanced earth pressures must be designed to resist a pressure that can






15

be calculated based on the following formula:

P = K ( h + q)

Where P = lateral pressure in kPa acting at a depth h (m) below ground surface

K = applicable lateral earth pressure coefficient

= bulk unit weight of backfill (kN/m3)

q = the complete surcharge loading (kPa)

This equation assumes that free-draining backfill and positive drainage is provided to ensure that there

is no hydrostatic pressure acting in conjunction with the earth pressure.

The coefficient of earth pressure at rest (Ko) should be used in the calculation of the earth pressure on

the basement walls.

Resistance to sliding of earth retaining structures is developed by friction between the base of the

footing and the soil. This friction (R) depends on the normal load on the soil contact (N) and the

frictional resistance of the soil (tan Φ’) expressed as: R = N tan Φ’. This is an ultimate resistance value

and does not contain a factor of safety.

6.10 Chemical Characterizat ion of Subsurface Soi l

Two (2) native soil samples obtained from Boreholes BH4 (Sample 3; 1.5 mbgs) and BH5 (Sample 4; 2.3

mbgs) were submitted to AGAT Laboratories for pH index test and water-soluble sulphate content to

determine the potential of attacking the subsurface concrete.

The test results revealed that the pH index of the soil sample in Borehole BH4 is 7.74 and in Borehole BH5

is 7.82. The pH of the two tested samples indicates a slight alkalinity.

The water-soluble sulphate content of the soil sample in Borehole BH4 is 0.0011%; in Borehole BH5 is

0.0013%. The concentration of water-soluble sulphate content of the tested samples is below the CSA

Standard of 0.1% water-soluble sulphate (Table 12 of CSA A23.1, Requirements for Concrete Subjected

to Sulphate Attack). Special concrete mixes against sulphate attack is therefore not required for the

sub-surface concrete of the proposed industrial building.

The Certificate of Analysis provided by the analytical chemical testing laboratory is contained in

Appendix F of this report.






APPENDIX A LIMITATIONS OF REPORT






l imitations of report

The conclusions and recommendations in this report are based on information determined at the inspection

locations. Soil and groundwater conditions between and beyond the test holes may differ from those

encountered at the test hole locations, and conditions may become apparent during construction which

could not be detected or anticipated at the time of the soil investigation.

The design recommendations given in this report are applicable only to the project described in the text, and

then only if constructed substantially in accordance with details of alignment and elevations stated in the

report. Since all details of the design may not be known to us, in our analysis certain assumptions had to be

made as set out in this report. The actual conditions may, however, vary from those assumed, in which case

changes and modifications may be required to our recommendations.

This report was prepared for Marshall Homes (Finch) Ltd. by Alston Associates. The material in it reflects Alston

Associates judgement in light of the information available to it at the time of preparation. Any use which a

Third Party makes of this report, or any reliance on decisions which the Third Party may make based on it, are

the sole responsibility of such Third Parties.

We recommend, therefore, that we be retained during the final design stage to review the design drawings

and to verify that they are consistent with our recommendations or the assumptions made in our analysis. We

recommend also that we be retained during construction to confirm that the subsurface conditions

throughout the site do not deviate materially from those encountered in the test holes. In cases where these

recommendations are not followed, the company’s responsibility is limited to accurately interpreting the

conditions encountered at the test holes, only.

The comments given in this report on potential construction problems and possible methods are intended for

the guidance of the design engineer, only. The number of inspection locations may not be sufficient to

determine all the factors that may affect construction methods and costs. The contractors bidding on this

project or undertaking the construction should, therefore, make their own interpretation of the factual

information presented and draw their own conclusions as to how the subsurface conditions may affect their

work.






APPENDIX B DRAWING 1: BOREHOLE LOCATION PLAN

DRAWING 2: POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

SF

NOVEMBER 2017

CT2397.04

AS SHOWN

DRAWING 1DRAWING #

DRAWN

DATE

PROJECT #

CLIENT

SCALE

CHECKED

SOURCE: SURVEYOR’S REAL PROPERTY REPORT PART1: PLAN OF PART OF LOT 32 CONCESSION 2 BY AKSAN PILLER CORPORATION LTD., JULY 2017,

0 10m 20m

(APPROXIMATE)

BOREHOLE LOCATION PLAN

390 AND 398 FINCH AVENUE EASTPICKERING, ONTARIO

MARSHALL HOMES(FINCH) LTD.

BOREHOLE WITH MONITORING WELL

LEGEND

BOREHOLE

geotechnical division of

PROPERTY BOUNDARYPROPERTY BOUNDARY

BH103BH103

BH104BH104

BH105BH105

MW106MW106

MW101MW101

MW102MW102

SITE

BH103BH103

BH104BH104

BH105BH105

MW106MW106

MW101MW101

MW102MW102

TP5TP5

TP4TP4

TP3TP3

TP2TP2

TP1TP1

BH7BH7

BH4BH4

BH3BH3

MW1MW1

MW2MW2

MW6MW6

MW5MW5

SF

MARCH 2018

CT2397.04

AS SHOWN

DRAWING 2DRAWING #

DRAWN

DATE

PROJECT #

CLIENT

SCALE

CHECKED

SOURCE: SITE PLAN BY HUNT DESIGN ASSOCIATES INC., 2018.

0 25m 50m

(APPROXIMATE)

POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT390 AND 398 FINCH AVENUE EAST

PICKERING, ONTARIO

MARSHALL HOMES(FINCH) LTD.

BOREHOLE WITH MONITORING WELL

LEGEND

BOREHOLE

geotechnical division of

PREVIOUS TEST PIT

PREVIOUS WITH MONITORING WELL

BOREHOLE

PREVIOUS BOREHOLE






APPENDIX C

BOREHOLE LOG SHEETS

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

5.5

6

139.5

139

138.5

138

137.5

137

136.5

136

135.5

135

134.5

134

133.5

Topsoil (450 mm)

loosedamp to

moist

----- -----

brownSILTY FINE SANDcompact wet

-----

tracegravel

compact

----- moist to wetgrey

SANDY SILT (TILL)trace gravel, trace clayoccasional sand seamsvery

dense

END OF BOREHOLE

2

5

16

19

21

17

90/225

50/100

15

4

21

16

19

10

9

10

9

10

1A

1B

2A

2B

3

4

5

6

7

8

2

5

16

19

21

17

90/225

50/100

Borehole cave-in at 4.3m and groundwater at1.5 m below groundsurface on complition.

Groundwater measuredat 1.79 m below groundsurface on November 15,2017.

Sand + Screen

CLIENT: Marshall Homes METHOD: Augering and Split Spoon Sampling

BH No.: MW101PROJECT: 390 and 398 Finch Avenue PROJECT ENGINEER: VN ELEV. (m) 139.63

LOCATION: Pickering, ON NORTHING: EASTING: PROJECT NO.: CT2397.04

SAMPLE TYPE AUGER DRIVEN CORING DYNAMIC CONE SHELBY SPLIT SPOON

LOGGED BY: SA DRILLING DATE: November 15, 2017

REVIEWED BY: VN

GWL(m)

SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

SOILDESCRIPTION

DE

PT

H (

m)

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m) Shear Strength

(kPa)

N-Value(Blows/300mm)

20 40 60 80

40 80 120 160

WaterContent

(%)

PL W.C. LL

20 40 60 80 SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SP

T(N

) Well

Constr

uction

REMARKS

Page 1 of 1

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

5.5

6

6.5

7

7.5

8

140

139.5

139

138.5

138

137.5

137

136.5

136

135.5

135

134.5

134

133.5

133

132.5

Topsoil (300 mm)

damp

-----

loose moistbrown

SILTY FINE SAND

-----

wet

-----

compact

browndense, wet

GRAVELLY SAND-----

grey

dense, moist to wetgrey

SANDY SILT (TILL)trace gravel, trace clayoccasional sand layers

very stiffmoist, grey

CLAYEY SILTto

SILTY CLAY (TILL)trace gravel, trace sand

END OF BOREHOLE

4

5

4

10

30

37

32

23

16

1A

1B

2

3

4

5

6A

6B

7

8

9

4

5

4

10

30

37

32

23

16

Borehole cave-in at 4 mand groundwater at 2.5m below ground surfaceon complition.

Groundwater measuredat 2.7 m below groundsurface on November 15,2017.

Sand + Screen






REVIEWED BY: VN

GWL(m)

SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

SOILDESCRIPTION

DE

PT

H (

m)

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m) Shear Strength

(kPa)


20 40 60 80

40 80 120 160

WaterContent

(%)

PL W.C. LL

20 40 60 80 SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SP

T(N

) Well

Constr

uction

REMARKS

Page 1 of 1

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

139.5

139

138.5

138

137.5

137

136.5

136

135.5

135

Topsoil (150 mm)

very loose, moist, brownsilty sand, trace gravelpiece of brick (FILL)

loose, moist, brownSILTY FINE SAND

dense, wet, brownGRAVELLY SAND

compact

-----

grey, moistCLAYEY SILT (TILL)

trace gravel, trace sandstiff

-----

verystiff

END OF BOREHOLE

1

6

8

42

21

11

29

179

11

11

13

8

5

9

10

1A

1B

2A

2B

3

4

5

6

7

1

6

8

42

21

11

29



BH No.: 103PROJECT: 390 and 398 Finch Avenue PROJECT ENGINEER: VN ELEV. (m) 139.93




REVIEWED BY: VN

GWL(m)

SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

SOILDESCRIPTION

DE

PT

H (

m)

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m) Shear Strength

(kPa)


20 40 60 80

40 80 120 160

WaterContent

(%)

PL W.C. LL

20 40 60 80 SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SP

T(N

) Well

Constr

uction

REMARKS

Page 1 of 1

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

5.5

6

139.5

139

138.5

138

137.5

137

136.5

136

135.5

135

134.5

134

133.5

Topsoil (300 mm)

very looseto loose

brown, damp to moistSILTY FINE SAND

-----

compact

compact, wet, greyGRAVELLY SAND

compact

-----

dense

-----

very dense very densemoist, grey

SANDY SILT (TILL)trace gravel, trace clayoccasional sand seams

END OF BOREHOLE

3

9

30

21

32

50/50

50/125

50/125

1A

1B

2

3A

3B

4

5

6

7

8

3

9

30

21

32

50/50

50/125

50/125







REVIEWED BY: VN

GWL(m)

SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

SOILDESCRIPTION

DE

PT

H (

m)

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m) Shear Strength

(kPa)


20 40 60 80

40 80 120 160

WaterContent

(%)

PL W.C. LL

20 40 60 80 SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SP

T(N

) Well

Constr

uction

REMARKS

Page 1 of 1

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

139.5

139

138.5

138

137.5

137

136.5

136

135.5

135

Topsoil (300 mm)

very loose

-----damp to moist

brownSILTY FINE SANDcompact

moist

-----compact to densegrey

SANDY SILT (TILL)trace gravel, trace clay

wet

very stiff, moist, greyCLAYEY SILT (TILL)

some sand, trace gravel

END OF BOREHOLE

1

14

25

39

29

32

17

1A

1B

2

3A

3B

4

5

6

7

1

14

25

39

29

32

17

Borehole cave-in at 4 mand groundwater at 3.7m below ground surfaceon complition.






REVIEWED BY: VN

GWL(m)

SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

SOILDESCRIPTION

DE

PT

H (

m)

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m) Shear Strength

(kPa)


20 40 60 80

40 80 120 160

WaterContent

(%)

PL W.C. LL

20 40 60 80 SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SP

T(N

) Well

Constr

uction

REMARKS

Page 1 of 1

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

5.5

6

6.5

139.5

139

138.5

138

137.5

137

136.5

136

135.5

135

134.5

134

133.5

Topsoil (450 mm)

loose, brown, damp to moistSILTY FINE SAND

compact, wet, brownGRAVELLY SAND

brown

-----

compact grey

moistSANDY SILT (TILL)

trace graveltrace clay

occasional sand layersand sand seams

------

dense

-----

compact

very stiff, moist, greyCLAYEY SILT (TILL)

some sand, trace gravel

END OF BOREHOLE

3

7

21

28

15

35

14

16

7

9

15

12

17

9

9

9

11

11

1A

1B

2

3A

3B

4

5

6

7

8

3

7

21

28

15

35

14

16

Borehole open andgroundwater at 5.2 mbelow ground surface oncomplition.

Groundwater measuredat 1.78 m below groundsurface on November 15, 2017.

Sand+ Screen






REVIEWED BY: VN

GWL(m)

SO

IL S

YM

BO

L

SOILDESCRIPTION

DE

PT

H (

m)

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

m) Shear Strength

(kPa)


20 40 60 80

40 80 120 160

WaterContent

(%)

PL W.C. LL

20 40 60 80 SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SP

T(N

) Well

Constr

uction

REMARKS

Page 1 of 1






APPENDIX D LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

Tested By: VP Checked By: VN

LL PL D85 D60 D50 D30 D15 D10 Cc Cu

Material Description USCS AASHTO

Project No. Client: Remarks:

Project:

Sample Number: MW101, Sample 3

Alston Associates

Geotechnical Division of Terrapex Figure

0.2777 0.1698 0.1429 0.0990

SAND, some Silt

CT2397.04 Marshall Homes

D1

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PE

RC

EN

T C

OA

RS

ER

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

GRAIN SIZE - mm.

0.0010.010.1110100

% +3"Coarse

% Gravel

Fine Coarse Medium

% Sand

Fine Silt

% Fines

Clay

0 0 0 1 6 77 16

80

56

40

28

20

14

10

5 2.5

1.2

5

0.6

3

0.3

15

0.1

6

0.0

75

Grain Size Distribution Report

390 and 398 Finch Avenue





Project:


Alston Associates


0.2980 0.1928 0.1654 0.1178 0.0875 0.0788 0.91 2.45

SAND, trace Silt


D2

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PE

RC

EN

T C

OA

RS

ER

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

GRAIN SIZE - mm.

0.0010.010.1110100

% +3"Coarse

% Gravel

Fine Coarse Medium

% Sand

Fine Silt

% Fines

Clay

0 0 0 0 5 87 8

80

56

40

28

20

14

10

5 2.5

1.2

5

0.6

3

0.3

15

0.1

6

0.0

75







Project:


Alston Associates


4.1490 0.1879 0.0948 0.0124 0.0024

Silty SAND, some Clay, some Gravel


D3

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PE

RC

EN

T C

OA

RS

ER

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

GRAIN SIZE - mm.

0.0010.010.1110100

% +3"Coarse

% Gravel

Fine Coarse Medium

% Sand

Fine Silt

% Fines

Clay

0 7 7 5 9 25 33 14

80

56

40

28

20

14

10

5 2.5

1.2

5

0.6

3

0.3

15

0.1

6

0.0

75



0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Liquid Limit

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70P

lasticity In

de

x

PLASTICITY CHART

Remarks:

Figure No. D-4

Client: Marshall Homes

Project: 390 and 398 Finch Avenue, Pickering, ONRef. No.: CT2397.04

Sample SymbolMW106, Sample 4

A-L

ine

CH

CL

CL-MLMI or OI

MH or OH

ML ML

CI

7

4






APPENDIX E TYPICAL PERIMETER AND UNDERFLOOR DRAINAGE SYSTEM






APPENDIX F CERTIFICATE OF CHEMICAL ANALYSES

CLIENT NAME: ALSTON ASSOCIATES90 SCARSDALE RDTORONTO, ON M3B2R7 (905) 474-5265

5835 COOPERS AVENUEMISSISSAUGA, ONTARIO

CANADA L4Z 1Y2TEL (905)712-5100FAX (905)712-5122

http://www.agatlabs.com

Amanjot Bhela, Inorganic CoordinatorSOIL ANALYSIS REVIEWED BY:

DATE REPORTED:

PAGES (INCLUDING COVER): 5

Nov 29, 2017

VERSION*: 1

Should you require any information regarding this analysis please contact your client services representative at (905) 712-5100

17T287202AGAT WORK ORDER:

ATTENTION TO: VIC NERSESIAN

PROJECT: CT2397.04

Laboratories (V1) Page 1 of 5

All samples will be disposed of within 30 days following analysis. Please contact the lab if you require additional sample storage time.

AGAT Laboratories is accredited to ISO/IEC 17025 by the Canadian Association for Laboratory Accreditation Inc. (CALA) and/or Standards Council of Canada (SCC) for specific tests listed on the scope of accreditation. AGAT Laboratories (Mississauga) is also accredited by the Canadian Association for Laboratory Accreditation Inc. (CALA) for specific drinking water tests. Accreditations are location and parameter specific. A complete listing of parameters for each location is available from www.cala.ca and/or www.scc.ca. The tests in this report may not necessarily be included in the scope of accreditation.

Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta (APEGA)Western Enviro-Agricultural Laboratory Association (WEALA)Environmental Services Association of Alberta (ESAA)

Member of:

*NOTES

Results relate only to the items tested and to all the items testedAll reportable information as specified by ISO 17025:2005 is available from AGAT Laboratories upon request

BH5/S4BH4/S3SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:

SoilSoilSAMPLE TYPE:

2017-11-152017-11-15DATE SAMPLED:

8928167 8928171G / S RDLUnitParameter

7.74 7.82pH, 2:1 CaCl2 Extraction NApH Units

11 13Sulphate (2:1) 2µg/g

Comments: RDL - Reported Detection Limit; G / S - Guideline / Standard

8928167-8928171 pH was determined on the 0.01M CaCl2 extract obtained from 2:1 leaching procedure (2 parts extraction fluid:1 part wet soil). Sulphate was determined on the DI water extract obtained from the 2:1 leaching procedure (2 parts DI water:1 part soil).

Results relate only to the items tested and to all the items tested

DATE RECEIVED: 2017-11-22

Certificate of Analysis

ATTENTION TO: VIC NERSESIANCLIENT NAME: ALSTON ASSOCIATES

AGAT WORK ORDER: 17T287202

DATE REPORTED: 2017-11-29

PROJECT: CT2397.04

pH / Sulphate (Soil)

SAMPLED BY:SAMPLING SITE:




CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS (V1)

Certified By:Page 2 of 5

pH / Sulphate (Soil)

pH, 2:1 CaCl2 Extraction 8933480 7.90 7.92 0.3% NA 101% 90% 110% NA NA

Sulphate (2:1) 8928171 8928171 13 13 0.0% < 2 96% 70% 130% 101% 70% 130% 102% 70% 130%

Comments: NA signifies Not Applicable.

Certified By:


SAMPLING SITE: SAMPLED BY:


Dup #1 RPDMeasured

ValueRecovery Recovery

Quality Assurance


CLIENT NAME: ALSTON ASSOCIATES

PROJECT: CT2397.04

Soil Analysis

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

BatchPARAMETERSample

IdDup #2

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

UpperLower

AcceptableLimits

MATRIX SPIKEMETHOD BLANK SPIKEDUPLICATERPT Date: Nov 29, 2017 REFERENCE MATERIAL

MethodBlank




QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT (V1) Page 3 of 5

AGAT Laboratories is accredited to ISO/IEC 17025 by the Canadian Association for Laboratory Accreditation Inc. (CALA) and/or Standards Council of Canada (SCC) for specific tests listed on the scope of accreditation. AGAT Laboratories (Mississauga) is also accredited by the Canadian Association for Laboratory Accreditation Inc. (CALA) for specific drinking water tests. Accreditations are location and parameter specific. A complete listing of parameters for each location is available from www.cala.ca and/or www.scc.ca. The tests in this report may not necessarily be included in the scope of accreditation.

Soil Analysis

pH, 2:1 CaCl2 Extraction INOR-93-6031 MSA part 3 & SM 4500-H+ B pH METER

Sulphate (2:1) INOR-93-6004 McKeague 4.12 & SM 4110 B ION CHROMATOGRAPH


SAMPLING SITE: SAMPLED BY:


Method Summary


CLIENT NAME: ALSTON ASSOCIATES

PROJECT: CT2397.04

AGAT S.O.P ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUELITERATURE REFERENCEPARAMETER




METHOD SUMMARY (V1) Page 4 of 5

geotechnical investigation report proposed … · to determine the engineering properties of the...

Documents