Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Mixed-Use Development 484 - 490 Plains Road East, Burlington, Ontario

NATIONAL HOMES (PLAINS ROAD) LP
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PROPOSED MIXED-USE
DEVELOPMENT
484 - 490 PLAINS ROAD EAST,
BURLINGTON, ONTARIO
OCTOBER 25, 2017

PROPOSED MIXED-USE
DEVELOPMENT
484 - 490 PLAINS ROAD EAST,
BURLINGTON, ONTARIO
NATIONAL HOMES (PLAINS ROAD) LP
Report
Project no : 161-09479-00
Date : October 25, 2017
–
WSP Canada Inc.
351 Steelcase Road West, Units 9-12
Markham, Ontario L3R 4H9 Canada
Phone: +1 905-475-0065
Fax: +1 905-475-0045
www.wspgroup.com
WSP Canada Inc.

351 Steelcase Road West, Units 9-12
Markham, Ontario L3R 4H9 Canada
Phone: +1 905-475-0065
Fax: +1 905-475-0045
www.wspgroup.com
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................. 1
2 FIELD AND LABORATORY WORK .............................................. 1
3 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ...................................... 2

3.1 SOIL CONDITIONS ............................................................................................... 2
3.2 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS .......................................................................... 4
4 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................... 5

4.1 SITE PREPARATION, REGRADING, ENGINEERED FILLS .............................. 5
4.2 FOUNDATIONS..................................................................................................... 6
4.2.1 FOUNDATIONS FOR TOWNHOMES ................................................................... 6
4.2.2 FOUNDATIONS FOR EIGHT-STOREY BUILDINGS ........................................... 7
4.2.3 OTHER COMMENTS ON FOUNDATIONS .......................................................... 7
4.3 EARTH PRESSURES ........................................................................................... 8
4.4 FLOOR SLAB AND PERMANENT DRAINAGE .................................................. 8
4.5 EXCAVATIONS AND GROUNDWATER CONTROL ........................................... 8
4.6 TEMPORARY SHORING ...................................................................................... 9
4.7 EARTHQUAKE CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................. 10
4.8 ROAD AND PARKING LOT ................................................................................ 10

4.8.1 STRIPPING, SUB-EXCAVATION AND GRADING ............................................. 10
4.8.2 CONSTRUCTION ................................................................................................ 11
4.8.3 DRAINAGE .......................................................................................................... 11
4.9 SITE SERVICING ................................................................................................ 11

4.9.1 TRENCHING EXCAVATION AND DEWATERING ............................................. 12
4.9.2 BEDDING ............................................................................................................. 12
4.9.3 BACKFILLING OF TRENCHES........................................................................... 12
NATIONAL HOMES (PLAINS ROAD) LP WSP
No 161-09479-00
October 2017
iii
5 GENERAL COMMENTS AND LIMITATIONS OF

REPORT ....................................................................................... 12
6 CLOSURE..................................................................................... 13
DRAWINGS
DRAWING 1 BOREHOLE LOCATION PLAN
DRAWING 2 DRAINAGE AND BACKFILL RECOMMENDATIONS (OPEN CUT)
DRAWING 3 DRAINAGE RECOMMENDATIONS (SHORED WALLS)
ENCLOSURES
ENCLOSURES 1A NOTES ON SAMPLE DESCRIPTIONS
ENCLOSURES 1B EXPLANATION OF TERMS USED IN THE RECORD OF BOREHOLE
ENCLOSURES 2-14 BOREHOLE LOGS
FIGURES
FIGURE 1-4 SOIL GRADATION AND ATTERBERG LIMITS TESTING RESULTS
APPENDIX
APPENDIX A GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ENGINEERED FILL
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION WSP

NATIONAL HOMES (PLAINS ROAD) LP No 161-09479-00
October 2017
1
1 INTRODUCTION
WSP Canada Inc. (WSP) was retained by National Homes (Plains Road) LP, herein referred to as National
Homes to undertake geotechnical investigations for the site located at 484 - 490 Plains Road East, Burlington,
Ontario.
Based on the Conceptual Site Plan provided, the site is proposed for a mixed-use of residential and
commercial development consisting of eight-storey buildings and three-storey stacked townhomes. One level
of underground parking is designed across the majority of the site.
In 2016, a preliminary geotechnical investigation was conducted by WSP for the then proposed townhome
with no basement development during the due-diligence period. Additional boreholes were drilled in 2017, at
the south part of the site where the proposed six-storey buildings are located.
This report is provided on the assumption that the design will be in accordance with the applicable codes and
standards. If there are any changes in the design features relevant to the geotechnical analyses, or if any
questions arise concerning the geotechnical aspects of the codes and standards, this office should be
contacted to review the design. It may then be necessary to carry out additional borings and reporting before
the recommendations of this office can be relied upon.
The site investigation and recommendations follow generally accepted practice for geotechnical consultants
in Ontario. Laboratory testing for most part follows ASTM or CSA Standards or modifications of these
standards that have become standard practice.
This report has been prepared for National Homes and its designers. Third party use of this report without
WSP’s consent is prohibited. The limitation conditions presented in this report form an integral part of the
report and they must be considered in conjunction with this report
2 FIELD AND LABORATORY WORK

The field work for the above noted investigations were carried out on June 29 to 30, 2016 and April 17 to 18,
2017 at which time thirteen (13) boreholes were advanced to depths ranging from 6.7 m to 17.2 m below the
existing ground surface at the locations shown on the Borehole and Monitoring Location Plan, Drawing No.
1. Boreholes BH16-1 to BH16-8 were drilled during 2016 investigation while Boreholes BH17-7 to BH17-11
were drilled during 2017 investigation.
The boreholes were carried out using a track mounted drilling machine provided by a drilling sub-contractor
under the direction and supervision of WSP personnel. Soil samples were retrieved at regular intervals of
depth from the boreholes with a 50 mm O.D. split-barrel sampler driven into the undisturbed ground with a
hammer weighing 624 N and dropping 760 mm in accordance with the Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
method. The number of blows required to advance the sampler 300 mm were recorded as the STP ‘N’ values
which then were used to infer the compactness conditions of the cohesionless, granular soils and the
consistency of cohesive clayey soils. Notes on sample descriptions are presented on Enclosure No. 1-A.
Explanation of terms used in the record of boreholes is presented on Enclosure No. 1-B.
Water level observations were made during drilling in the open boreholes and upon the completion of the
drilling operations. 50 mm diameter monitoring wells were installed in Boreholes BH16-2, BH16-3, BH16-

October 2017
2
4, BH16-6, BH16-7 and BH17-9 to permit further monitoring of the groundwater levels as well as for the
environmental study and potential hydrogeological study.
The borehole locations were laid out on site by WSP. The locations and ground surface elevations of the
boreholes were surveyed by WSP using a Global Positioning System (GPS) device. It should be noted that
the locations and elevations at the as-drilled borehole locations were not provided by a professional surveyor
and should be considered to be approximate.
In addition to the visual examination of the recovered soil samples in the laboratory, all samples were tested
for natural water contents. Three (3) and one (1) selected soil samples were subjected to grain size analyses
and Atterberg limit testing, respectively. The results are shown on the borehole logs and presented on Figure
Nos. 1 to 4.
3 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

The subject site is an existing commercial plaza consisting of a roughly rectangular shaped parcel of land
located at 484-490 Plains Road East, about 100 m southwest of the intersection of Plains Road East and
Sanford Drive, Burlington, Ontario. It is understood that the existing plaza will be demolished. On three sides
the property is bordered by existing residential subdivisions, and by Plains Road on the fourth.
3.1 SOIL CONDITIONS
The subsurface conditions in the boreholes (BH16-1 to BH16-8 and BH17-7 to BH17-11) are presented in
the individual borehole logs (Enclosure Nos. 2 to 14 inclusive). The following is a summarized account of the
subsurface conditions encountered in the boreholes, followed by more detailed descriptions of the major soil
strata and the groundwater conditions encountered in the boreholes drilled at the site.
Summary
Underlying the asphalt pavement and fill materials, the native soils encountered at the site are predominantly
silty sand underlain by silty clay (till). Groundwater measured in the monitoring wells was about 3.5 to 4.9 m
below the existing ground surface, corresponding to Elev. 92.4 to 94.3 m.
Existing Pavement Structure
All boreholes were advanced through the existing pavement structure at the site. The thickness of the asphalt
ranged from 50 mm to 180 mm, with an average of about 115 mm. The average thickness of the granular
base was about 180 mm with a range of 80 to 400 mm.
Fill Material
Fill materials consisting of silty sand was encountered in all boreholes and extended to depths ranging from
2.2 m to 3.4 m (average 2.8 m) below the existing ground surface. SPT carried out within the fill material gave
‘N’ values ranging from 0 to 16 blows per 300 mm penetration, indicating a very loose to compact state but
generally loose with an average ‘N’ value of less than 5. The in-situ water contents of the soil samples ranged
from approximately 6 % to 26 %.

October 2017
3
Silty Sand to Sandy Silt
Deposits of silty sand to sandy silt were encountered in all boreholes and extended to the depths ranging
from 6.5 m to 17.2 m below the existing ground surface. Boreholes BH16-1, BH16-5, BH17-7 and BH17-9
were terminated in these deposits. The silty sand to silty sand deposits were in a very loose to very dense
condition with measured SPT ‘N’ values ranging from 4 to greater than 100 blows per 300 mm penetration.
The natural water contents of the soil samples ranged from about 9 % to 30 %.
Grain size analysis of one (1) soil sample (BH16-3/SS6) gave the result presented on Figure No. 1 indicating
the following soil fractions:
Grain Size Distribution

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
BOREHOLE NO. SAMPLE NO.
%Gravel %Sand %Silt %Clay
BH16-3 SS6 0 76 19 5
Sand
Sand was encountered in Borehole BH17-9 and extended to a depth of 7.1 m below ground surface. SPT
carried out within the cohesionless sand gave an “N” value of 14 blows per 0.3 m penetration, indicating a
compact density. The natural water content is about 22 %.
Grain size analysis of one (1) soil sample (BH17-9/SS5) gave the result presented on Figure No. 4 indicating
the following soil fractions:

BH17-9 SS5 1 88 7 4
Silty Clay Till
Deposits of silty clay till were encountered in all boreholes with the exception of Borehole BH16-1 and BH16-
5 and extended to depths ranging from 8.2 m to 15.7 m below the existing ground surface. Boreholes BH16-
2 to BH16-4, BH16-6 to BH16-8 and BH17-8 were terminated in these deposits. SPT ‘N’ values ranging from
17 blows to greater than 100 blows per 300 mm penetration indicate a very stiff to hard consistency. The
natural water contents of the soil samples ranged from about 10 % to 22 %.
The result of one (1) grain size analysis is shown on the borehole logs and on Figure No. 2 and is also
summarized in the following table:

BH17-8 SS10 6 12 47 35
Atterberg limits test was carried out on the same sample. The result is presented on Figure No. 3 as well as
shown on the borehole logs. It is also summarized in the following table:

October 2017
4
Plasticity Indices
ATTERBERG LIMITS
BH NO. SAMPLE NO. Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity Index
( WL ) ( WP ) ( PI )
BH17-8 SS10 30 16 14
Silty Clay
Silty clay deposits were encountered in Boreholes BH17-7 and BH17-9 to BH17-11 and extended to depths
ranging from 13.9 m to 15.7 m below the existing ground surface. Boreholes BH17-10 and BH17-11 were
terminated in these deposits. SPT ‘N’ values ranging from 29 blows to 77 blows per 300 mm penetration
indicate a very stiff to hard consistency. The natural water contents of the soil samples ranged from about 16
% to 32 %.
3.2 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS

During the drilling of the boreholes groundwater was encountered at depths ranging from approximately 3 m
to 4.6 m below the existing grade in all boreholes. The groundwater tables measured in the monitoring wells
are shown in the following table:
Groundwater Levels Measured in Monitoring Wells
DEPTH OF ELEVATION OF
BOREHOLE DATE OF OBSERVATION
GROUNDWATER(M) GROUNDWATER(M) NOTE
NO.
July 11, 2016 4.78 92.5
BH16-2 50 mm dia. monitoring well
October 24, 2016 4.94 92.4
July 11, 2016 4.58 93.1
October 24, 2016 4.75 93.0

December 10, 2016 4.79 92.9
February 7, 2017 4.74 93.0
July 11, 2016 3.90 93.9
October 24, 2016 4.07 93.7

December 10, 2016 4.15 93.7
February 7, 2017 4.13 93.7
July 11, 2016 3.86 92.8
October 24, 2016 4.03 92.7

December 10, 2016 4.10 92.6
February 7, 2017 3.97 92.7
July 11, 2016 3.50 94.3
BH16-7 October 24, 2016 3.65 94.2 50 mm dia. monitoring well
December 10, 2016 3.75 94.1

October 2017
5
February 7, 2017 3.72 94.1
BH17-9 May 25, 2017 4.06 94.0 50 mm dia. monitoring well
It should be noted that the groundwater levels can vary and are subject to seasonal fluctuations in response
to weather events. Due to the presence of highly pervious sandy deposits, a sudden significant rise in the
ground water level could occur after heavy precipitation or snow melt.
4 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS
In this section, the subsurface conditions are interpreted as they relate to the design of the proposed mixed-
use of residential and commercial development consisting of eight-storey buildings and stacked three-storey
townhouses. Anticipated construction conditions are also evaluated for the guidance of the designer to
establish constructability.
The construction methods described in this report must not be regarded as being specifications or direct
recommendations to the contractors, or as being the only suitable methods. Prospective contractors should
evaluate all of the factual information, obtain additional subsurface information as they might deem necessary
and should select their construction methods, sequence and equipment based on their own experience in
similar ground and groundwater conditions. Readers of this report are also reminded that the conditions are
known only at the borehole location and subsurface conditions may be significantly different in the unexplored
parts of the site.
4.1 SITE PREPARATION, REGRADING, ENGINEERED FILLS
It is understood that the existing buildings presently occupying the site will be demolished to make room for
the proposed eight-storey building and three-storey townhomes. It is, therefore, anticipated that cut and fill
operations would be required to establish appropriate uniform subgrade levels throughout the site.
It is recommended that the foundation walls and footings of the existing structures be completely removed in
order to prevent these becoming “hard points” under future buildings and thus cause excessive differential
settlements. Similarly the existing fill material should be removed in areas where settlements cannot be
tolerated.
In the areas where earth fill is required for site grading purposes, engineered fill may have to be utilized to
support pavements and utilities.
For the preparation of subgrade prior to the placement of the engineered fill, all existing pavement structure,
fill material, existing foundations and softened native soils must be removed and the exposed subgrade proof
rolled. Any soft spots revealed during proof rolling must be sub-excavated and re-engineered, and the
excavation base must be inspected and approved by this office prior to the placement of backfill. It is noted
that the existing fill material extended to between about 2.2 m and 3.4 m below existing ground surface and
may be even deeper in places between the boreholes. The extent of the existing fill materials must be
inspected at the time of construction to assure that all fill material is removed prior to the placement of the
engineered fill. Materials for the use of engineered fill must be approved by WSP prior to placement. Some
of the excavated fill and native soils from the site, free of significant amounts of organics and other deleterious
materials, may be reused as engineered fill.

October 2017
6
It should also be noted that due to the fine-grained nature of the soils encountered at the site, their workability
is sensitive to moisture conditions and some difficulty would be expected in achieving adequate compaction
during wet weather. In this regard, imported materials may have to be used for engineered fill.
The materials used for engineered fill must be approved by WSP at the source(s), prior to hauling to the site.
The engineered fill consisting of approved inorganic material should be placed in maximum 300 mm loose
lifts and uniformly compacted to 100 % Standard Proctor Maximum Dry Density (SPMDD) throughout.
The excavated soils are not considered to be free draining. Where free draining backfill is required, imported
granular fill such as OPSS Granular B should be used.
General guidelines for the placement and preparation of engineered fill are presented in Appendix A and will
not be discussed further here.
4.2 FOUNDATIONS
As per the Conceptual Site Plan, eight-storey buildings with one level of underground parking, numbered as
Buildings ‘A’ and ‘B’, are proposed at the north part of the site. Three-storey stacked back to back townhomes
with one level of underground parking, numbered as Buildings ‘C’ to ‘H’, are proposed at the middle and south
portion of the site. Based on the borehole information, the types of proposed structures, and the anticipated
excavation depth for one level of underground parking, the proposed eight-storey building is recommended
to be supported by deep foundation (i.e. caisson); while the three-storey townhomes can be supported by
conventional shallow foundations.
4.2.1 FOUNDATIONS FOR TOWNHOMES
The existing very loose to loose fills are not suitable for supporting any settlement sensitive structures. The
proposed townhome foundation bases can be supported by spread/strip footings founded on the compact
native silty sand encountered below the fills. The bearing resistances of the native silty sand at the
Serviceability Limit States (SLS) and the factored geotechnical resistances at the Ultimate Limit States (ULS),
together with the corresponding founding elevations at the borehole locations, are summarized in the
following table.
Bearing Soils and Founding Levels of Footings

FACTORED MINIMUM DEPTH
GROUND BEARING APPROXIMATE
GEOTECHNICAL BELOW
SURFACE RESISTANCE MINIMUM ANTICIPATED GROUNDWATER
BOREHOLE RESISTANCE EXISTING
ELEVATION AT SLS FOUNDING BEARING SOIL LEVEL/ELEVATION
NO. AT ULS GROUND*
(M ) (KPA) ELEVATIONS (M)
(KPA) (M)
BH16-2 97.3 100 150 3.6 93.7 Silty Sand 4.8/92.5
BH16-3 97.7 100 150 2.3 95.4 Silty Sand 4.6/93.1
BH16-5 97.5 100 150 3.6 93.9 Silty Sand -
BH16-6 96.7 100 150 3.1 93.6 Silty Sand 3.9/92.8
BH16-8 97.0 100 150 2.5 94.5 Silty Sand -
Footings bearing in approved engineered fill should have a minimum width of 500 mm and may be designed
using bearing resistance of 100 kPa at SLS, for 25 mm of settlement, and factored geotechnical resistance
of 150 kPa at Ultimate Limit States (ULS), provided that all requirements on Appendix A are adhered to.

October 2017
7
4.2.2 FOUNDATIONS FOR EIGHT-STOREY BUILDINGS
The proposed eight-storey building can be supported by caissons founded on the silty clay till for a
geotechnical resistance of 800 kPa at Serviceability Limit States (SLS) and for a factored geotechnical
resistance of 1,200 kPa at Ultimate Limit State (ULS). The founding elevations are summarized in the
following table.
FACTORED
BEARING CAPACITY MINIMUM DEPTH FOUNDING LEVEL
GEOTECHNICAL
BOREHOLE GROUND SURFACE AT SLS BELOW EXISTING AT OR BELOW
RESISTANCE AT
NO. ELEVATION (KPA) GROUND (M) ELEVATION (M)
ULS (KPA)
BH17-7 97.6 800 1200 10.7 87.0
BH17-8 98.0 800 1200 11.0 87.0
BH17-9 98.0 800 1200 11.0 87.0
BH17-10 97.8 800 1200 10.8 87.0
BH17-11 97.1 800 1200 10.1 87.0
It should be noted that the caissons will be drilled through the water bearing sandy deposits into the silty clay
till deposits. The caissons will require temporary liners for the installations to help prevent the soils from
caving and to help control groundwater expected from the sandy deposits. The liner should be socketed into
silty clay till for a sufficient depth to form a seal.
Potential difficulty should be expected during the installation of the caissons due to the presence of
cobbles/boulders. Appropriate equipment and procedures will be required to penetrate obstructions (cobbles
and boulders) that are encountered during drilling for caisson foundations.
4.2.3 OTHER COMMENTS ON FOUNDATIONS
Foundations designed to the specified bearing capacities at the serviceability limit states (SLS) are expected
to settle less than 25 mm total and 19 mm differential.
All footing bases must be inspected by this office prior to pouring concrete.
Where it is necessary to place footings in soils at different levels, the upper footing must be founded below
an imaginary 10 horizontal to 7 vertical line drawn up from the base of the lower footing. The lower footing
must be installed first to help minimize the risk of undermining the upper footing.
All foundations exposed to seasonal freezing conditions must have at least 1.2 m of soil cover for frost
protection or equivalent insulation for frost protection.
It should be noted that the recommended bearing capacities have been calculated by WSP from the borehole
information for the preliminary design stage only. The investigation and comments are necessarily on-going
as new information of the underground conditions becomes available. For example, more specific information
is available with respect to conditions between boreholes when foundation construction is underway. The
interpretation between boreholes and the recommendations of this report must therefore be checked through
field inspections provided by WSP to validate the information for use during the construction stage.

October 2017
8
4.3 EARTH PRESSURES
The lateral earth pressures acting on rigid basement walls may be calculated from the following expression:
p = K(ϒ h +q)
where p = Lateral earth pressure in kPa acting at depth h
K = Earth pressure coefficient equal to 0.45 for vertical walls and horizontal backfill.
ϒ = Unit weight of backfill, a value of 20.5 kN/m3 may be assumed
h = Depth to point of interest in metres
q = Equivalent value of surcharge on the ground surface in kPa
The above expression assumes that the perimeter drainage system prevents the buildup of any hydrostatic
pressure behind the wall.
4.4 FLOOR SLAB AND PERMANENT DRAINAGE
The floor slab can be supported on grade provided all fill materials and surficially softened native soils are
removed and the base thoroughly proof rolled.
The fill required to raise the grade can consist of inorganic soil, placed in shallow lifts and compacted to 98
percent of Standard Proctor Maximum Dry Density (SPMDD). A moisture barrier consisting of at least 200
mm of 19 mm clear crushed stone should be installed under the floor slab.
A drainage system will be required around the exterior basement walls and an underfloor drainage will be
required beneath the parking floor slab. Typical drainage and backfill recommendations are illustrated on
Drawing No.2 for open cut excavation and on Drawing No. 3 for shored basement wall. All openings including
the slab subgrade must be covered or wrapped with filter fabric, typically a Class II non-woven geotextile with
a filtration opening size (F.O.S.) of 50 to 100 µm.
4.5 EXCAVATIONS AND GROUNDWATER CONTROL
For one level of underground parking, it is anticipated that excavations will excavate through the fill materials
into native sand to silty sand where it is near groundwater levels. Should the excavation be extended into the
water bearing sand to silty sand deposits, significant groundwater inflow/seepage should be expected from
these water bearing deposits, some forms of positive (pro-active) groundwater control or depressurization
may be required to maintain the stability of the base and side slopes of the excavations. It should be noted
that groundwater control measures that extract more than 50,000 L/day of water are subject to a Permit to
Take Water (PTTW), as regulated by the MOECC.
All excavations for the foundation must be carried out in accordance with the most recent Occupational Health
and Safety Act (OHSA). In accordance with OHSA, the existing fill materials can be classified as Type 3 soil;
the native sand to silty sand can be classified as Type 3 Soil above groundwater level and as Type 4 soil
below groundwater level.

October 2017
9
It is anticipated that all excavations at the site will consist of temporary open cuts with side slopes not steeper
than 1 horizontal to 1 vertical (1H:1V) or as recommended by OHSA. However, depending on the construction
procedures adopted by the contractor and weather conditions at the time of construction, some local flattening
of the slopes may be required.
4.6 TEMPORARY SHORING
Excavations to the one level of underground paring could be carried out without support using side slopes
not steeper than 1 horizontal to 1 vertical (1H:1V) in the native silty sand. Within the fill the slopes should be
flattened to 1.5H: 1V. Where the excavations at these angles extend beyond the property lines, or close to
existing structures, the ground should be supported by an appropriate engineered shoring system such as
soldier piles and timber lagging or caisson wall to support adjacent structures, if required.
The shoring system must be designed in accordance with the Fourth Edition of the Canadian Foundation
Engineering Manual. The soil parameters estimated to be applicable for this design are as follows:
1) Earth Pressure Coefficients
(a) where movement must be minimal K=0.45
(b) where minor movement (.002H) can be tolerated K=0.25
(c) passive earth pressure for soldier piles (unfactored) Kp=3
2) For stability check
Φ = 32˚
c= 0
γ = 21 kN/m3
Surcharge is to be determined by shoring contractor.
The soldier piles should be installed in pre-augered holes taken below the deepest excavation. The holes
should be filled with concrete below the excavation level and half bag mix above the base of the excavation.
The concrete strength must be specified by the shoring designer. Temporary liners may be required to help
prevent the sandy/silty layers/zones from caving during the installation period. The potential for obstructions
due to cobbles and boulders in the tills that may impact the soldier pile/caisson installations should be
considered by the shoring contractor.
Positive measures may be required to prevent the loss of soil through the spaces between the lagging
boards. This could probably be achieved by placing well-graded sand and gravel behind the lagging boards
or by installing a geotextile filter cloth.
Movement of the shoring system is inevitable. Vertical movements will result from the vertical load on the
soldier piles resulting from the inclined tiebacks and inward horizontal movement resulting from earth and
possibly water pressures. The magnitude of this movement can be controlled by sound construction
practices, and it is anticipated that the horizontal movement will be in the range of 0.1 to 0.25%H.
To ensure that movements of the shoring are within an acceptable range, monitoring must be carried out.
Vertical and horizontal targets on the soldier piles must be located and surveyed before excavation begins.

October 2017
10
Weekly readings during excavation should show that the movements will be within those predicted; if not,
the monitoring results will enable directions to be given to improve the shoring.
4.7 EARTHQUAKE CONSIDERATIONS
Based on the existing borehole information and according to Table 4.1.8.4.A of OBC 2012, the subject site
for the proposed buildings with one level of underground parking can be classified as ‘Class D’ for seismic
site response. It might be possible to upgrade the seismic site class to ‘Class C’ for the proposed buildings,
however, shear wave velocity testing would be needed to bear this out.
4.8 ROAD AND PARKING LOT
The investigation has shown that the predominant subgrade soil, after removing the existing pavement
structure, fills and any other organic and otherwise unsuitable subsoil, will generally consist of silty sand.
Based on the subsurface soil conditions encountered at the site and the assumed traffic usage for residential
local and collector streets, the following pavement designs are recommended for the proposed road and
parking lot:
THICKNESS OF PAVEMENT ELEMENTS (MM)

MATERIAL
LOCAL ROAD, COLLECTOR, HEAVY
LIGHT DUTY PARKING DUTY PARKING
Asphaltic Material HL 3 Surface Course 40 40

(OPSS 1150) HL 8 Binder Course 50 80
Granular ‘A’ Crushed
150 150
Granular Material Limestone Base
(OPSS 1010) Granular ‘B’ 200 300

Prepared and Approved Subgrade
The site subgrade and weather conditions (i.e. if wet) at the time of construction may necessitate the
placement of thicker granular sub-base layer in order to facilitate the construction. The need for filter
fabric/geo-grid can be evaluated during construction stage. Furthermore, heavy construction equipment have
to be kept off the newly constructed roads before the placement of asphalt and/or immediately thereafter, to
avoid damaging the weak subgrade by heavy truck traffic.
4.8.1 STRIPPING, SUB-EXCAVATION AND GRADING
The site should be stripped of all existing pavement structure, fills and any organic or otherwise unsuitable
soils to the full depth of the roads.
Following stripping, the site should be graded to the subgrade level and approved. The subgrade should
then be proof-rolled, in the presence of the geotechnical engineer, by at least several passes of a heavy
compactor having a rated capacity of at least 8 tonnes. Any soft spots thus exposed should be removed and
replaced by select fill material, similar to the existing subgrade soil and approved by the geotechnical
engineer. The subgrade should then be re-compacted from the surface to at least 98% of its Standard Proctor
Maximum Dry Density (SPMDD). The final subgrade should be cambered or otherwise shaped properly to
facilitate rapid drainage and to prevent the formation of local depressions in which water could accumulate.

October 2017
11
Proper cambering and allowing the water to escape towards the sides (where it can be removed by means
of subdrains) is considered to be beneficial for this project. Otherwise, any water collected in the granular
sub-base materials could be trapped thus causing problems due to softened subgrade, differential frost
heave, etc. For the same reason damaging the subgrade during and after placement of the granular materials
by heavy construction traffic should be avoided. If the moisture content of the local material cannot be
maintained at ±2% of the optimum moisture content, imported granular material may need to be used.
Any fill required for re-grading the site or backfill should be select, clean material, free of existing fills, organic
or other foreign and unsuitable matter. The fill should be placed in thin layers and compacted to at least 95%
of its SPMDD. The degree of compaction should be increased to 98% within the top 1.0 m of the subgrade,
or as per Town Standards. The compaction of the new fill should be checked by frequent field density tests.
4.8.2 CONSTRUCTION
Once the subgrade has been inspected and approved, the granular base and sub-base course materials
should be placed in layers not exceeding 300 mm (uncompacted thickness) and should be compacted to at
least 98% of their respective SPMDD. The grading of the material should conform to current OPS
Specifications.
The placing, spreading and rolling of the asphalt should be in accordance with OPS Specifications or, as
required by the local authorities.
Frequent field density tests should be carried out on both the asphalt and granular base and sub-base
materials to ensure that the required degree of compaction is achieved.
4.8.3 DRAINAGE
Installation of full-length subdrains along all roads, should be required. The subdrains should be properly
filtered to prevent the loss of (and clogging by) soil fines.
The sub-drains system should consist of 100 mm or 150 mm diameter geotextile wrapped perforated pipe,
placed inside a 300 mm X 300 mm trench and surrounded on all sides by 20 mm clear stone (minimum 50
mm at the bottom side), wrapped in filter cloth (Terrafix 270R or approved alternative), overlap to be at least
150 mm as shown on subdrain detail, Drawing No. 2. The pipes should be placed such that the top of the
sand filter is at subgrade level and connected to a catchbasins or some other permanently frost free outlet to
provide positive drainage. In addition, the subgrade should be graded at a slope of minimum 2% downwards
towards the subdrains to promote the drainage.
All paved surfaces should be sloped to provide satisfactory drainage towards catchbasins. The finished
pavement surface and underlying subgrade should be free of depressions and should be crowned and sloped
in accordance with local municipal design standards to provide effective drainage. As discussed above, by
means of good planning any water trapped in the granular base materials should be drained rapidly towards
subdrains or other interceptors.
4.9 SITE SERVICING
It should be noted that the design alignments and invert elevations of the sewers and watermains are not
known at this time. Once the design underground service pipe alignments and invert depths are available,
the following recommendations should be reviewed and amended by the geotechnical engineer, as required.
Additional investigation should be carried out in identified areas of insufficient subsurface information.

October 2017
12
The native soils and properly constructed engineered fills are considered to be suitable for supporting the
pipes, provided the integrity of the base of the trench can be maintained during construction.
4.9.1 TRENCHING EXCAVATION AND DEWATERING
Based on the results of this investigation, the site servicing excavation may be subexcavated through the
existing pavement structure, existing sandy fills and silty sand depending on the inverts of the service pipes.
All excavations must be carried out in accordance with the most recent Occupational Health and Safety Act
(OHSA) (refer to Section 4.5).
4.9.2 BEDDING
The bedding for the underground service pipes should be compatible with local municipality Standards.
Where granular bedding is deemed to be acceptable, it should consist of at least 150 mm of OPSS Granular
A. The thickness of the bedding may, however, have to be increased depending on the pipe diameter or in
accordance with local standards or if wet or weak subgrade conditions are encountered, depending upon the
success of the contractor’s groundwater control methods. Where the subgrade is loose, a Geoweb reinforced
base can be constructed at the trench base.
Clear stone bedding material should not be used in any case for pipe bedding or to stabilize the base unless
it is fully wrapped in a non- woven geotextile. The use of clear stone bedding material should be directed by
geotechnical engineer during construction.
Suitable trench backfill materials, preferably sand, for the protection of the sewer and manholes against
squeezing shale should be used.
4.9.3 BACKFILLING OF TRENCHES
The excavated materials at suitable water contents may be reused as trench backfill provided they are free
of topsoil, organics or other deleterious material, and are placed and compacted as outlined below. Some
drying of the wetter silty sand deposits below groundwater table may be required prior to placement. It should
also be noted that due to the predominantly fine-grained, silty nature of the majority of the native soils, some
difficulty would be expected in achieving adequate compaction during wet weather.
The backfill should be placed in maximum 300 mm thick layers at or near (±2%) their optimum moisture
content and each layer should be compacted to at least 95% SPMDD. Unsuitable materials such as organic
soils, frozen soils, etc. should not be used for backfilling.
5 GENERAL COMMENTS AND

LIMITATIONS OF REPORT
WSP Canada Inc. should be retained for a general review of the detailed design and specifications to verify
that this report has been properly interpreted and implemented. Based on that review the scope of the
additional works (boreholes, laboratory tests, analyses) can be determined. If not accorded the opportunity
of making this review, WSP will assume no responsibility for interpretation of the recommendations in the
report.

October 2017
13
This report deals with geotechnical issues only. The Phase One and Phase Two Environmental Site
Assessments (ESA) have been carried out and will be reported separately.
The comments given in this report are intended only for the guidance of design engineers. This report is
intended solely for the Client named. The material in it reflects our best judgment in light of the information
available to WSP at the time of preparation. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by WSP, it shall not be used
to express or imply warranty as to the fitness of the property for a particular purpose. No portion of this report
may be used as a separate entity, it is written to be read in its entirety.
The conclusions and recommendations given in this report are based on information determined at the widely
spaced borehole locations. Subsurface and groundwater conditions between and beyond the test holes may
differ from those encountered at the test hole locations and conditions which were not detected or could be
anticipated at the time of the site investigation may exist. 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 the details stated in this report. This work has been undertaken in accordance with normally accepted
geotechnical engineering practices and for site assessments.
Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on or decisions to be made based on it, are
the responsibility of such third parties. WSP accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any
third party as a result of decisions made or actions based on this report.
6 CLOSURE
Once the final development plans are available, the information in this report should be reviewed by the
geotechnical engineer to ensure that the recommendations provided in this report are compatible with the
actual proposed development plans for the site.
We trust that the information contained in this report is complete within our terms of reference. Should you
have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office.

October 2017
DRAWINGS
DRAWING 1 BOREHOLE LOCATION PLAN
DRAWING 2 DRAINAGE AND BACKFILL RECOMMENDATIONS (OPEN CUT)
DRAWING 3 DRAINAGE RECOMMENDATIONS (SHORED WALL)
Legend:
Borehole
Monitoring Well
Subject Property
Pl
ai
ns
R
Rd
ES PR
ID OP BU M .
C
BH17-9
AI
O R EN O IL N
M E TI SE DIN EN E
(A ME SID AL D G TR
VE R E / C 8 S 'A AN
R CIA NC C
AG L E
: O TO ' E
E : M R
PE M 85 27 162 M E
0 8.7 S
N EC W
ft ² 0 U
ER Y
TH H C AL
O . PE m ITE
BH16-1
U ² IA KW
SE R /3 S
U , L AY
N 00
IT 0
) ft ²
IN
A
D
@ ME O
O
PL
9t N
R
h IT
Flo Y
or
AI
N
ENTRANCE
S
BH17-10
O
U R
A T
28 ME DO O
0 NI OR
sq TY
.m
.
AD
LO
A
LA AR DI
N EA NG 1.
D
EA
6. 8m
SC 0 M
AP D W
E U R R AL
BH17-3
/G AM IV
ST
KW
E
BH17-8
PA P
(T
G
H
YP
C
R TO
E
AP
AY
B)
AR
KIN AI
SL
AG
VI
G LA S
E
N IT E
D
BH17-4
E O
UT
SC R
'S
RO AP
E E PA
BH17-2
FIR R
KI
1. N
E 8m G
SL W
D AI AL
R B E KW
YA IV
R U R
D AY
BH16-4
EA
PR IL
R D 0M M
3 O IN 6. AI
ST PRO B N
BH17-1
BA S ST PO G (1 EN
T
C C A R SE 'F' O 8
AC P U LA TR
U N AN
W
N K OS ILD D O C
O K- C E D
FE
AL
N T K Y SC U E
A T
IT CO ED ED IN
AT
S G
BH16-13,
KW
AP
U
(2 DO O- ED
4 E
R
B 22 ME DO
BH16-3,
BH16-13I,
'
AY
- R ND BA 3
E
BH16-13D
0 NI OR
BH16-5
U MI A
BH16-10,
sq TY
BH16-3D
N N C EV O C ST H'
.m
AY
BH16-10I,
.
IT IU K
BH16-10D
ER M K-T O
S) M KW
AL
SE INI O RE
W D UM -B Y
8m FR AC
1. O K
N I
C
TA A ND
O
P @ ME OO N PR
BH17-5
LA G VI 9t N R D O BU
BH17-7
N ST RO B E) SI h IT C O P
D (1 TO Flo Y O M O IL
M
R
SC
8
AC P UI R or IN S D
'S M
ES
AP U K OS LD IU ED ING
TE
E N (A ER
ID
PA M 8
U
R VE C
O
EN
IT CO ED ED IN LA R IA & S 'B'
R
S G
C
N KI
N
E
D AG L: C TO
E:
G O
R
- R ND BA 3 'G
AP A)
YP
SC E 13
FI
(T
HC E
14
VI M RE
2
EV O CK ST ' SI AP 85 9 M Y
TO E 0 .35
SU
BH16-9, FI
ER M -T O R ft² ER
IT
R 'S PE m² C
E
E
(T
SE INI O RE
ENTRANCE
BH16-9D
S
IA
YP
R /1
HC E
R PA
AP B)
BH16-12,
O D UM -B Y R U ,5 L
BH16-2
U
BH16-12I,
AC KI N 00
FR IT
BH16-12D
TE
O N
K G ) ft²
N PE
M
N
TA
G
EC
BH16-7
1. TH
H
8m
.
E) E O
6.
0M W SL U
SE
AL AI
D KW E
R IV
ST PRO B IV AY R B
E D U
AC P U AI
1.
8 SL 0M
6.
PR IL
K OS ILD m E D
C ED ED IN W 3 O IN
O AL
B S ST PO G
N BA 3 G ' KW
(2 DO C S E' AY C AC TA OR SE 'C'
4 LA
BH16-14
K T O K- C E D N
U MI -T O
N N
N T K Y D
SC
BH17-6
(1 DO O- ED
IT IU O- RE
S) 2 B AP
M BA Y U MI A E
C N N C
K IT IU K
S)
R
M
BH16-6
EA
R LA
N
BH16-6D
YA
R D
BH17-11
D SC D
R
BH16-11
AP
E YA
R
EA
BH16-11D
R
B
U
IL
PR
D
3 OP
IN
B
G
S ST O
'D
C AC TA OR SE
'
O K- C E D
N T K Y
351 STEELCASE ROAD, UNITS 9-12

(1 DO O- ED
8 B
MARKHAM, ONTARIO CANADA L3R 4H9

U MI A
N N C
IT IU K
S) M D
R
YA
R
EA
R
TEL.: 905-475-0065 | FAX: 905-475-0045 | WWW.WSP.COM

BH16-8
30m
Size:
Date:
Client:
Drawn:
Original
15
LWS
Tabloid
June 2017
0
Rev:
Scale:
Approved:
National Homes (Plains Road) LP
DW
N/A
As Shown
30 METRES
Title:
Project:
Discipline:
Project No.:
161-09479-00
Pl
ai
n s
N.T.S.
Rd
E
Key Plan
Drawing No.:
Subject
GEOTECHNICAL
Property
K
in
g
1
R
d
Borehole and Monitoring Well Location Plan
484-490 Plains Road East, Burlington, Ontario

Geotechnical Investigation for Proposed Development
Project: 161-09479-00 Drawing No. 2
1.0 m (min.)
Floor Slab (6)

Exterior Grade (9)
Impermeable Seal (5)

Basement Wall (8)
On-Site Material
if Approved (4) Free Draining Backfill (4)
20 mm Clear Stone (2) Moisture Barrier (7)

Slab on Grade(10)
Approved Filter Fabric Blanket (13)
Approved Filter Membrane (3)
20 mm Clear Stone (2)
Drainage Tile (1) Drainage Tile (1, 11, 12)

Approved Filter Membrane (3)
EXTERIOR FOOTING
Notes
1. Drainage tile to consist of 100 mm (4") diameter weeping tile or equivalent perforated
pipe leading to a positive sump or outlet.
2. 20 mm (3/4") clear stone - 150 mm (6") top and side of drain. If drain is not on footing,
place100 mm (4 inches) of stone below drain .
3. Wrap the clear stone with an approved filter membrane (Terrafix 270R or equivalent).
4. Free Draining backfill - OPSS Granular B or equivalent compacted to the specified
density. Do not use heavy compaction equipment within 450 mm (18") of the wall. Use
hand controlled light compaction equipment within 1.8 m (6') of wall. The minimum
width of the Granular 'B' backfill must be 1.0 m.
5. Impermeable backfill seal - compacted clay, clayey silt or equivalent. If original soil is
free-draining, seal may be omitted. Maximum thickness of seal to be 0.5 m.
6. Do not backfill until wall is supported by basement and floor slabs or adequate bracing.
7. Moisture barrier to be at least 200 mm (8") of compacted clear 20 mm (3/4") stone or
equivalent free draining material. A vapour barrier may be required for specialty floors.
8. Basement wall to be damp proofed /water proofed.
9. Exterior grade to slope away from building.
10. Slab on grade should not be structurally connected to the wall or footing.
11. Underfloor drain invert to be at least 300 mm (12") below underside of floor slab.
12. Drainage tile placed in parallel rows 6 to 8 m (20 to 25') centers one way. Place drain
on 100 mm (4") clear stone with 150 mm (6") of clear stone on top and sides. Enclose
stone with filter fabric as noted in (3).
13. The entire subgrade to be sealed with approved filter fabric (Terrafix 270R or equivalent)
if non-cohesive (sandy) soils below ground water table encountered.
14. Do not connect the underfloor drains to perimeter drains.
15. Review the geotechnical report for specific details.
DRAINAGE AND BACKFILL RECOMMENDATIONS

Basement with Underfloor Drainage
(not to scale)
Project: 161-09479-00 Drawing No. 3
Floor Slab
Fabric Flap
Fabric Filter (9)
Vertical Drainage Board (9)

Water Proofing (11)
Moisture Barrier (4)
Slab on Grade(5) Approved Filter Fabric Blanket (10)
20 mm Clear Stone (2)
Sealant
Shoring Drainage Tile (1, 6)
Approved Filter Fabric (3)
Solid discharge pipe (8)
EXTERIOR FOOTING
Notes
1. Drainage tile to consist of 100 mm (4") diameter weeping tile or equivalent perforated
pipe leading to a positive sump or outlet, spaced between columns.
2. 20 mm (3/4") clear stone - 150 mm (6") top and side of drain. If drain is not on footing,
place100 mm (4 inches) of stone below drain .
3. Wrap the clear stone with an approved filter membrane (Terrafix 270R or equivalent).
4. Moisture barrier to be at least 200 mm (8") of compacted clear 20 mm (3/4") stone or
equivalent free draining material. A vapour barrier may be required for specialty floors.
5. Slab on grade should not be structurally connected to the wall or footing.
6. Underfloor drain invert to be at least 300 mm (12") below underside of floor slab.
Drainage tile placed in parallel rows 6 to 8 m (20 to 25') centers one way. Place drain
on 100 mm (4") clear stone with 150 mm (6") of clear stone on top and sides. Enclose
stone with filter fabric as noted in (3).
7. Do not connect the underfloor drains to perimeter drains.
8. Solid discharge pipe located at the middle of each bay between the solider piles,
approximate spacing 2.5 m, outletting into a solid pipe leading to a sump.
9. Vertical drainage board with filter cloth should be kept a minium of 1.2 m below exterior
finished grade.
10. The entire subgrade to be sealed with approved filter fabric (Terrafix 270R or equivalent)
if non-cohesive (sandy) soils below ground water table encountered.
11. The basement walls should be water proofed using bentonite or equivalent
water-proofing system.
12. Review the geotechnical report for specific details. Final detail must be approved before
system is considered acceptable.
DRAINAGE RECOMMENDATIONS
Shored Basement wall with Underfloor Drainage System
(not to scale)
ENCLOSURES
ENCLOSURES 1A NOTES ON SAMPLE DESCRIPTIONS
ENCLOSURES 1B EXPLANATION OF TERMS USED IN THE RECORD OF BOREHOLE
ENCLOSURES 2-14 BOREHOLE LOGS
Enclosure 1-A: Notes on Sample Descriptions
1. All sample descriptions included in this report generally follow the Unified Soil Classification. Laboratory grain size analyses provided by
WSP also follow the same system. Different classification systems may be used by others, such as the system by the International Society
for Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering (ISSMFE). Please note that, with the exception of those samples where a grain size
analysis and/or Atterberg Limits testing have been made, all samples are classified visually. Visual classification is not sufficiently
accurate to provide exact grain sizing or precise differentiation between size classification systems.
2. Fill: Where fill is designated on the borehole log it is defined as indicated by the sample recovered during the boring process. The reader
is cautioned that fills are heterogeneous in nature and variable in density or degree of compaction. The borehole description may
therefore not be applicable as a general description of site fill materials. All fills should be expected to contain obstruction such as wood,
large concrete pieces or subsurface basements, floors, tanks, etc., none of these may have been encountered in the boreholes. Since
boreholes cannot accurately define the contents of the fill, test pits are recommended to provide supplementary information. Despite
the use of test pits, the heterogeneous nature of fill will leave some ambiguity as to the exact composition of the fill. Most fills contain
pockets, seams, or layers of organically contaminated soil. This organic material can result in the generation of methane gas and/or
significant ongoing and future settlements. Fill at this site may have been monitored for the presence of methane gas and, if so, the
results are given on the borehole logs. The monitoring process does not indicate the volume of gas that can be potentially generated nor
does it pinpoint the source of the gas. These readings are to advise of the presence of gas only, and a detailed study is recommended for
sites where any explosive gas/methane is detected. Some fill material may be contaminated by toxic/hazardous waste that renders it
unacceptable for deposition in any but designated land fill sites; unless specifically stated the fill on this site has not been tested for
contaminants that may be considered toxic or hazardous. This testing and a potential hazard study can be undertaken if requested. In
most residential/commercial areas undergoing reconstruction, buried oil tanks are common and are generally not detected in a
conventional preliminary geotechnical site investigation.
3. Till: The term till on the borehole logs indicates that the material originates from a geological process associated with glaciation.
Because of this geological process the till must be considered heterogeneous in composition and as such may contain pockets and/or
seams of material such as sand, gravel, silt or clay. Till often contains cobbles (60 to 200 mm) or boulders (over 200 mm). Contractors
may therefore encounter cobbles and boulders during excavation, even if they are not indicated by the borings. It should be appreciated
that normal sampling equipment cannot differentiate the size or type of any obstruction. Because of the horizontal and vertical
variability of till, the sample description may be applicable to a very limited zone; caution is therefore essential when dealing with
sensitive excavations or dewatering programs in till materials.
Enclosure 1-B: Explanation of Terms Used in the Record of Borehole
Sample Type Soil Description
AS Auger sample a) Cohesive Soils(*)

BS Block sample
CS Chunk sample Consistency Undrained Shear SPT “N” Value
DO Drive open Strength (kPa)
DS Dimension type sample Very soft <12 0-2
FS Foil sample Soft 12-25 2-4
NR No recovery Firm 25-50 4-8
RC Rock core Stiff 50-100 8-15
SC Soil core Very stiff 100-200 15-30
SS Spoon sample Hard >200 >30
SH Shelby tube sample
ST Slotted tube (*) Hierarchy of Shear Strength prediction
TO Thin-walled, open 1. Lab triaxial test
TP Thin-walled, piston 2. Field vane shear test
WS Wash sample 3. Lab. vane shear test
4. SPT “N” value
Penetration Resistance 5. Pocket penetrometer
Standard Penetration Resistance (SPT), N: b) Cohesionless Soils

The number of blows by a 63.5 kg (140 lb) hammer dropped 760 mm (30
in) required to drive a 50 mm (2 in) drive open sampler for a distance of 300 Density Index (Relative Density) SPT “N” Value
mm (12 in).
Very loose <4
WH – Samples sinks under “weight of hammer” Loose 4-10
Compact 10-30
Dynamic Cone Penetration Resistance, Nd: Dense 30-50
The number of blows by a 63.5 kg (140 lb) hammer dropped 760 mm (30 Very dense >50
in) to drive uncased a 50 mm (2 in) diameter, 60o cone attached to “A” size
drill rods for a distance of 300 mm (12 in). Soil Tests
Textural Classification of Soils (ASTM D2487-10) w Water content

wp Plastic limit
Classification Particle Size wl Liquid limit
Boulders > 300 mm C Consolidation (oedometer) test
Cobbles 75 mm - 300 mm CID Consolidated isotropically drained triaxial test
Gravel 4.75 mm - 75 mm CIU consolidated isotropically undrained triaxial test with porewater
Sand 0.075 mm - 4.75 mm pressure measurement
Silt 0.002 mm - 0.075 mm DR Relative density (specific gravity, Gs)
Clay <0.002 mm(*) DS Direct shear test
(*) Canadian Foundation Engineering Manual (4th Edition) ENV Environmental/ chemical analysis
M Sieve analysis for particle size
MH Combined sieve and hydrometer (H) analysis
Coarse Grain Soil Description (50% greater than 0.075 mm) MPC Modified proctor compaction test
SPC Standard proctor compaction test
Terminology Proportion OC Organic content test
Trace 0-10% U Unconsolidated Undrained Triaxial Test
Some 10-20% V Field vane (LV-laboratory vane test)
Adjective (e.g. silty or sandy) 20-35% Γ Unit weight
And (e.g. sand and gravel) > 35%
LOG OF BOREHOLE BH16-1 1 OF 1
PROJECT: Phase Two and Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation DRILLING DATA
CLIENT: National Homes (Plains Road) LP Method: Solid Stem Auger
PROJECT LOCATION: 484 Plains Road East, Burlington, Ontario Diameter: 115mm REF. NO.: 161-09479-00
DATUM: NAD83, ZONE 17 Date: Jun/29/2016 ENCL NO.: 2
BH LOCATION: N 4796798 E 594288
DYNAMIC CONE PENETRATION
SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES RESISTANCE PLOT NATURAL REMARKS
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
SHEAR STRENGTH (kPa)
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
DEPTH UNCONFINED & Sensitivity (%)
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
QUICK TRIAXIAL LAB VANE
98.0 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
0.0
97.8 ASPHALT (150 mm)
0.2 GRANULAR BASE (80 mm)
FILL: silty sand, trace clay, redish 1 AUGER
brown, moist, very loose.
1
97
2 SS 0
3 SS 2
2
96
4 SS 3
3 95.0 95
3.0 SILTY SAND:contains clayey silt
layers, redishbrown, moist to wet,
compact. 5 SS 14
4
94
6 SS 14
5
93
WSP SOIL LOG 161-0947900-00 484 PLAINS RD E, BURLINGTON 20170529.GPJ SPL.GDT 29/5/17
6
92
7 SS 14
91.3
6.7 END OF BOREHOLE
Notes:
1). Water was encountered at 4.6 m
below ground surface (bgs) during
drilling.
2). Water was at 4.3 m bgs upon
completion of drilling.
3). Borehole caved in to a depth of
4.4 m bgs upon completion of
drilling.
GRAPH 3, 3 : Numbers refer =3%

GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS Strain at Failure
NOTES to Sensitivity
1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
CLIENT: National Homes (Plains Road) LP Method: Hollow Stem Auger
PROJECT LOCATION: 484 Plains Road East, Burlington, Ontario Diameter: 150 mm REF. NO.: 161-09479-00
BH LOCATION: N 4796711 E 594366
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
97.3 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
97
0.3 FILL: silty sand, trace clay, redish 1 AUGER
brown, moist, very loose to loose.
1
2 SS 5
96
3 SS 6 Bentonite
2
95
4 SS 2
93.9 5 SS 8 94
3.4 SILTY SAND: trace clay,
redishbrown, moist to wet, loose to
compact. Sand
4
93
5
6 SS 14
W. L. 92.4 m
Oct 24, 2016
92
Screen
91
7 SS 27
90
8 8 SS 30
89.2
89.1
8.2 SILTY CLAY TILL: grey, moist,
8.2 very stiff.
END OF BOREHOLE
Notes:
drilling;
2). 2" well was installed in the
borehole upon completion of drilling.
Water Level Reading:

Date Depth (m)
July 11, 2016 4.78
Oct 24, 2016 4.94

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
PROJECT LOCATION: 484 Plains Road East, Burlington, Ontario DATUM: Diameter: 150 mm REF. NO.: 161-09479-00
NAD83, ZONE 17 Date: Jun/30/2016 ENCL NO.: 4
BH LOCATION: N 4796753 E 594339
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
97.7 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
brown, moist, very loose to loose.
97
1
2 SS 4
96
3 SS 11
2 Bentonite
95.5
compact. 4 SS 14
95
3
5 SS 11
94
4
Sand
93
6 SS 20 W. L. 93.0 m 0 76 19 5
5
Feb 07, 2017
92
6 Screen
7 SS 24
91
7
89.9 90
8
7.8 SILTY CLAY TILL: grey, moist, 8 SS 22
very stiff.
89.5 ---------------------------
8.2 sand and gravel layer
END OF BOREHOLE
Notes:
drilling;

Date Depth (m)
July 11, 2016 4.58
Oct 24, 2016 4.75
Dec 10, 2016 4.79
Feb 7, 2017 4.74

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
BH LOCATION: N 4796820 E 594329
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
97.8 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
0.3 FILL: silty sand, trace clay, 1 AUGER
contains clayey silt layer, redish
97
1
2 SS 4
Bentonite
3 SS 3 96
2
4 SS 2
95
3 94.8
compact. 5 SS 17
Sand
94
4
W. L. 93.7 m
Feb 07, 2017
6 SS 22 93
5
Screen
92
6
7 SS 15
91
7
90.7
very stiff.
90
8 8 SS 23
89.6
8.2 END OF BOREHOLE
Notes:
drilling;

Date Depth (m)
July 11, 2016 3.90
Oct 24, 2016 4.07
Dec 10, 2016 4.15
Feb 7, 2017 4.13

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
BH LOCATION: N 4796805 E 594348
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
97.5 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
0.0 ASPHALT (90 mm)
0.3 1 AUGER
FILL: silty sand, trace clay, redish 97
1
2 SS 0
96
3 SS 3
2
95
4 SS 2
3 94.5
compact. 5 SS 8
94
93
5
6 SS 18
92
7 SS 11 91
90.8
6.7 END OF BOREHOLE
Notes:
drilling;

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
BH LOCATION: N 4796741 E 594395
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
96.7 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
brown, moist, very loose to
compact. 96
1
2 SS 3
95
Bentonite
3 SS 4
2
4 SS 11
94
3 93.7
redishbrown, moist to wet, compact.
5 SS 19
93
4
Sand
W. L. 92.8 m
Feb 07, 2017
92
5
6 SS 11
Screen
91
6
7 SS 18
90
7
89.6
very stiff.
89
8 8 SS 20
88.5
8.2 END OF BOREHOLE
Notes:
drilling;

Date Depth (m)
July 11, 2016 3.86
Oct 24, 2016 4.03
Dec 10, 2016 4.10
Feb 7, 2017 3.97

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
BH LOCATION: N 4796881 E 594363
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
97.8 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
0.0
FILL: silty sand, trace clay, redish 1 AUGER
compact.
97
1
2 SS 8
3 SS 4 96
2 Bentonite
4 SS 4
95
3 94.8
3.0 SILTY SAND: contains clayey silt
layers, redishbrown, wet, very lose
to compact. 5 SS 10
9494.1 m
W. L.
4 Feb 07, 2017
6 SS 4
Sand
93
5
7 SS 11
8 SS 5
92
6
Screen
9 SS 15
91
7
90.1
7.7 SILTY CLAY TILL: grey, moist, 90
8 very stiff. 10 SS 19
89.6
8.2 END OF BOREHOLE
Notes:
1). Water was encountered at 3 m
drilling;

Date Depth (m)
July 11, 2016 3.50
Oct 24, 2016 3.65
Dec 10, 2016 3.75
Feb 7, 2017 3.72

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
BH LOCATION: N 4796775 E 594428
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
97.0 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
compact.
1
2 SS 14 96
3 SS 8
2
95
94.8
redishbrown, moist to wet, compact.
4 SS 9
3
94
5 SS 9
4
93
5
6 SS 15
92
6
91
7 SS 5
7
90
89.8
very stiff.
8 8 SS 29
89
88.8
8.2 END OF BOREHOLE
Notes:
drilling.
3). Borehole caved in to a depth of
4.4 m bgs upon completion of
drilling.

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
PROJECT: Geotechnical Investigation DRILLING DATA
DATUM: NAD 83, ZONE 17 Date: Apr/17/2017 ENCL NO.: 10
BH LOCATION: N 4796850.502 E 594358.633
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
97.6 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
0.3 FILL: silty sand, trace clay, reddish 1 SS 8
brown, moist to wet, very loose.
97
1
2 SS 3
96
3 SS 2
2
4 SS 3
95
94.7
3 2.9 SILTY SAND: trace gravel, reddish
brown, wet, compact to dense.
5 SS 13
94
4
WSP SOIL LOG 161-0947900-00 484 PLAINS RD E, BURLINGTON-BH17-7 TO BH17-11 20170602.GPJ SPL.GDT 2/6/17
- Spoon wet 93
6 SS 26
5
92
7 SS 32
91
7
90.5
7.1 SILTY CLAY TILL: trace gravel,
some sand, trace silty clay zones,
grey, moist, very stiff to hard.
90
8 SS 23
8
89
9 SS 45
88
10
Continued Next Page
1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
BH LOCATION: N 4796850.502 E 594358.633
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
SILTY CLAY TILL: trace gravel,
grey, moist, very stiff to
hard.(Continued)
87
10 SS 50/
150mm
11
86
12
11 SS 59
85
13
84.4
13.2 SILTY CLAY: trace sand, trace silt
zones, grey, moist, hard.
84
14 12 SS 36
82.9 83
14.7 SANDY SILT: trace gravel, trace
15 clay, trace silty clay zones, brown,
wet, very dense.
68/
13 SS
250mm
82
16
81
17
14 SS 55
80.4
17.2 END OF BOREHOLE
Notes:
drilling.
3). Borehole was open upon

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
BH LOCATION: N 4796837.702 E 594319.883
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
98.0 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
GRANULAR BASE (240 mm)
97.6 1 SS 16
0.4 FILL: silty sand, trace clay, reddish
brown, moist to wet, very loose to
loose.
1
2 SS 6 97
3 SS 4
2 96
4 SS 2
95.1
3 2.9 SILTY SAND: reddish brown, wet, 95
loose to compact.
5 SS 6
4 94
- Spoon wet
6 SS 9
5 93
6 92
7 SS 19
91.5
reddish brown to grey, moist, very
7 stiff to hard. 91
8 SS 24
8 90
9 89
9 SS 37
10
Continued Next Page
1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
BH LOCATION: N 4796837.702 E 594319.883
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
reddish brown to grey, moist, very
stiff to hard.(Continued)
11
10 SS 53 87 6 12 47 35
12 86
11 SS 36
13 85
14 12 SS 42 84
15 83
13 SS 40
82.3
Notes:
drilling.

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
BH LOCATION: N 4796784.401 E 594276.799
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
98.0 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
0.3 FILL: silty sand, trace clay, reddish 1 SS 8
brown, moist to wet, very loose.
1
97
2 SS 5
2
96
Bentonite
95.5
2.5 SILTY SAND: reddish brown, wet,
compact.
3
95
3 SS 18
4
94
W. L. 94.0 m
May 25, 2017
- Spoon wet
4 SS 14
5
93
92.5
5.6 SAND: trace gravel, trace silt, trace Sand
clay, reddish brown, wet, compact. Screen
6
92
5 SS 14 1 88 7 4
7
90.9 91
some sand, grey, moist, very stiff to
hard.
6 SS 31
8
90
9
89
7 SS 27
10
Continued Next Page
1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
BH LOCATION: N 4796784.401 E 594276.799
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
hard.(Continued)
11
8 SS 39
87
Bentonite
86.4
11.6 SILTY CLAY: trace gravel, trace
sand, grey, moist, hard.
12
86
9 SS 45
13
85
84.1
14 13.9 SILTY SAND: trace gravel, trace 10 SS 43
84
clay, reddish brown to grey, moist to
wet, very dense.
15
83
11 SS 34
82.3
Notes:
drilling.
Water Level Readings:
Date W. L. Depth (m bgs)
May 25, 2017 4.06

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
BH LOCATION: N 4796751.233 E 594311.141
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
97.8 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
0.3 FILL: silty sand, trace to some 1 SS 12
gravel, reddish brown, moist to wet,
very loose to loose.
97
1
2 SS 5
3 SS 2 96
2
4 SS 3
94.9 95
3 2.9 SILTY SAND: trace gravel, reddish
brown, wet, compact.
5 SS 14
94
4
- Spoon wet
6 SS 25 93
5
92
6
7 SS 31
91
7
90.0 - Gravelly sand zone

8 SS 24 90
8
hard.
89
9
9 SS 34
88
10
Continued Next Page
1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
BH LOCATION: N 4796751.233 E 594311.141
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
hard.(Continued)
87
11
10 SS 39
86
12
76/
11 SS
280mm
85
13
84
14 12 SS 76
83.1
14.7 SILTY CLAY: trace sand, grey, 83
15 moist, very stiff.
13 SS 29
82.1
Notes:
drilling.

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
BH LOCATION: N 4796783.016 E 594391.601
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
97.1 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
0.0 ASPHALT (50 mm) 97
GRANULAR BASE (400 mm)
1 SS 12
96.7
0.5 FILL: silty sand, trace gravel,
reddish brown, moist, compact.
96
2 SS 12
2
95
94.6
2.5 SILTY SAND: trace gravel, reddish
brown, moist to wet, compact.
3
94
3 SS 14
93
- Spoon wet
4 SS 16
5
92
91
5 SS 27
7
90.0
90
hard.
6 SS 17
8
89
88
7 SS 53
10
Continued Next Page
1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
BH LOCATION: N 4796783.016 E 594391.601
NATURAL UNIT WT
PLASTIC LIQUID
GROUND WATER
MOISTURE
POCKET PEN.
20 40 60 80 100 LIMIT
CONTENT
LIMIT AND
(m)
STRATA PLOT
(Cu) (kPa)
GRAIN SIZE
CONDITIONS
(kN/m )
wP w wL
3
"N" BLOWS
ELEVATION
0.3 m
ELEV DISTRIBUTION
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
FIELD VANE
WATER CONTENT (%)
TYPE
20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
SILTY CLAY TILL: trace gravel, 87
hard.(Continued)
11
8 SS 47
86
12
85
9 SS 61
13
84
90/
14 10 SS
250mm
83
82.4
14.7 SILTY CLAY: trace sand, grey,
15 moist, hard.
82
11 SS 77
81.4
Notes:
drilling.

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
FIGURES
Particle Size Distribution Report
0.315
0.075
1.25
0.63
0.16
2.5
80
56
40
28
20
14
10
5
100
90
80
70
PERCENT FINER
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
GRAIN SIZE - mm.

% Gravel % Sand % Fines
% +3"
Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay
0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 3.0 71.4 19.3 5.2
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? Soil Description

SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) Silty sand, trace clay
4.75mm 100.0
2mm 98.9
0.850mm 98.7
0.425mm 95.9 Atterberg Limits
PL= LL= PI=
0.250mm 80.7
0.106mm 33.2 Coefficients
0.075mm 24.5 D90= 0.3203 D85= 0.2762 D60= 0.1740
0.0446 mm. 13.9 D50= 0.1480 D30= 0.0956 D15= 0.0481
0.0317 mm. 12.2 D10= 0.0135 Cu= 12.89 Cc= 3.89
0.0201 mm. 11.3
Classification
0.0117 mm. 9.6 USCS= AASHTO=
0.0083 mm. 8.7
0.0059 mm. 7.0 Remarks
0.0030 mm. 5.2 Sampled by Jack
0.0012 mm. 5.2 F.M.=0.66
* (no specification provided)
Location: BH16-3 SS6

Sample Number: MM-2775 Date:
Client: National Homes (Plains Road) LP

Project: Geotechnical Investigation,Ph1&2, 484 Plains Road East, Burlington
Project No: 161-09479-00 Figure 1

0.315
0.075
1.25
0.63
0.16
2.5
80
56
40
28
20
14
10
5
100
90
80
70
PERCENT FINER
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
GRAIN SIZE - mm.

% +3"
0.0 0.0 6.0 3.4 3.4 5.4 46.8 35.0

SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) Silty clay till, some sand, trace gravel
13.2mm 100.0
9.5mm 97.9
4.75mm 94.0
2mm 90.6
0.850mm 88.6
Atterberg Limits
0.425mm 87.2 PL= 16 LL= 30 PI= 14
0.250mm 85.7
0.075mm 81.8 D90= 1.6253 D85= 0.1951 D60= 0.0110
0.0366 mm. 78.1 D50= 0.0053 D30= 0.0013 D15=
0.0267 mm. 72.9 D10= Cu= Cc =
0.0174 mm. 67.7
0.0105 mm. 59.0 Classification
0.0076 mm. 53.8 USCS= CL AASHTO= A-6(10)
0.0055 mm. 50.4
0.0028 mm. 39.9 Remarks
0.0012 mm. 29.5
Sampled by Michael Hu on April 2017
F.M.=0.69

Sample Number: MM-4227 Date: 20/04/17


LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT
60
Dashed line indicates the approximate
upper limit boundary for natural soils
50
OH
or
CH
40
PLASTICITY INDEX
30
20 OL
or
CL
10
CL-ML
4
7
ML or OL MH or OH
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
LIQUID LIMIT
31.6
31.2
30.8
30.4
WATER CONTENT
30
29.6
29.2
28.8
28.4
28
27.6
5 6 7 8 9 10 20 25 30 40
NUMBER OF BLOWS
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL PL PI %<#40 %<#200 USCS
Silty clay till, some sand, trace gravel 30 16 14 87.2 81.8 CL
Project No. 161-09479-00 Client: National Homes (Plains Road) LP Remarks:

Project: Geotechnical Investigation,Ph1&2, 484 Plains Road East, Burlington Sampled by Michael Hu on April
2017
Sample Number: MM-4227
Figure 3
0.315
0.075
1.25
0.63
0.16
2.5
80
56
40
28
20
14
10
5
100
90
80
70
PERCENT FINER
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
GRAIN SIZE - mm.

% +3"
0.0 0.0 0.5 0.9 13.2 74.9 7.0 3.5

SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) Sand, trace silt, trace clay, trace gravel
9.5mm 100.0
4.75mm 99.5
2mm 98.6
0.850mm 96.8 Atterberg Limits
PL= LL= PI=
0.425mm 85.4
0.106mm 12.7 D90= 0.5297 D85= 0.4228 D60= 0.3268
0.075mm 10.5 D50= 0.2983 D30= 0.2305 D15= 0.1258
0.0496 mm. 8.4 D10= 0.0699 Cu= 4.67 Cc= 2.32
0.0352 mm. 7.7
Classification
0.0223 mm. 7.0 USCS= AASHTO=
0.0129 mm. 6.3
0.0092 mm. 5.6 Remarks
0.0065 mm. 4.9 Sampled by Michael Hu on April 2017
0.0032 mm. 4.2 F.M.=1.43
0.0014 mm. 2.8

Sample Number: MM-4226 Date: 21/04/2017


APPENDIX A
General Requirements for Engineered Fill
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ENGINEERED FILL
Compacted imported soil that meets specific engineering requirements and is free of organics and
debris and that has been continually monitored on a full-time basis by a qualified geotechnical
representative is classified as engineered fill. Engineered fill that meets these requirements and is
bearing on suitable native subsoil can be used for the support of foundations.
Imported soil used as engineered fill can be removed from other portions of a site or can be brought in
from other sites. In general, most of Ontario soils are too wet to achieve the 100% Standard Proctor
Maximum Dry Density (SPMDD) and will require drying and careful site management if they are to be
considered for engineered fill. Imported non-cohesive granular soil is preferred for all engineered fill.
For engineered fill, we recommend use of OPSS Granular ‘B’ sand and gravel fill material.
Adverse weather conditions such as rain make the placement of engineered fill to the required degree
of density difficult or impossible; engineered fill cannot be placed during freezing conditions, i.e.
normally not between December 15 and April 1 of each year.
The location of the foundations on the engineered fill pad is critical and certification by a qualified
surveyor that the foundations are within the stipulated boundaries is mandatory. Since layout stakes
are often damaged or removed during fill placement, offset stakes must be installed and maintained by
the surveyors during the course of fill placement so that the contractor and engineering staff are
continually aware of where the engineered fill limits lie. Excavations within the engineered fill pad must
be backfilled with the same conditions and quality control as the original pad.
To perform satisfactorily, engineered fill requires the cooperation of the designers, engineers,
contractors and all parties must be aware of the requirements. The minimum requirements are as
follows, however, the geotechnical report must be reviewed for specific information and requirements.
1. Prior to site work involving engineered fill, a site meeting to discuss all aspects must be
convened. The surveyor, contractor, design engineer and geotechnical engineer must attend
the meeting. At this meeting, the limits of the engineered fill will be defined. The contractor
must make known where all fill material will be obtained from and samples must be provided to
the geotechnical engineer for review, and approval before filling begins.
2. Detailed drawings indicating the lower boundaries as well as the upper boundaries of the
engineered fill must be available at the site meeting and be approved by the geotechnical
engineer.
3. The building footprint and base of the pad, including basements, garages, etc. must be defined
by offset stakes that remain in place until the footings and service connections are all
constructed. Confirmation that the footings are within the pad, service lines are in place, and
that the grade conforms to drawings, must be obtained by the owner in writing from the
surveyor and WSP Canada Inc. (WSP). Without this confirmation no responsibility for the
performance of the structure can be accepted by WSP. Survey drawing of the pre and post fill
location and elevations will also be required.
4. The area must be stripped of all existing pavement structure and fill materials. Subgrade must
be proof-rolled. Soft spots must be dug out. The stripped native subgrade must be examined
and approved by a WSP engineer prior to placement of fill.
i
5. The approved engineered fill material must be compacted to 100% Standard Proctor Maximum
Dry Density throughout. Engineered fill should not be placed during the winter months.
Engineered fill compacted to 100% SPMDD will settle under its own weight approximately 0.5%
of the fill height and the structural engineer must be aware of this settlement. In addition to the
settlement of the fill, additional settlement due to consolidation of the underlying soils from the
structural and fill loads will occur and should be evaluated prior to placing the fill.
6. Full-time geotechnical inspection by WSP during placement of engineered fill is required. Work
cannot commence or continue without the presence of the WSP representative.
7. The fill must be placed such that the specified geometry is achieved. Refer to the attached
sketches for minimum requirements. Take careful note that the projection of the compacted
pad beyond the footing at footing level is a minimum of 2 m. The base of the compacted pad
extends 2 m plus the depth of excavation beyond the edge of the footing.
8. A bearing capacity of 100 KPa at SLS (150 kPa at ULS) can be used provided that all conditions
outlined above are adhered to. A minimum footing width of 500 mm (20 inches) is suggested
and footings must be provided with nominal steel reinforcement.
9. All excavations must be done in accordance with the Occupational Health and Safety
Regulations of Ontario.
10. After completion of the engineered fill pad a second contractor may be selected to install
footings. The prepared footing bases must be evaluated by engineering staff from WSP prior to
footing concrete placements. All excavations must be backfilled under full time supervision by
WSP to the same degree as the engineered fill pad. Surface water cannot be allowed to pond in
excavations or to be trapped in clear stone backfill. Clear stone backfill can only be used with
the approval of WSP.
11. After completion of compaction, the surface of the engineered fill pad must be protected from
disturbance from traffic, rain and frost. During the course of fill placement, the engineered fill
must be smooth-graded, proof-rolled and sloped/crowned at the end of each day, prior to
weekends and any stoppage in work in order to promote rapid runoff of rainwater and to avoid
any ponding surface water. Any stockpiles of fill intended for use as engineered fill must also be
smooth-bladed to promote runoff and/or protected from excessive moisture take up.
12. If there is a delay in construction, the engineered fill pad must be inspected and accepted by the
geotechnical engineer. The location of the structure must be reconfirmed that it remains within
the pad.
13. The geometry of the engineered fill as illustrated in these General Requirements is general in
nature. Each project will have its own unique requirements. For example, if perimeter
sidewalks are to be constructed around the building, then the projection of the engineered fill
beyond the foundation wall may need to be greater.
14. These guidelines are to be read in conjunction with WSP report attached.
ii
iii

Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Mixed-Use Development 484 - 490 Plains Road East, Burlington, Ontario

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Mixed-Use Development 484 - 490 Plains Road East, Burlington, Ontario

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Mixed-Use Development 484 - 490 Plains Road East, Burlington, Ontario

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NATIONAL HOMES (PLAINS ROAD) LP

OCTOBER 25, 2017

WSP Canada Inc.

2 FIELD AND LABORATORY WORK .............................................. 1

3 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ...................................... 2

3.2 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS .......................................................................... 4

4 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................... 5

4.3 EARTH PRESSURES ........................................................................................... 8

4.4 FLOOR SLAB AND PERMANENT DRAINAGE .................................................. 8

4.5 EXCAVATIONS AND GROUNDWATER CONTROL ........................................... 8

4.6 TEMPORARY SHORING ...................................................................................... 9

4.7 EARTHQUAKE CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................. 10

4.8 ROAD AND PARKING LOT ................................................................................ 10

4.9 SITE SERVICING ................................................................................................ 11

5 GENERAL COMMENTS AND LIMITATIONS OF

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION WSP

2 FIELD AND LABORATORY WORK

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION WSP

3 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

3.1 SOIL CONDITIONS

Existing Pavement Structure

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION WSP

Silty Sand to Sandy Silt

Grain Size Distribution

Grain Size Distribution

Silty Clay Till

Grain Size Distribution

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION WSP

3.2 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS

Groundwater Levels Measured in Monitoring Wells

July 11, 2016 4.58 93.1

October 24, 2016 4.75 93.0

February 7, 2017 4.74 93.0

July 11, 2016 3.90 93.9

October 24, 2016 4.07 93.7

February 7, 2017 4.13 93.7

July 11, 2016 3.86 92.8

October 24, 2016 4.03 92.7

February 7, 2017 3.97 92.7

July 11, 2016 3.50 94.3

BH16-7 October 24, 2016 3.65 94.2 50 mm dia. monitoring well

December 10, 2016 3.75 94.1

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION WSP

February 7, 2017 3.72 94.1

BH17-9 May 25, 2017 4.06 94.0 50 mm dia. monitoring well

4.1 SITE PREPARATION, REGRADING, ENGINEERED FILLS

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION WSP

4.2.1 FOUNDATIONS FOR TOWNHOMES

Bearing Soils and Founding Levels of Footings

BH16-3 97.7 100 150 2.3 95.4 Silty Sand 4.6/93.1

BH16-5 97.5 100 150 3.6 93.9 Silty Sand -

BH16-6 96.7 100 150 3.1 93.6 Silty Sand 3.9/92.8

BH16-8 97.0 100 150 2.5 94.5 Silty Sand -

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION WSP

4.2.2 FOUNDATIONS FOR EIGHT-STOREY BUILDINGS

BH17-9 98.0 800 1200 11.0 87.0

BH17-10 97.8 800 1200 10.8 87.0

BH17-11 97.1 800 1200 10.1 87.0