Slope Stability

REPORT ON
SLOPE STABILITY INVESTIGATION

PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
2100 BRANT STREET
BURLINGTON, ONTARIO
Prepared for:
NATIONAL HOMES
Prepared By:
SIRATI & PARTNERS CONSULTANTS LIMITED
Project: SP17-187-10 750 Millway Avenue, Unit 8

May 4, 2017 Vaughan, Ontario, L4K 3T7
Tel: 905.669.4477
Fax: 905.669.4488
Project: SP17-187-10 Slope Stability Report
National Homes Proposed Residential Development
2100 Brant Street, Burlington, Ontario
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 ................................................................................. 3
4. SLOPE STABILITY ASSESSMENT 3

4.1 SLOPE CONDITIONS..................................................................................................... 3
4.2 TOE EROSION CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................... 4
4.3 SOIL PARAMETERS AND GROUNDWATER........................................................... 4
4.4 STABILITY OF EXISTING SLOPE ............................................................................. 5
4.5 LONG TERM STABLE TOP OF SLOPE ..................................................................... 5
4.6 GENERAL COMMENTS ON SLOPE STABILITY .................................................... 6
5. GENERAL COMMENTS ON REPORT 6
DRAWINGS/ENCLOSURES NO.
SLOPE PROFILES LOCATION PLAN 1
SLOPE PROFILES 2-5
SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSES 6-7
APPENDIX A: PHOTOGRAPHS OF SLOPE CONDITIONS

APPENDIX B: SPCL BOREHOLE LOGS AND LOCATION PLAN
APPENDIX C: LANDTEK BOREHOLE LOGS & LOCATION PLAN
APPENDIX D: LIMITATIONS OF REPORT
SIRATI & PARTNERS CONSULTANTS LIMITED i

MAY 4, 2017
Project: SP17-187-10 Slope Stability Study
1. INTRODUCTION
Sirati & Partners Consultants Limited (SPCL) was retained by National Homes to undertake a
geotechnical investigation for the proposed residential development located at 2100 Brant Street,
Burlington, Ontario.
A ravine slope towards Rambo Creek is located along the west property line. The purpose of this
geotechnical investigation was to determine the subsurface conditions at the borehole locations for
the proposed development and from the findings in the boreholes, carry out a detailed slope stability
investigation and make recommendations for the Long-term Stable Top of Slope (LTSTOS) as per
MNR Guidelines.
This report deals with slope stability study only. Geotechnical report for the proposed development
and environmental studies at the subject site are reported under separate covers.
This report has been prepared for National Homes and Halton Conservation. Third party use of this
report without Sirati & Partners Consultants Limited (SPCL) consent is prohibited. The limitation
conditions presented in Appendix D form an integral part of the report and they must be considered
in conjunction with this report.
2. FIELD AND LABORATORY WORK
SPCL drilled eight boreholes (BH1 to BH8) at the subject site as a part of the geotechnical
investigation for the proposed development. Boreholes were drilled to depths ranging from 2.5 to
12.8m below existing grade. Borehole logs and location plan of the SPCL boreholes are attached in
Appendix B of this report.
Boreholes were drilled with solid stem continuous flight auger equipment by a drilling sub-contractor
under the direction and supervision of SPCL personnel. Samples were retrieved at regular intervals
with a 50 mm O.D. split-barrel sampler driven with a hammer weighing 624 N and dropping 760 mm
in accordance with the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) method. The samples were logged in the
field and returned to the SPCL laboratory for detailed examination by the project engineer and for
laboratory testing.
As well as visual examination in the laboratory, all the soil samples were tested for moisture content.
Water level observations were made during drilling and in the open boreholes at the completion of
the drilling operations. Monitoring wells were installed in three boreholes (BH4, BH5 & BH8) for
the long-term (stabilized) groundwater level monitoring.
The elevations at the borehole locations were surveyed by the SPCL personnel using differential GPS
system.
SIRATI & PARTNERS CONSULTANTS LIMITED 1

MAY 4, 2017
Landtek Limited carried out a geotechnical investigation at the subject site in November 2015.
Landtek borehole logs and location plan are attached in Appendix C of this report.
The slope profiles (Section A-A to D-D) for slope stability analyses were derived from the
topographic drawing provided by the client.
3. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The site is approximately a rectangular shaped parcel of land located to the west of Brant Street, in
the City of Burlington. The Property is surrounded by residential and community use properties
located along Havendale Boulevard to the north, by Brant Street to the east, by residential
subdivision to the south and by the Rambo Creek Valley on the west.
The borehole location plan is shown on Drawing 1 in Appendix B. The subsurface conditions in the
boreholes are presented in the individual borehole logs in Appendix B (Encl. 2 to 9 inclusive). The
subsurface conditions in the boreholes are summarized in the following paragraphs.
3.1 SOIL CONDITIONS:
Topsoil/Fill Material (Weathered/Disturbed Native):
A surficial topsoil layer, ranging in thickness from 50 to 170 mm, was encountered at the borehole
locations. Fill material (possibly weathered/disturbed native soil) was encountered in all the
boreholes, extending to a depth of about 0.8m. Fill material generally consisted of soft to stiff clayey
silt, with inclusions of topsoil and rootlets.
Clayey Silt to Silty Clay Till:
Below the fill material or upper weathered/disturbed soil), native soil consisting of clayey silt to silty
clay till was encountered, extending to the maximum explored depths of the boreholes or shale
bedrock. Clayey silt to silty clay till was present in a very stiff to hard consistency, with measured
SPT ‘N’ values ranging from 16 to 47 blows per 300mm penetration. Occasional cobble/boulder and
sand seams were present within the cohesive till deposit.
A wet sandy silt layer was found in BH5 below a depth of 12.2m and extended to the maximum
explored depth of 12.8m.
Shale Bedrock:
Shale bedrock of Queenston Formation was encountered in Landtek boreholes BH2 to BH4 below a
depth of about 10.8m, corresponding to Elevations 145.9 to 151.0m. Shale bedrock was not
confirmed by bedrock coring.

MAY 4, 2017
3.2 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS
All boreholes were found dry and open during drilling or upon completion, except BH5 which was
found wet at the bottom. The stabilized groundwater levels observed in the monitoring wells on
March 15, 2017 were at depths ranging from 0.8 to 6.4 mbgs, corresponding to elevations ranging
from 153.8 m to 162.1 m, as listed on Table 1.
Table 1: Groundwater Levels Observed in Monitoring Wells

BH Date of Drilling Date of Depth of Elevation of
No. Observation Groundwater (m) Groundwater (m)
BH4 March 3, 2017 March 15, 2017 6.4 153.8
BH5 March 6, 2017 March 15, 2017 0.9 156.8
BH8 March 6, 2017 March 15, 2017 0.8 162.1
It should be noted that the groundwater levels can vary and are subject to seasonal fluctuations in
response to major weather events.
4. SLOPE STABILITY ASSESSMENT
The slope stability assessment in this report is based on subsurface conditions in the boreholes, the
observations during our site visits, and the slope profiles provided by the client. Stability analyses of
the slopes were carried out using the computer program SLIDE 6 with the Bishop’s Method of
analysis. The slope conditions and the results of slope stability analyses are presented as follows.
4.1 SLOPE CONDITIONS
A site visit was made by a senior geotechnical engineer of SPCL on May 3, 2017 to carry out the
visual assessment of the slope. The existing site and slope conditions, including general topography
of the slopes, vegetation cover, and any evidence of slope failure and erosion were examined during
the site visit. Photographs of the site taken during our site visits are shown in Appendix A of this
report. Based on our observations during the site visits, the slope conditions are summarized as
follows:
• The height of the subject slopes was about 4 to 8 m from the top of the slope to the toe of
slope. The steepness of the slopes generally ranged from 2.7 H: 1V to flatter than 3.5H: 1V.
• The slope was generally covered with mature trees and other understory vegetation. Trees
were generally standing straight. (See pictures in Appendix A). No slope slumping or tension
cracks were observed on the slope. No erosion features such as scour, rills or bare spots were
present at the time of our site visit.
• No water seepage was observed on the slope surface or at the toe of slope area.

MAY 4, 2017
• Rambo Creek is located in the toe of slope area, on the west side. The creek is generally 3 to
5m wide. The water flow direction was towards south. Active creek bank erosion was
observed during our site visit.
• There is a wide flood plain (more than 15m) between the water course and the toe of slope in
the southern part of the valley but in the northern part, water course is located at or near the
toe of slope.
Four (4) slope profiles (Cross Sections A-A to D-D, see Drawing 1 for the profile locations) were
derived from the topographic map provided by the client. Slope profiles at Sections A-A to D-D are
provided on Drawings 2 to 5.
4.2 TOE EROSION CONSIDERATIONS
According to the borehole information and our visual assessment, the soil at the toe of the slope
generally consisted of very stiff to hard clayey silt to silty clay till (Halton Till). Active creek bank
erosion was observed during our site visit. In accordance with the Provincial Guidelines entitled
“Understanding Natural Hazards” and considering the soil and creek conditions, it is our opinion that
a creek bank erosion allowance of 8.0 m can be used for the analyses of the long-term stable slope.
This value of erosion allowance will be used to determine the long term stable slope to be discussed
in the following.
In the northern half of the valley, the creek is located at or near the toe of slope. Hence, an erosion
allowance of 8m will be applied in this area to establish the long-term stable top of slope.
In the southern part of the valley, creek is located more that 15m away from the toe of slope.
Therefore, no erosion allowance is required in this area.
4.3 SOIL PARAMETERS
Based on the borehole information as described in Section 3 of this report, long-term soil parameters
used in the slope stability analyses are given on Table 2.
Table 2: Soil Parameters for Slope Stability Analyses

Soil Unit Long-term Strength
Soil Type
Weight
(See Section 3 for soil description) c' (kPa) Ø (degree)
(kN/m3)
Fill or Upper Weather/disturbed till 20.0 0 30
Clayey Silt to Silty Clay Till 21.5 8 30
Shale Bedrock 23.0 Infinite Strength
To take into consideration the vegetation and trees on the slopes and to prevent shallow surficial
failures in the analyses, a soil layer up to 0.3 m thick along the slope surface is assumed to have a
cohesion value of 2 kPa.

MAY 4, 2017
4.4 STABILITY OF EXISTING SLOPE
Four (4) slope profiles (Cross Sections A-A to D-D, see Drawing 1 for profile locations) were
derived from the topographic map provided by the client, as presented in Drawings 2 to 5.
Stability analysis of the existing slope at Section A-A (steepest section, 2.7H:1V) was carried out and
the results are presented on Drawing 6, using the soil parameters listed in Table 2 and considering
the soil profile in the nearby boreholes drilled by SPCL and Landtek.
The calculated factor of safety (FS) of the existing slope at Section A-A is 2.26, which exceeds the
generally acceptable value of 1.5 for long-term stability of slopes. The existing slope at Section A-A,
is considered stable in terms of long-term stability.
4.5 LONG-TERM STABLE SLOPE
To determine the steepness of the long-term stable slope at Cross Section A-A after applying the
erosion allowance of 8m, analysis of an imaginary slope of 2H:1V is carried out, as shown on
Drawing 7. The calculated factor of safety (FS) of the imaginary 2.0H: 1V slope on Drawing 7 is
1.75, which is greater than the minimum acceptable value of 1.5. The 2.0H: 1V slope shown on
Drawing 7 is considered stable in terms of long-term stability.
Based on the slope stability analyses results, the top of the existing slope/top of bank at 2H: 1V or
flatter inclination is considered to be the top of the long term stable slope.
The existing slopes at the site are generally flatter than 2.7H:1V inclination. With 8m erosion
allowance and 2H:1V slope inclination, the existing top of slopes is stable in terms of its long-term
stability.
In summary, the long term stable slope lines and stable top of slopes at Sections A-A to D-D are
shown on Drawings 2 to 5.
4.6 LONG TERM STABLE TOP OF SLOPE
Based on the analysis results, the points representing the long-term stable top of slope at the cross
Sections A-A to F-F are as follows.
• Point “S1” on Drawing 2 represents the long term stable top of slope at Section A-A
• Point “S2” on Drawing 3 represents the long term stable top of slope at Section B-B
• Point “S3” on Drawing 4 represents the long term stable crest of slope at Section C-C
• Point “S5” on Drawing 5 represents the long term stable crest of slope at Section D-D

MAY 4, 2017
Based on the long-term stable slopes at Sections A-A to D-D and our field observations, the
recommended Long-term Stable Top of Slope (LTSTOS) line (Line S0-S1-S2-S3-S4-S5-S6-S7) is
shown on Drawing 1. The Long-term Stable Top of Slope line must be reviewed by the Halton
Conservation.
4.7 GENERAL COMMENTS ON SLOPE STABILITY
Additional comments related to the slope stability at the site are as follows:
• In order to prevent soil erosion at the slope surface, the vegetation and trees on the existing
slopes must be preserved.
• Surface water must be directed away from the slope or carried down the slope in suitable
conduits
• Snow must not be piled near the top of the slope.
• Additional fill cannot be placed on the existing slope surfaces or near the top of the slope.
• It should be noted that for the proposed development, Halton Conservation will require
additional setback from the long term stable top of slope line.
5. GENERAL COMMENTS ON REPORT
Sirati & Partners Consultants Limited (SPCL) should be retained for a general review of the final
design and specifications to verify that this report has been properly interpreted and implemented. If
not accorded the privilege of making this review, Sirati & Partners will assume no responsibility for
interpretation of the recommendations in the report.
The comments given in this report are intended only for the guidance of design engineers. The
number of boreholes required to determine the localized underground conditions between boreholes
affecting construction costs, techniques, sequencing, equipment, scheduling, etc., would be much
greater than has been carried out for design purposes. Contractors bidding on or undertaking the
works should, in this light, decide on their own investigations, as well as their own interpretations of
the factual borehole results, so that they may draw their own conclusions as to how the subsurface
conditions may affect them.
The limitation conditions presented in Appendix D form an integral part of the report and they must
be considered in conjunction with this report.

MAY 4, 2017
Drawings

MAY 4, 2017
EXISTING TOP OF BANK/LONG TERM
STABLE TOP OF SLOPE (LTSTOS) LINE S6 S7
S5
S1
S0
S3
S4
S2
Client: National Homes Project No.: SP17-187-10 Drawing No.: 1
Drawn: YL Approved: AS Title: Profile Location Plan
S0-S1-S2-S3-S4-S5-S6-S7 Date: April 2017 Scale: 0.63 Location: 2100 Brant Street, Burlington, Ontario
Long-term Stable Top of Slope (LTSTOS) Line
Original 750 Millway Avenue, Unit-8,
Letter Rev: N/A Sirati & Partners Consultants Ltd.
Size: Vaughan, ON L4K 0M7 Geotechnical & Environmental Services
Engineering Solutions
Phone#905-669-4477, Fax#905-669-4488
S1
2 Section A-A Site Plan

2 1:500
170.00
163.50
163.50
165.00 S1
Existing Slope
2.72H:1V
157.75
160.00 Creek/Water
155.50
Slope = 2H:1V
155.00
e=8m
DATUM 150.00
9.50
14.89
17.58
12.20
25.12
27.14
36.22
0.00
20.27
22.97
29.14
32.19
33.79
3.88
1 Section A-A Profile

2 1:500
Drawn: YL Approved: AS Title: Slope Profile at Section A-A
Date: April 2017 Scale: 1:500 Location: 2100 Brant Street, Burlington, Ontario

Phone#905-669-4477, Fax#905-669-4488
S2
2 Section B-B Site Plan

3 1:500
170.00
165.00
161.75
161.75
S2
Existing Slope
160.00 3.85H:1V
Creek/Water
155.25
155.00
154.00
155.00 Slope = 2H:1V
e=8m
DATUM 150.00
14.67
18.57
34.02
22.54
26.41
30.22
37.82
39.72
42.27
44.04
45.83
0.00
1 Section B-B Profile

3 1:500
Drawn: YL Approved: AS Title: Slope Profile at Section B-B

Phone#905-669-4477, Fax#905-669-4488
S3
2 Section C-C Site Plan

4 1:500
158.25
158.25
160.00 Existing Slope

S3 3.37H:1V
155.00
Existing Slope
Water
153.75
22.22H:1V
152.75
155.00
152.50
DATUM 150.00
12.77
15.18
17.68
51.49
54.56
56.24
20.22
23.71
27.99
34.26
59.46
40.52
46.79
0.00
1 Section C-C Profile

4 1:500
Drawn: YL Approved: AS Title: Slope Profile at Section C-C

Letter Sirati & Partners Consultants Ltd.
Size: Rev: N/A Vaughan, ON L4K 0M7 Geotechnical & Environmental Services
Phone#905-669-4477, Fax#905-669-4488
S5
1 Section D-D Site Plan

5 1:500
160.00
156.75
156.75
156.50
Existing Slope
S5 3.21H:1V
Creek
153.50
155.00 Existing Slope
152.25
151.50
28.96H:1V
DATUM 150.00
11.49
16.79
19.09
23.76
21.43
66.84
0.00
26.43
45.56
62.63
32.16
38.89
52.22
2 Section D-D Profile
5 1:500
Drawn: YL Approved: AS Title: Slope Profile at Section D-D

Phone#905-669-4477, Fax#905-669-4488
Safety Factor
0.00 Unit Weight Cohesion Phi 2.26
0.25 Material Name Color Strength Type
(kN/m3) (kPa) (deg)
180
0.50
0.75 Topsoil 16 Mohr-Coulomb 2 0
1.00
1.25 Fill/Weathered Disturbed Soil 20 Mohr-Coulomb 0 30
1.50
1.75 Clayey Silt to Silty Clay Till 21.5 Mohr-Coulomb 8 30
175
2.00
2.25
Shale Bedrock 23 Inﬁnite strength
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
170
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
165
5.25
5.50
W Existing Slope
5.75
6.00+
160
Creek
W
2H
:1V
S lo
155
pe
(Lo
ngt
erm e=8m
Sta
b le S
lop
e)
150
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Project
SP17-187-10 Slope Stability Study - 2100 Brant Street, Burlington, ON
Analysis Description
Existing Slope at Section A-A
Drawn By Scale Company
AS 1:220 SPCL
Date File Name
SLIDEINTERPRET 7.023
2017-05-04, 9:26:04 AM Drawing 6.slim
Safety Factor
0.00 Unit Weight Cohesion Phi
0.25 Material Name Color Strength Type
(kN/m3) (kPa) (deg)
180
0.50
0.75 Topsoil 16 Mohr-Coulomb 2 0
1.00
1.25 Fill/Weathered Disturbed Soil 20 Mohr-Coulomb 0 30
1.50
1.75 Clayey Silt to Silty Clay Till 21.5 Mohr-Coulomb 8 30
175
2.00
2.25 Shale Bedrock 23 Inﬁnite strength
2.50
2.75
3.00
1.75
3.25
3.50
170
3.75
4.00
4.25 Existing Top of Slope/Longterm Stable Top of Slope (S1)
4.50
4.75
5.00 Existing Slope
165
5.25
5.50
5.75
W
6.00+
2H
160
:1 V
Slo
pe
Creek
W
155
e=8m
150
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Project
SP17-187-10 Slope Stability Study - 2100 Brant Street, Burlington, ON
Analysis Description
Longterm Stable Slope (2H:1V) at Section A-A
Drawn By Scale Company
AS 1:220 SPCL
Date File Name
SLIDEINTERPRET 7.023
2017-05-04, 9:26:04 AM Drawing 7.slim
APPENDIX A: Photographs of Site/Slope

MAY 4, 2017
Photograph A1: Top of Slope Area (Looking South from Section A-A)
Photograph A2: Slope/Vegetation Conditions at Section A-A (Looking West)

MAY 4, 2017
Photograph A3: General Slope/Vegetation Conditions (Looking South from Section A-A)
Photograph A4: Slope/Vegetation Conditions at Section A-A (Looking West)

MAY 4, 2017
Photograph A5: Creek Conditions Near North Project Limit (Looking Northwest)
Photograph A6: Active Erosion of Creek Banks Between Sections A-A & B-B (Looking Southwest)

MAY 4, 2017
Photograph A7: Creek Conditions Near Section B-B (Looking Southwest)
Photograph A8: Slope/Vegetation Conditions Near Section B-B (Looking East)

MAY 4, 2017
Photograph A9: Flood Plain Conditions between Toe of Slope & Creek, Section C-C/D-D
Photograph A10: Slope/Vegetation Conditions Between Section C-C & D-D (Looking East)

MAY 4, 2017
Appendix B: Logs & Location Plan of SPCL Boreholes

MAY 4, 2017
.
NOTES:
1. The boundaries and soil types have been

established only at borehole locations.
Between and beyond boreholes they
are assumed and may be subject to
considerable error.
2. Soil samples will be retained in storage
for 3 months and then destroyed unless
the client advises an extended time Project No: SP17-187-10 Drawing No: 1
period is required. Client: National Homes
3. Topsoil / granular quantities should not Title: Borehole Location Plan
be established from the information
provided at the borehole locations. Project: Proposed Residential Development
Drawn: NS Approved: AS
4. Borehole elevations should not be used
to design building(s) or floor slab(s) or
parking lot(s) grades. Date: 29-Mar-17 Scale: N.T.S
5. This drawing forms part of the report
Original
(project number as referenced) and Tabloid Rev: N/A
Size:
should only be used in conjunction with
LOG OF BOREHOLE BH1 1 OF 1
PROJECT: Proposed Residential Development DRILLING DATA

CLIENT: National Homes Method: Solid Stem Augers
PROJECT LOCATION: 2100 Brant Street, Burlington, ON. Diameter: 150mm REF. NO.: SP17-187-10
DATUM: Geodetic Date: Mar/03/2017 ENCL NO.: 2
BH LOCATION: See Drawing 1
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
156.2 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
0.0 FILL: clayey silt, trace sand, brown,
1 SS 6
156
moist, firm
155.4
1 0.8 CLAYEY SILT TILL: some sand,
trace gravel, occasional 2 SS 36
155
cobble/boulder, brown, moist, hard
3 SS 39
2
154
153.7
2.5 END OF BOREHOLE
Notes:
1) Borehole dry and open upon
completion.
SPCL SOIL LOG SP17-187-10 -2100 BRANT STREET.GPJ SPCL.GDT 3/29/17
GRAPH 3, 3 : Numbers refer =3%

GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS Strain at Failure
NOTES to Sensitivity
1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement

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
157.8 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
0.0 FILL: clayey silt, trace sand, brown,
moist, soft 1 SS 3
157.0
157
1 0.8 SILTY CLAY TILL: some sand,
trace gravel, brown, moist, very stiff 2 SS 25
to hard
3 SS 36 156
2
155.3
2.5 END OF BOREHOLE
Notes:
completion.

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement

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
159.1 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
0.0
159.0
0.1 TOPSOIL: 70mm 159
FILL: clayey silt, trace topsoil, trace 1 SS 11
sand, brown, moist, stiff
158.3
trace gravel, brown, moist, hard 2 SS 31 158
3 SS 33
2
157
156.6
2.5 END OF BOREHOLE
Notes:
completion.

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement

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
160.1 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
0.0
160.1
0.1 TOPSOIL: 50mm 160
rootlets, trace sand, brown, moist,
159.3 soft
1 0.8 CLAYEY SILT TO SILTY CLAY
TILL: some sand, trace gravel,
2 SS 26 159
brown, moist, very stiff to hard
3 SS 32
2
158
4 SS 35
3
157
5 SS 34
4
156
5 6 SS 18
155
6
154
7 SS 16 W. L. 153.8 m
Mar 15, 2017
7
153
8 8 SS 17
151.9 152
8.2 END OF BOREHOLE
Notes:
1) Monitoring well installed in the
borehole upon completion.
2) Water level in monitoring well at
6.4m on Mar 15, 2017.

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement

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
157.6 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
0.0
157.5
0.1 TOPSOIL: 70mm
rootlets, trace sand, brown, moist, 157
156.8 firm
1 0.8 CLAYEY SILT TO SILTY CLAY W. L. 156.8 m
2 SS 35 Mar 15, 2017
TILL: some sand, trace gravel,
occational cobble/boulder, brown,
moist, very stiff to hard 156
3 SS 36
2
4 SS 34 155
3
5 SS 47
154
4
153
5 6 SS 34
152
6
7 SS 29
151
7
150
8 8 SS 23
149
9
grey below 9.1m

9 SS 20
148
10
147
11
10 SS 30
146
12
145.4
12.2 SANDY SILT: some clay, grey, 50/
moist, 11 SS
144.8 120mm 145
12.8 END OF BOREHOLE
Notes:
0.9m on Mar 15, 2017.

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement

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
156.7 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
0.0
156.6 TOPSOIL: 100mm
0.1 1 SS 4
FILL: clayey silt, trace topsoil, trace
sand, brown, moist, firm
155.9 156
to hard
3 SS 41
155
2
154.2
2.5 END OF BOREHOLE
Notes:
completion.

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement

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
159.5 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
0.0
0.2 FILL: clayey silt, trace topsoil, trace 1 SS 7
sand, brown, moist, firm 159
158.7
to hard
158
3 SS 35
2
157.0
157
2.5 END OF BOREHOLE
Notes:
completion.

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement

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
162.9 20 40 60 80 100 10 20 30 GR SA SI CL
0.0
0.2 FILL: clayey silt, trace topsoil, trace 1 SS 7
sand, brown, moist, firm
162.1
1 0.8 CLAYEY SILT TO SILTY CLAY W.162
L. 162.1 m
TILL: trace sand, trace gravel, 2 SS 30 Mar 15, 2017
brown, moist, very stiff to hard
3 SS 40
2 161
4 SS 39
3 160
5 SS 27
4 159
5 6 SS 45 158
6 157
7 SS 28
156.2
6.7 Straight Auger to 12.2m without soil
7 156
sampling to install monitoring well
8 155
9 154
10 153
11 152
12 151
150.7
12.2 END OF BOREHOLE
Notes:
0.8m on Mar 15, 2017.

1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Measurement
Appendix C: Logs & Location Plan of Landtek Limited Boreholes

MAY 4, 2017
Appendix D: Limitation and Use of the Report
This report is intended solely for the Client named. The material in it reflects our best judgment in light of the
information available to Sirati & Partners Consultants Limited (SPCL) at the time of preparation. Unless
otherwise agreed in writing by SPCL, 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 borehole
locations. The information contained herein in no way reflects on the environment aspects of the project, unless
otherwise stated. Subsurface and groundwater conditions between and beyond the boreholes may differ from
those encountered at the borehole locations, and conditions may become apparent during construction, which
could not be detected or anticipated at the time of the site investigation. The benchmark and elevations used in
this report are primarily to establish relative elevation differences between the borehole locations and should not
be used for other purposes, such as grading, excavating, planning, development, etc. Professional judgement was
exercised in gathering and analyzing data and formulation of recommendations using current industry guidelines
and standards. Similar to all professional persons rendering advice, SPCL cannot act as absolute insurer of the
conclusion we have reached. No additional warranty or representation, expressed or implied, is included or
intended in this report other than stated herein the report.
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.
The comments made in this report on potential construction problems and possible methods are intended only
for the guidance of the designer. The number of boreholes may not be sufficient to determine all the factors that
may affect construction methods and costs. For example, the thickness of surficial topsoil or fill layers may
vary markedly and unpredictably. 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. This work has been undertaken in
accordance with normally accepted geotechnical engineering practices.
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. SPCL accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third
party as a result of decisions made or actions based on this report.
We accept no responsibility for any decisions made or actions taken as a result of this report unless we are
specifically advised of and participate in such action, in which case our responsibility will be as agreed to at that
time. Any user of this report specifically denies any right to claims against the Consultant, Sub-Consultants,
their officers, agents and employees in excess of the fee paid for professional services.
SPCL engagement hereunder is subject to and condition upon, that SPCL not being required by the Client, or
any other third party to provide evidence or testimony in any legal proceedings pertaining to this finding of this
report, or providing litigations support services which may arise to be required in respect of the work produced
herein by SPCL. It is prohibited to publish, release or disclose to any third party the report produced by SPCL
pursuant to this engagement and such report is produced solely for the Client own internal purposes and which
shall remain the confidential proprietary property of SPCL for use by the Client, within the context of the work
agreement. The Client will and does hereby remise and forever absolutely release SPCL, its directors, officers,
agents and shareholders of and from any and all claims, obligations, liabilities, expenses, costs, charges or other
demands or requirements of any nature pertaining to the report produced by SPCL hereunder. The Client will
not commence any claims against any Person who may make a claim against SPCL in respect of work produced
under this engagement.

MAY 4, 2017

Slope Stability

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Slope Stability

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Slope Stability

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

REPORT ON

SLOPE STABILITY INVESTIGATION

SIRATI & PARTNERS CONSULTANTS LIMITED

Project: SP17-187-10 750 Millway Avenue, Unit 8

2. FIELD AND LABORATORY WORK 1

3. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2

4. SLOPE STABILITY ASSESSMENT 3

5. GENERAL COMMENTS ON REPORT 6

APPENDIX A: PHOTOGRAPHS OF SLOPE CONDITIONS

SIRATI & PARTNERS CONSULTANTS LIMITED i

2. FIELD AND LABORATORY WORK

SIRATI & PARTNERS CONSULTANTS LIMITED 1

3. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

3.1 SOIL CONDITIONS:

Topsoil/Fill Material (Weathered/Disturbed Native):

Clayey Silt to Silty Clay Till:

SIRATI & PARTNERS CONSULTANTS LIMITED 2

Table 1: Groundwater Levels Observed in Monitoring Wells

4. SLOPE STABILITY ASSESSMENT

4.1 SLOPE CONDITIONS

SIRATI & PARTNERS CONSULTANTS LIMITED 3

4.2 TOE EROSION CONSIDERATIONS

4.3 SOIL PARAMETERS

Table 2: Soil Parameters for Slope Stability Analyses

SIRATI & PARTNERS CONSULTANTS LIMITED 4

4.5 LONG-TERM STABLE SLOPE

4.6 LONG TERM STABLE TOP OF SLOPE

SIRATI & PARTNERS CONSULTANTS LIMITED 5

4.7 GENERAL COMMENTS ON SLOPE STABILITY

• Snow must not be piled near the top of the slope.

5. GENERAL COMMENTS ON REPORT

SIRATI & PARTNERS CONSULTANTS LIMITED 6

SIRATI & PARTNERS CONSULTANTS LIMITED 1

Client: National Homes Project No.: SP17-187-10 Drawing No.: 1

Drawn: YL Approved: AS Title: Profile Location Plan

2 Section A-A Site Plan

1 Section A-A Profile

Client: National Homes Project No.: SP17-187-10 Drawing No.: 2

Drawn: YL Approved: AS Title: Slope Profile at Section A-A

Original 750 Millway Avenue, Unit-8,

2 Section B-B Site Plan

1 Section B-B Profile

Client: National Homes Project No.: SP17-187-10 Drawing No.: 3

Drawn: YL Approved: AS Title: Slope Profile at Section B-B

Original 750 Millway Avenue, Unit-8,

2 Section C-C Site Plan

160.00 Existing Slope

1 Section C-C Profile

Client: National Homes Project No.: SP17-187-10 Drawing No.: 4

Drawn: YL Approved: AS Title: Slope Profile at Section C-C

Original 750 Millway Avenue, Unit-8,

1 Section D-D Site Plan

155.00 Existing Slope

Client: National Homes Project No.: SP17-187-10 Drawing No.: 5

Drawn: YL Approved: AS Title: Slope Profile at Section D-D

Original 750 Millway Avenue, Unit-8,

APPENDIX A: Photographs of Site/Slope

SIRATI & PARTNERS CONSULTANTS LIMITED 2

Photograph A2: Slope/Vegetation Conditions at Section A-A (Looking West)