patersongroup memorandum

Transcription

1 patersongroup memorandum consulting engineers to: David Schaeffer Engineering Limited - Ms. Jennifer Ailey - jailey@dsel.ca to: Richcraft Homes - Mr. Phil Castro - PhilC@Richcraft.com re: Limit of Hazard Lands - Proposed Channel Proposed Residential Development - Trails Edge West Renaud Road - Ottawa date: December 17, 2014 file: from: PG0861-MEMO.22R David Gilbert Further to your request, Paterson Group (Paterson) conducted a review of the proposed modifications to the existing Mud Creek to determine the limit of hazard lands, including a slope stability analysis of the existing slope along the proposed watercourse within the aforementioned property. Limit of Hazard Lands - Existing Creek Paterson Group (Paterson) completed a slope stability analysis on the existing conditions of Mud Creek entitled, Limit of Hazard Lands, PG0861-LET.02 dated March 19, At that time, two (2) slope cross-sections were studied as the worst case scenarios along the existing section of Mud Creek. Based on our review of the existing conditions, a 1 m toe erosion was deemed appropriate for the existing slope based on the nature of the soils, the observed erosion areas and the current watercourse width and location. The limit of hazard lands for the existing slope consisted of a toe erosion allowance of 1 m and an access allowance of 6 m was required from the top of the existing stable slope (ie.- slope with factor of safety greater than 1.5). Limit of Hazard Lands - Proposed Channel Paterson reviewed the drawings prepared by David Schaeffer Engineering Limited (DSEL) for the Mud Creek channel dated April 1, 2014 and the drawing entitled Drawing 1 - Mud Creek Channel - Option 1, between Belcourt and Compass dated December 11, 2014.

2 Ms. Jennifer Ailey Page 2 File: PG0861-MEMO.22R Slope Stability Analysis Five (5) slope cross-sections were studied as the worst case scenario along the proposed channel. The location of the cross sections analyzed are presented on Drawings PG and 16 - Limit of Hazard Lands attached to the present memo. The analysis of the stability of the slope was carried out using SLIDE, a computer program which permits a two-dimensional slope stability analysis using several methods including the Bishop s method, which is a widely used and accepted analysis method. The program calculates a factor of safety, which represents the ratio of the forces resisting failure to those favoring failure. Theoretically, a factor of safety of 1.0 represents a condition where the slope is stable. However, due to intrinsic limitations of the calculation methods and the variability of the subsoil and groundwater conditions, a factor of safety greater than one is usually required to ascertain than the risks of failure are acceptable. A minimum factor of safety of 1.5 is generally recommended for conditions where the failure of the slope would endanger permanent structures. Subsoil conditions at the cross-sections were inferred based on the subsoil conditions encountered at the nearby test hole locations and general knowledge of the area s geology. Geotechnical investigations recently completed by Paterson for the subject site indicate the subsoil profile generally consists of topsoil followed by a 1 to 1.5 m thick silty sand layer underlain by a deep, sensitive silty clay deposit. The cross section analyses considered worst case scenario by providing a perched groundwater condition (geodetic elevation of m) within the overlying loose silty sand and a fully saturated silty clay deposit. The results for the static slope conditions of the proposed channel is shown in Figure 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11 and 13 attached to the present memo. The factor of safety was found to be greater than 1.5 at the section analysed. Seismic Loading Analysis An analysis considering seismic loading was also completed. A horizontal seismic acceleration, K h, of 0.16G was considered for the analyzed sections. A factor of safety of 1.1 is considered to be satisfactory for stability analyses including seismic loading. The overlying well graded silty fine sand material is not susceptible to liquefaction under seismic loading. The results of the analyses including seismic loading is shown in Figure 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 14 for the proposed channel. The results indicate that the factors of safety are greater than 1.1. Based on these results, the slopes are considered to be stable under seismic loading. patersongroup

3 Ms. Jennifer Ailey Page 3 File: PG0861-MEMO.22R Limit of Hazard Lands The open channel configuration between South Forebay Pond and Belcourt Boulevard was reviewed by Paterson to determine the limit of hazard lands line. Due to the channel configuration, a toe erosion allowance is not required for the subject channel alignment. Also, a 6 m erosion access allowance is not required due to the accessibility provided along the subject channel alignment, which allow for construction equipment access if repairs along the channel are required. Therefore, the limit of hazard lands line has been determined to run along the top of slope, as indicated in Drawings PG and Limit of Hazard Lands attached. A segmental retaining wall is planned for the north side of channel to accommodate a walking path. The segmental retaining wall covers an approximate 120 m length located to the east of Compass Street. A Stone Strong retaining wall system is recommended due to the site constraints along the north side of the channel alignment and wall height required. Geotechnical parameters for wall design are provided in the following section. Also, a culvert crossing is to be located approximately 100 m east of Compass Street. Based on our review, the proposed channel configurations are acceptable from a geotechnical perspective. It should be noted that the proposed channel side slopes are considered to be stable with a global stability factor of safety of greater than 1.5 under long term conditions and a factor of safety greater than 1.1 under seismic loading conditions. It is understood that where the side slopes are steeper than a 3H:1V profile, a slope improvement system, such as Geoweb or equivalent product, will be used to increase the overall stability of the slope and limit surficial erosion activities. The geoweb system is designed to improve the long-term stability of shallow slopes. Specifications and details of the various Geoweb systems are attached to the present report. It is anticipated that a GW30V or equivalent product with a series of ATRA anchors will provide sufficient support for the proposed slope profiles less than 3H:1V designed for the subject slope. It is expected that the slope surface will be topped with a topsoil mix. It is recommended that the vegetation finish selected by the landscape architect consist of a low maintenance planting due to the shallow finished slope. Where required, the geoweb product can be cut away to allow sufficient room for plantings where established bushes/trees have been called for in the landscaping design. Retaining Wall Design The finished grading and location of the proposed retaining walls and wing walls as provided by DSEL are presented in Drawing PG Limit of Hazard Lands attached. The subject retaining walls vary approximately between 1.0 to 4.3 m in height. A hand rail is required along the top of the stone strong walls. To accommodate the required hand rail, a fence post hole sleeve within the top of the stone strong wall should be designed. patersongroup

4 Ms. Jennifer Ailey Page 4 File: PG0861-MEMO.22R A global stability of the retaining wall structure was completed as part of our slope stability review. Based on our analysis, the overall global stability of the retaining wall structure is considered stable. However, a detailed retaining wall design will be completed by a qualified engineer authorized by the wall installer at the time of construction. It is anticipated that a free draining, non-frost susceptible granular backfill will be required for backfilling purposes behind the retaining wall. Also, based on a preliminary analysis, a layer of lightweight fill may be required behind the retaining wall to compensate for the significant increase in soil load over the sensitive silty clay deposit. The lightweight fill will help reduce differential settlement, which could occur due to the dead load associated with the retaining wall structure. Geotechnical field review should be completed at the time of excavation, prior to placing the granular bedding layer, to assess the bearing medium under the proposed wall. The bearing medium at the subgrade level for the retaining wall should consist of an undisturbed, firm silty clay. The shear strength parameters, c and ö, can be taken as 0 10 kpa and 33, respectively, for design purposes. A bearing resistance at serviceability limit states, or allowable bearing pressure, of 50 kpa, and/or a factored bearing resistance at ULS of 100 kpa, is required. It is recommended that the geotechnical consultant conduct field reviews of the subgrade for the base of the wall, and testing or visual observations of the compaction methods for the base and backfill. It is further recommended that all bedding and backfill materials be placed under dry conditions and in above freezing temperatures and approved by the geotechnical consultant at the time of construction. Precautions should be taken to ensure that the bedding material does not freeze before placement of the retaining wall blocks, which could lead to detrimental movement within the retaining wall, once the frost leaves the bedding material. Gravel Covered Pathway It is recommended that the gravel covered pathway consist of a minimum 300 mm thick layer of Granular A crushed stone compacted to a minimum 95% of its SPMDD. patersongroup

5 Ms. Jennifer Ailey Page 5 File: PG0861-MEMO.22R We trust that this information satisfies your requirements. Sincerely, Paterson Group Inc. Richard Groniger, C. Tech. David J. Gilbert, P.Eng. Attachments: Soil Profile and Test Data Sheets Symbols and Terms Figures 1 to 14 - Slope Stability Sections Drawing PG Limit of Hazard Lands Drawing PG Limit of Hazard Lands Paterson Group Inc. Head Office and Laboratory Northern Office and Laboratory St. Lawrence Office 154 Colonnade Road South 63 Gibson Street 993 Princess Street - Suite 216 Ottawa - Ontario - K2E 7J5 North Bay - Ontario - P1B 8Z4 Kingston - Ontario - K7L 1H3 Tel: (613) Fax: (613) Tel: (705) Fax: (705) Tel: (613)

6 patersongroup 154 Colonnade Road South, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 7J5 Consulting Engineers SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Trailsedge-Phase 2-Towns - Renaud Road Ottawa, Ontario DATUM Ground surface at borehole locations provided by Stantec Geomatics Ltd. FILE NO. REMARKS HOLE NO. BORINGS BY CME 55 Power Auger DATE September 17, 2012 PG2772 BH 2 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE STRATA PLOT TYPE AU SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY 1 N VALUE or RQD DEPTH 0 ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction Compact, brown SILTY FINE SAND SS SS TW Soft to firm, grey SILTY CLAY some sand seams to 4.3m depth TW Dynamic Cone Penetration Test commenced at 9.45m depth. Cone pushed to 29.8m depth. Practical cone refusal at 29.95m depth m-Oct. 5, 2012) Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

7 patersongroup 154 Colonnade Road South, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 7J5 Consulting Engineers SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Trailsedge-Phase 2-Towns - Renaud Road Ottawa, Ontario DATUM Ground surface at borehole locations provided by Stantec Geomatics Ltd. FILE NO. REMARKS HOLE NO. BORINGS BY CME 55 Power Auger DATE September 17, 2012 PG2772 BH 3 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE Loose, brown SILTY FINE SAND 0.69 STRATA PLOT TYPE SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH 0 ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction Stiff to firm, red-brown SILTY CLAY 1.45 SS TW Firm, grey SILTY CLAY TW End of Borehole m-Oct. 5, 2012) Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

8 patersongroup 154 Colonnade Road South, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 7J5 Consulting Engineers SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Prop. Residential Development-Trails Edge Phase 2 Ottawa, Ontario DATUM Ground surface provided by Annis, O'Sullivan, Vollebekk Limited. FILE NO. REMARKS HOLE NO. BORINGS BY CME 55 Power Auger DATE 16 August 2011 PG2392 BH 3 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE Very loose, brown SILTY SAND Stiff to firm, brown SILTY CLAY STRATA PLOT TYPE AU SS SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction TW TW Firm, grey SILTY CLAY Dynamic Cone Penetration Test 9.60m depth. Cone pushed to 26.2m depth Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

9 patersongroup 154 Colonnade Road South, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 7J5 Consulting Engineers SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Prop. Residential Development-Trails Edge Phase 2 Ottawa, Ontario DATUM Ground surface provided by Annis, O'Sullivan, Vollebekk Limited. FILE NO. REMARKS HOLE NO. BORINGS BY CME 55 Power Auger DATE 16 August 2011 PG2392 BH 3 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE STRATA PLOT TYPE SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH 15 ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction End of Borehole Practical cone 27.56m depth 1.6m depth based on field observations) Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

10 patersongroup 154 Colonnade Road South, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 7J5 Consulting Engineers SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Prop. Residential Development-Trails Edge Phase 2 Ottawa, Ontario DATUM Ground surface provided by Annis, O'Sullivan, Vollebekk Limited. FILE NO. REMARKS HOLE NO. BORINGS BY CME 55 Power Auger DATE 14 February 2012 PG2392 BH 4 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE TOPSOIL Brown SILTY SAND STRATA PLOT TYPE AU SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY 1 N VALUE or RQD DEPTH 0 ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction Very stiff to stiff, brown SILTY CLAY SS TW Firm, grey SILTY CLAY TW Dynamic Cone Penetration Test 8.38m depth. Cone pushed to 22.5m depth Inferred SILTY CLAY Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

11 patersongroup 154 Colonnade Road South, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 7J5 Consulting Engineers Geotechnical Investigation Prop. Residential Development-Trails Edge Phase 2 Ottawa, Ontario DATUM Ground surface provided by Annis, O'Sullivan, Vollebekk Limited. FILE NO. REMARKS BORINGS BY SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA HOLE NO. CME 55 Power Auger DATE 14 February 2012 PG2392 BH 4 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE STRATA PLOT TYPE SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH 15 ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction End of Borehole Practical DCPT 22.50m depth 2.2m depth based on field observations) Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

12 patersongroup 154 Colonnade Road South, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 7J5 Consulting Engineers SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Prop. Residential Development-Trails Edge Phase 2 Ottawa, Ontario DATUM Ground surface provided by Annis, O'Sullivan, Vollebekk Limited. FILE NO. REMARKS HOLE NO. BORINGS BY CME 55 Power Auger DATE 10 February 2012 PG2392 BH 5 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE TOPSOIL 0.20 STRATA PLOT TYPE AU AU SAMPLE NUMBER 1 2 % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH 0 ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction Very stiff to stiff, brown SILTY CLAY SS TW Firm, grey SILTY CLAY TW Dynamic Cone Penetration Test 9.60m depth. Cone pushed to 21.6m depth Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

13 patersongroup 154 Colonnade Road South, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 7J5 Consulting Engineers SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Prop. Residential Development-Trails Edge Phase 2 Ottawa, Ontario DATUM Ground surface provided by Annis, O'Sullivan, Vollebekk Limited. FILE NO. REMARKS HOLE NO. BORINGS BY CME 55 Power Auger DATE 10 February 2012 PG2392 BH 5 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE STRATA PLOT TYPE SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH 15 ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction End of Borehole Practical DCPT 22.78m depth. 2.2m depth based on field observations) Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

14 patersongroup 28 Concourse Gate, Unit 1, Ottawa, ON K2E 7T7 DATUM REMARKS BORINGS BY CME 850 Power Auger Consulting Engineers SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development-Renaud Road Ottawa, Ontario FILE NO. HOLE NO. DATE 12 May 09 PG1605 BH 2-09 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE TOPSOIL 0.10 STRATA PLOT TYPE AU SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY 1 N VALUE or RQD DEPTH 0 ELEV. Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction Loose, brown to red-brown SILTY SAND SS SS Firm, brown SILTY CLAY - grey by 2.8m depth 3 4 TW TW End of Borehole 9.60 (Based on soil sample observations, 2.3m depth) Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

15 patersongroup 28 Concourse Gate, Unit 1, Ottawa, ON K2E 7T7 DATUM REMARKS BORINGS BY Ground surface elevations provided by Stantec Geomatics Ltd. CME 55 Power Auger Consulting Engineers DATE SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Residential Development - Eden Park East Portion Ottawa, Ontario 5 August 2008 FILE NO. HOLE NO. PG0861 BH 2-08 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE TOPSOIL Brown SILTY SAND, trace clay STRATA PLOT SAMPLE TYPE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD AU 1 SS DEPTH 0 1 ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction Very stiff to stiff, brown SILTY CLAY, trace sand SS stiff to firm and grey by 1.6m depth TW End of Borehole m-Aug. 28/08) Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

16 patersongroup 28 Concourse Gate, Unit 1, Ottawa, ON K2E 7T7 DATUM REMARKS BORINGS BY CME 55 Power Auger Consulting Engineers Ground surface elevations provided by Stantec Geomatics Ltd. DATE SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Residential Development - Eden Park East Portion Ottawa, Ontario 5 August 2008 FILE NO. HOLE NO. PG0861 BH 3-08 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE FILL: Brown silty sand, trace topsoil Brown SILTY SAND STRATA PLOT TYPE AU SS SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH 0 1 ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction Very stiff to stiff, brown SILTY CLAY firm and grey by 2.2m depth TW End of Borehole m-Aug. 28/08) Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

17 patersongroup 28 Concourse Gate, Unit 1, Ottawa, ON K2E 7T7 DATUM REMARKS BORINGS BY Consulting Engineers Ground surface elevations provided by Stantec Geomatics Ltd. CME 55 Power Auger DATE SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Residential Development - Eden Park East Portion Ottawa, Ontario 5 August 2008 FILE NO. HOLE NO. PG0861 BH 4-08 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE FILL: Topsoil, some wood chips Compact, brown SILTY SAND STRATA PLOT TYPE AU SS SS SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction Very stiff to stiff, brown SILTY CLAY, trace sand to 2.0m firm to soft and grey by 2.5m depth SS TW TW End of Borehole m-Aug. 28/08) Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

18 patersongroup 28 Concourse Gate, Unit 1, Ottawa, ON K2E 7T7 DATUM REMARKS BORINGS BY Ground surface elevations provided by Stantec Geomatics Ltd. CME 55 Power Auger Consulting Engineers DATE SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Residential Development - Eden Park East Portion Ottawa, Ontario 6 August 2008 FILE NO. HOLE NO. PG0861 BH 5-08 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE Compact, red-brown SILTY SAND 1.35 STRATA PLOT TYPE AU SS SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH 0 1 ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction Very stiff to stiff, brown SILTY CLAY, trace sand to 2.0m - stiff to firm and grey by 2.8m depth SS SS TW TW Dynamic Cone Penetration Test 9.60m depth Inferred SILTY CLAY Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

19 patersongroup 28 Concourse Gate, Unit 1, Ottawa, ON K2E 7T7 DATUM REMARKS BORINGS BY CME 55 Power Auger Consulting Engineers Ground surface elevations provided by Stantec Geomatics Ltd. DATE SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Residential Development - Eden Park East Portion Ottawa, Ontario 6 August 2008 FILE NO. HOLE NO. PG0861 BH 5-08 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE STRATA PLOT TYPE SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH 13 ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction Inferred SILTY CLAY Inferred SILTY CLAY Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

20 patersongroup 28 Concourse Gate, Unit 1, Ottawa, ON K2E 7T7 Consulting Engineers SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Residential Development - Eden Park East Portion Ottawa, Ontario DATUM Ground surface elevations provided by Stantec Geomatics Ltd. FILE NO. REMARKS HOLE NO. BORINGS BY CME 55 Power Auger DATE 6 August 2008 PG0861 BH 5-08 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE STRATA PLOT TYPE SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH 26 ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction Inferred GLACIAL TILL End of Borehole Practical DCPT 29.29m depth 2.08m-Aug. 28/08) Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

21 patersongroup 28 Concourse Gate, Unit 1, Ottawa, ON K2E 7T7 Consulting Engineers SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Residential Development - Eden Park East Portion Ottawa, Ontario DATUM Ground surface elevations provided by Stantec Geomatics Ltd. FILE NO. REMARKS HOLE NO. BORINGS BY Hydraulic Shovel DATE 28 August 2008 PG0861 TP 2-08 SOIL DESCRIPTION DEPTH ELEV. Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone GROUND SURFACE FILL: Brown silty sand, some 0.15 topsoil and gravel Brown SILTY SAND, trace clay 0.60 STRATA PLOT TYPE G 1 SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD Water Content % Piezometer Construction Very stiff to stiff, brown SILTY CLAY, trace sand to 1.3m - stiff to firm and grey by 1.6m depth soft by 2.6m depth End of Test Pit m-Aug. 28/08) Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

22 patersongroup 28 Concourse Gate, Unit 1, Ottawa, ON K2E 7T7 Consulting Engineers SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Residential Development - Eden Park East Portion Ottawa, Ontario DATUM Ground surface elevations provided by Stantec Geomatics Ltd. FILE NO. REMARKS HOLE NO. BORINGS BY Hydraulic Shovel DATE 28 August 2008 PG0861 TP 3-08 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE STRATA PLOT TYPE SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH 0 ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction TOPSOIL with brown silty sand Brown SILTY SAND Very stiff to stiff, brown SILTY CLAY - stiff to firm and grey by 2.2m depth End of Test Pit m-Aug. 28/08) Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

23 patersongroup 28 Concourse Gate, Unit 1, Ottawa, ON K2E 7T7 DATUM REMARKS BORINGS BY Ground surface elevations provided by Stantec Geomatics Ltd. Hydraulic Shovel Consulting Engineers DATE SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Residential Development - Eden Park East Portion Ottawa, Ontario 28 August 2008 FILE NO. HOLE NO. PG0861 TP 4-08 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE STRATA PLOT TYPE SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH 0 ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction TOPSOIL, some wood chips 0.80 Compact, brown SILTY SAND Very stiff to stiff, brown SILTY CLAY, trace sand to 2.0m firm to soft and grey by 2.5m depth End of Test Pit m-Aug. 28/08) Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

24 patersongroup 28 Concourse Gate, Unit 1, Ottawa, ON K2E 7T7 DATUM REMARKS BORINGS BY Ground surface elevations provided by Stantec Geomatics Ltd. Hydraulic Shovel Consulting Engineers DATE SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Residential Development - Eden Park East Portion Ottawa, Ontario 28 August 2008 FILE NO. HOLE NO. PG0861 TP 5-08 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE STRATA PLOT TYPE SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH 0 ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction Loose, red-brown SILTY SAND - compact and brown by 0.6m depth Very stiff to stiff, brown SILTY CLAY, trace sand to 2.0m - stiff to firm and grey by 2.8m depth End of Test Pit m-Aug. 28/08) Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

25 patersongroup 28 Concourse Gate, Unit 1, Ottawa, ON K2E 7T7 DATUM REMARKS BORINGS BY Ground surface elevations provided by Stantec Geomatics Ltd. Hydraulic Shovel Consulting Engineers DATE SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Residential Development - Eden Park East Portion Ottawa, Ontario 28 August 2008 FILE NO. HOLE NO. PG0861 TP12-08 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE STRATA PLOT TYPE SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH 0 ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction FILL: Brown silty sand, trace topsoil TOPSOIL Compact, brown SILTY SAND 2.05 G Very stiff to stiff, brown SILTY CLAY, trace sand to 2.7m firm to soft and grey by 3.0m depth End of Test Pit m-Aug. 28/08) Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

26 patersongroup Engineers 28 Concourse Gate, Unit 1, Ottawa, ON K2E 7T7 Consulting SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA Geotechnical Investigation Residential Development - Eden Park East Portion Ottawa, Ontario DATUM Ground surface elevations provided by Stantec Geomatics Ltd. FILE NO. REMARKS HOLE NO. BORINGS BY Hydraulic Shovel DATE 28 August 2008 PG0861 TP13-08 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE STRATA PLOT TYPE SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH 0 ELEV Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction Compact, brown SILTY SAND Very stiff to stiff, brown SILTY CLAY, trace sand - stiff to firm and grey by 1.9m depth End of Test Pit m-Aug. 28/08) Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

27 SYMBOLS AND TERMS SOIL DESCRIPTION Behavioural properties, such as structure and strength, take precedence over particle gradation in describing soils. Terminology describing soil structure are as follows: Desiccated - having visible signs of weathering by oxidation of clay minerals, shrinkage cracks, etc. Fissured - having cracks, and hence a blocky structure. Varved - composed of regular alternating layers of silt and clay. Stratified - composed of alternating layers of different soil types, e.g. silt and sand or silt and clay. Well-Graded - Having wide range in grain sizes and substantial amounts of all intermediate particle sizes (see Grain Size Distribution). Uniformly-Graded - Predominantly of one grain size (see Grain Size Distribution). The standard terminology to describe the strength of cohesionless soils is the relative density, usually inferred from the results of the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N value. The SPT N value is the number of blows of a 63.5 kg hammer, falling 760 mm, required to drive a 51 mm O.D. split spoon sampler 300 mm into the soil after an initial penetration of 150 mm. Relative Density N Value Relative Density % Very Loose <4 <15 Loose Compact Dense Very Dense >50 >85 The standard terminology to describe the strength of cohesive soils is the consistency, which is based on the undisturbed undrained shear strength as measured by the in situ or laboratory vane tests, penetrometer tests, unconfined compression tests, or occasionally by Standard Penetration Tests. Consistency Undrained Shear Strength (kpa) N Value Very Soft <12 <2 Soft Firm Stiff Very Stiff Hard >200 >30

28 SYMBOLS AND TERMS (continued) SOIL DESCRIPTION (continued) Cohesive soils can also be classified according to their sensitivity. The sensitivity is the ratio between the undisturbed undrained shear strength and the remoulded undrained shear strength of the soil. Terminology used for describing soil strata based upon texture, or the proportion of individual particle sizes present is provided on the Textural Soil Classification Chart at the end of this information package. ROCK DESCRIPTION The structural description of the bedrock mass is based on the Rock Quality Designation (RQD). The RQD classification is based on a modified core recovery percentage in which all pieces of sound core over 100 mm long are counted as recovery. The smaller pieces are considered to be a result of closelyspaced discontinuities (resulting from shearing, jointing, faulting, or weathering) in the rock mass and are not counted. RQD is ideally determined from NXL size core. However, it can be used on smaller core sizes, such as BX, if the bulk of the fractures caused by drilling stresses (called mechanical breaks ) are easily distinguishable from the normal in situ fractures. RQD % ROCK QUALITY Excellent, intact, very sound Good, massive, moderately jointed or sound Fair, blocky and seamy, fractured Poor, shattered and very seamy or blocky, severely fractured 0-25 Very poor, crushed, very severely fractured SAMPLE TYPES SS - Split spoon sample (obtained in conjunction with the performing of the Standard Penetration Test (SPT)) TW - Thin wall tube or Shelby tube PS - Piston sample AU - Auger sample or bulk sample WS - Wash sample RC - Rock core sample (Core bit size AXT, BXL, etc.). Rock core samples are obtained with the use of standard diamond drilling bits.

29 SYMBOLS AND TERMS (continued) GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION MC% - Natural moisture content or water content of sample, % LL - Liquid Limit, % (water content above which soil behaves as a liquid) PL - Plastic limit, % (water content above which soil behaves plastically) PI - Plasticity index, % (difference between LL and PL) Dxx - Grain size which xx% of the soil, by weight, is of finer grain sizes These grain size descriptions are not used below mm grain size D10 - Grain size at which 10% of the soil is finer (effective grain size) D60 - Grain size at which 60% of the soil is finer Cc - Concavity coefficient = (D30) 2 / (D10 x D60) Cu - Uniformity coefficient = D60 / D10 Cc and Cu are used to assess the grading of sands and gravels: Well-graded gravels have: 1 < Cc < 3 and Cu > 4 Well-graded sands have: 1 < Cc < 3 and Cu > 6 Sands and gravels not meeting the above requirements are poorly-graded or uniformly-graded. Cc and Cu are not applicable for the description of soils with more than 10% silt and clay (more than 10% finer than mm or the #200 sieve) CONSOLIDATION TEST p o - Present effective overburden pressure at sample depth p c - Preconsolidation pressure of (maximum past pressure on) sample Ccr - Recompression index (in effect at pressures below p c ) Cc - Compression index (in effect at pressures above p c ) OC Ratio Overconsolidaton ratio = p c / p o Void Ratio Initial sample void ratio = volume of voids / volume of solids Wo - Initial water content (at start of consolidation test) PERMEABILITY TEST k - Coefficient of permeability or hydraulic conductivity is a measure of the ability of water to flow through the sample. The value of k is measured at a specified unit weight for (remoulded) cohesionless soil samples, because its value will vary with the unit weight or density of the sample during the test.

30

31 Safety Factor Figure 1 - Section A-A - Static Conditions South Side of Proposed Channel Silty Sand Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 35 degrees Brown Silty Clay Crust Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion: 5 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Top of Proposed Slope (Limit of Hazard Lands) Grey Silty Clay Unit Weight: 16 kn/m3 Cohesion: 10 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees 90 Silty Sand W Brown Silty Clay Crust Proposed Channel W 80 Grey Silt Clay

32 Safety Factor Figure 2 - Section A-A - Seismic Loading South Side of Proposed Channel Silty Sand Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 35 degrees Brown Silty Clay Crust Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 100 kpa Top of Proposed Slope (Limit of Hazard Lands) Grey Silty Clay Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 16 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 50 kpa Silty Sand W Brown Silty Clay Crust Proposed Channel W 80 Grey Silt Clay

33 Safety Factor Figure 3 - Section A-A - Static Conditions North Side of Proposed Channel Silty Sand Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 35 degrees Brown Silty Clay Crust Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion: 5 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Grey Silty Clay Unit Weight: 16 kn/m3 Cohesion: 10 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Top of Proposed Slope (Limit of Hazard Lands) W W Proposed Channel Grey Silt Clay Silty Sand Brown Silty Clay Crust

34 Safety Factor Brown Silty Clay Crust Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 100 kpa Figure 4 - Section A-A - Seismic Loading North Side of Proposed Channel Silty Sand Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 35 degrees Grey Silty Clay Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 16 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 50 kpa Top of Proposed Slope (Limit of Hazard Lands) W W Proposed Channel Silty Sand Brown Silty Clay Crust 80 Grey Silt Clay

35 Safety Factor Figure 5 - Section B-B - Static Conditions South Side of Proposed Channel Silty Sand Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 35 degrees Brown Silty Clay Crust Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion: 5 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Top of Proposed Slope (Limit of Hazard Lands) Grey Silty Clay Unit Weight: 16 kn/m3 Cohesion: 10 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Silty Sand W Brown Silty Clay Crust Proposed Channel 80 Grey Silt Clay

36 Safety Factor Figure 6 - Section B-B - Seismic Loading South Side of Proposed Channel Silty Sand Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 35 degrees Brown Silty Clay Crust Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 100 kpa Top of Proposed Slope (Limit of Hazard Lands) Grey Silty Clay Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 16 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 50 kpa 90 W Silty Sand Brown Silty Clay Crust Proposed Channel 80 Grey Silt Clay

37 Safety Factor Figure 7 - Section B-B - Static Conditions North Side of Proposed Channel Silty Sand Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 35 degrees Brown Silty Clay Crust Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion: 5 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Grey Silty Clay Unit Weight: 16 kn/m3 Cohesion: 10 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Top of Proposed Slope (Limit of Hazard Lands) 90 W W Proposed Channel Grey Silt Clay Brown Silty Clay Crust Silty Sand

38 Safety Factor Brown Silty Clay Crust Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 100 kpa Figure 8 - Section B-B - Seismic Loading North Side of Proposed Channel Silty Sand Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 35 degrees Grey Silty Clay Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 16 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 50 kpa Top of Proposed Slope (Limit of Hazard Lands) 90 W W Proposed Channel Silty Sand Brown Silty Clay Crust 80 Grey Silt Clay

39 Safety Factor Figure 9 - Section C-C - Static Conditions South Side of Proposed Channel with 2H:1V Slope Top of Proposed Slope (Limit of Hazard Lands) Silty Sand Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 35 degrees Brown Silty Clay Crust Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion: 5 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Grey Silty Clay Unit Weight: 16 kn/m3 Cohesion: 10 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees 90 Silty Sand Proposed 2H:1V Slope with GEOWEB Proposed Stone Strong Retaining Wall Crushed Stone Fill Crushed Stone Fill Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 31 degrees W 85 Brown Silty Clay Crust Proposed Channel Grey Silt Clay

40 Safety Factor Figure 10 - Section C-C - Seismic Loading South Side of Proposed Channel with 2H:1V Slope Silty Sand Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 35 degrees Brown Silty Clay Crust Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 100 kpa Top of Proposed Slope (Limit of Hazard Lands) Grey Silty Clay Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 16 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 50 kpa 90 Proposed 2H:1V Slope with GEOWEB Proposed Stone Strong Retaining Wall Crushed Stone Fill Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 31 degrees Silty Sand Crushed Stone Fill W 85 Brown Silty Clay Crust Proposed Channel Grey Silt Clay

41 Safety Factor Figure 11 - Section D-D - Static Conditions North Side of Proposed Channel with Proposed Stone Strong Retaining Wall Top of Proposed Slope (Limit of Hazard Lands) Silty Sand Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 35 degrees Brown Silty Clay Crust Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion: 5 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Grey Silty Clay Unit Weight: 16 kn/m3 Cohesion: 10 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees 90 Silty Sand Proposed Stone Strong Retaining Wall Crushed Stone Fill Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 31 degrees W Crushed Stone Fill 85 Brown Silty Clay Crust Proposed Channel Grey Silt Clay

42 Safety Factor Figure 12 - Section D-D - Static Loading North Side of Proposed Channel with Proposed Stone Strong Retaining Wall Top of Proposed Slope (Limit of Hazard Lands) Silty Sand Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 35 degrees Brown Silty Clay Crust Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 100 kpa Grey Silty Clay Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 16 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 50 kpa Silty Sand Crushed Stone Fill Proposed Stone Strong Retaining Wall Crushed Stone Fill Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 31 degrees W 85 Brown Silty Clay Crust Proposed Channel Grey Silt Clay

43 Safety Factor Figure 13 - Section E-E - Static Conditions North Side of Proposed Channel Silty Sand Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 35 degrees Brown Silty Clay Crust Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion: 5 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Grey Silty Clay Unit Weight: 16 kn/m3 Cohesion: 10 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Crushed Stone Fill Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 31 degrees 95 Crushed Stone Fill Imported Fill Top of Proposed Slope (Limit of Hazard Lands) Imported Fill Unit Weight: 18 kn/m3 Cohesion: 5 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees 90 Silty Sand Proposed Road Pedestrian Pathway Proposed 2.1H:1V Slope with GEOWEB 85 Brown Silty Clay Crust Proposed Channel Grey Silt Clay

44 Safety Factor Figure 14 - Section E-E - Seismic Loading North Side of Proposed Channel Silty Sand Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 35 degrees Brown Silty Clay Crust Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 100 kpa Grey Silty Clay Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 16 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 50 kpa 0.16 Crushed Stone Fill Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 0 kpa Friction Angle: 31 degrees 95 Crushed Stone Fill Imported Fill Top of Proposed Slope (Limit of Hazard Lands) Imported Fill Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 18 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 80 kpa 90 Silty Sand Proposed Road Pedestrian Pathway Proposed 2.1H:1V Slope with GEOWEB 85 Brown Silty Clay Crust Proposed Channel Grey Silt Clay

45 Base Material Strip Properties Cell & Seam Properties PRESTO Performance & Material Specification Summary Property Value Test Method Material Composition Polymer Polyethylene with density of lb/ft 3 ( g/cm 3 ) ASTM D 1505 Color Black - from Carbon Black Tan, Green, Other colors with no heavy metal content N/A Stabilizer Carbon black content 1.5% - 2% by weight Hindered amine light stabilizer (HALS) 1.0% by weight of carrier N/A Minimum ESCR 5000 hr ASTM D 1693 Sheet Thickness 50 mil 5% +10%(1.27 mm -5% +10%) ASTM D 5199 Surface Treatment Cell Details GW20V GW30V GW40V Short-term Seam Peel Strength Long-term Seam Peel Strength 10,000 hour Seam Peel Strength Certification Performance: The polyethylene strips shall be textured and perforated such that the peak friction angle between the surface of the textured / perforated plastic and #40 silica sand at 100% relative density shall be no less than 85% of the peak friction angle of the silica sand in isolation when tested by the direct shear method per ASTM D Percent Cell Wall Open Area 21.2% + _ 1.0% 16.8% + _ 1.0% 19.89% + _ 1.0% Nominal Dimensions ±10% Length Width Perforated GEOWEB System Material: The polyethylene strips shall be textured with a multitude of rhomboidal (diamond shape) indentations. The rhomboidal indentations shall have a surface density of per in 2 (22 31 per cm 2 ). In addition, the strips shall be perforated with horizontal rows of 0.4 in (10 mm) diameter holes. Perforations within each row shall be 0.75 in (19 mm) on-center. Horizontal rows shall be staggered and separated 0.50 in (12 mm) relative to the hole centers. The edge of strip to the nearest edge of perforation shall be 0.3 in (8 mm) minimum and the centerline of the weld to the nearest edge of perforation shall be 0.7 in (18 mm) minimum. A slot with a dimension of 3/8 in x 1 3/8 in (10 mm x 35 mm ) is standard in the center of the non-perforated areas and at the center of each weld. Density per yd 2 (m 2 ) Nominal Area ±1% 8.8 in (224 mm) 10.2 in (259 mm) 28.9 yd 2 (34.6 m 2 ) 44.8 in 2 (289 cm 2 ) 11.3 in (287 mm) 12.6 in (320 mm) 18.2 yd 2 (21.7 m 2 ) 71.3 in 2 (460 cm 2 ) 18.7 in (475 mm) 20.0 in (508 mm) 6.9 yd 2 (8.3 m 2 ) in 2 (1,206 cm 2 ) Cell Depth Minimum Certified Cell Seam Strength 3 in (75 mm) 240 lbf (1060 N) 4 in (100 mm) 320 lbf (1420 N) 6 in (150 mm) 480 lbf (2130 N) 8 in (200 mm) 640 lbf (2840 N) Long term seam peel-strength test shall be performed on all resin or pre-manufactured sheet or strips. A 4.0 in (100 mm) wide seam sample shall support a 160 lb (72.5 kg) load for a period of 168 hours (7 days) minimum in a temperature-controlled environment undergoing a temperature change on a 1-hour cycle from ambient room to 130 o F (54 o C). Ambient room temperature is per ASTM E 41. Presto shall provide data showing that the high-density polyethylene resin used to produce the GEOWEB sections has been tested using an appropriate number of seam samples and varying loads to generate data indicating that the seam peel strength shall survive a loading of at least 209 lbf (95 kg) for a minimum of 10,000 hours. Section Properties Section Dimension Section Width Section Length Range (Cells Long: 18, 21, 25, 29, 34) Variable Minimum Maximum GW20V GW30V GW40V 7.7 ft (2.3 m) to 9.2 ft (2.8 m) 12.0 ft (3.7 m) 15.4 ft (4.7 m) 25.4 ft (7.7 m) 27.3 ft ( 8.3 m) 35.1 ft (10.7 m) 58.2 ft (17.8 m) 2013 Presto Products Company. This specification is copyrighted and based on the use of Genuine GEOWEB manufactured by Presto Products Company (Presto GEOSYSTEMS ). Any use of this specification for any product other than that manufactured by Presto Products Company is strictly prohibited. GW/G000(M)-Oct 2013 AP-3639 R7 Oct 2013 PRESTO GEOSYSTEMS PO BOX 2399, APPLETON, WI PHONE: or FAX: info@prestogeo.com

46 The GEOWEB Cell Dimensions Relative Size 1 GW20V GW30V GW40V Name Nominal Length x Width 2 Maximum Expansion Section Width 7.6 ft (2.3 m) Section Width 9.2 ft (2.8 m) GW20V (small cell) Nominal Width 8.5 ft (2.6 m) Minimum Expansion 8.8 x 10.2 in (224 x 259 mm) Nominal Area in2 (289 cm 2 ) Cells per yd 2 (m 2 ) Nominal Depths 28.9 (34.6) 11.3 x 12.6 in (287 x 320 mm) 1 All details and dimensions are nominal and subject to manufacturing tolerances. 2 Cell length and width will vary approximately ±10% through the recommended expansion range. The GW20V Section Dimensions 3 in (75 mm), 4 in (100 mm), 6 in (150 mm), and 8 in (200 mm) for all cells Cells Long GW30V (mid cell) For all other Applications For Earth Retention in 2 (460 cm 2 ) Length Minimum Expansion 10.5 x 13.0 in (267 x 330 mm) 68.3 in 2 (440 cm 2 ) Length Maximum Expansion GW40V (large cell) 18.7 x 20.0 in (475 x 508 mm) in 2 (1206 cm 2 ) 18.2 (21.7) NA 6.9 (8.3) 3 Cell area will vary only ±1% through the recommended section expansion range. 4 Cell dimensions for Earth Retention sections are fixed and NOT variable or nominal. Nominal Length Nominal Area ft (3.7 m) 13 ft (4.0 m) 14.5 ft (4.4 m) 112 ft 2 (10.4 m 2 ) ft (4.3 m) 15 ft (4.7 m) 16.9 ft (5.1 m) 131 ft 2 (12.1 m 2 ) ft (5.1 m) 18 ft (5.6 m) 20.1 ft (6.1 m) 156 ft 2 (14.5 m 2 ) ft (5.9 m) 21ft (6.5 m) 23.3 ft (7.1 m) 181 ft 2 (16.8 m 2 ) ft (6.9 m) 25 ft (7.6 m) 27.3 ft (8.3 m) 212 ft 2 (19.7 m 2 ) The GW30V Section Dimensions Maximum Expansion Section Width 7.6 ft (2.3 m) Section Width 9.2 ft (2.8 m) Nominal Width 8.5 ft (2.6 m) Minimum Expansion Cells Long Length Minimum Expansion Nominal Length Length Maximum Expansion Nominal Area ft (4.7 m) 17 ft (5.1 m) 18.6 ft (5.7 m) 143 ft 2 (13.3 m 2 ) ft (5.5 m) 20 ft (6.0 m) 21.7 ft (6.6 m) 167 ft 2 (15.5 m 2 ) ft (6.5 m) 23 ft (7.1 m) 25.8 ft (7.9 m) 198 ft 2 (18.4 m 2 ) ft (7.6 m) 27 ft (8.2 m) 30.0 ft (9.1 m) 230 ft 2 (21.4 m 2 ) ft (8.9 m) 32 ft (9.6 m) 35.1 ft (10.7 m) 270 ft 2 (25.0 m 2 ) The GW40V Section Dimensions Maximum Expansion Section Width 7.6 ft (2.3 m) Section Width 9.2 ft (2.8 m) Nominal Width 8.5 ft (2.6 m) Minimum Expansion Cells Long Length Minimum Expansion Nominal Length Length Maximum Expansion Nominal Area ft (7.7 m) 28 ft (8.3 m) 30.8 ft (9.4 m) 234 ft 2 (21.7 m 2 ) ft (9.0 m) 32 ft (9.7 m) 36.0 ft (11.0 m) 273 ft 2 (25.3 m 2 ) ft (10.7 m) 38 ft (11.6 m) 42.8 ft (13.1 m) 325 ft 2 (30.2 m 2 ) ft (12.5 m) 44 ft (13.5 m) 49.7 ft (15.1 m) 377 ft 2 (35.0 m 2 ) ft (14.6 m) 52 ft (15.8 m) 58.2 ft (17.8 m) 441 ft 2 (41.0 m 2 ) 2013 Presto Products Company. This specification is copyrighted and based on the use of Genuine GEOWEB manufactured by Presto Products Company (Presto GEOSYSTEMS ). Any use of this specification for any product other than that manufactured by Presto Products Company is strictly prohibited. AP-3639-R7 Oct 2013

47

48

49

50

51

52

53