326 KENSAL ROAD LONDON W10 - rbkc.gov.uk
Transcript of 326 KENSAL ROAD LONDON W10 - rbkc.gov.uk
326 KENSAL ROADLONDON W10
Phase 2Geoenvironmental Investigation
ClientResolution Property Limited
AgentHeyne Tillett Steel
Report No. 4336-2 v2
27 January 2016
CONTENTS
Section Page
SYNOPSIS 1
1 Site description 2
2 Development proposals 2
3 Geology 3
4 Field work 3
5 Laboratory testing 4
6 Ground conditions6.1 Stratigraphy 5
6.1.1 Made Ground 56.1.2 Superficial deposits 66.1.3 London Clay 6
6.2 Groundwater 67 Discussion
7.1 General 77.2 Piled foundations 87.3 Excavations
7.3.1 Stability 97.3.2 Retaining walls 107.3.3 Groundwater 117.3.4 Soil swelling 11
7.4 Contaminant analysis7.4.1 Solid phase 137.4.2 Waste acceptance criteria 14
7.5 Further discussion 157.6 Buried concrete 17
Procedural Notes
APPENDICES
A FiguresB Borehole and Trial RecordsC Laboratory Test Results
Synopsis
An investigation has been carried out on land currently occupied by No. 326
Kensal Road on the instructions of Heyne Tillett Steel, Consulting Engineers to
Resolution Property Limited. A Phase I Environmental Assessment1 has been
prepared for the site and should be read in conjunction with this report. No
other intrusive investigations have been undertaken at the site that we are
aware of.
The purpose of the investigation was to determine the ground conditions and to
provide recommendations in respect of foundation design and other
geoenvironmental matters for the proposed mixed use redevelopment.
Three boreholes and four trial pits were carried out, supported by a programme
of in situ and laboratory testing.
Piled foundations are envisioned for the redevelopment and appropriate design
data is provided. Chemical analysis revealed insufficient contamination to affect
the development.
4336-2 v2
326 KENSAL ROADLONDON W10
Phase 2 Geoenvironmental Investigation
1 Report No. 4336-1 Phase I Environmental Assessment. 326 Kensal Road, LondonW10. AP Geotechnics Ltd., 21 August 2015
1
Site description
The area under investigation is an ‘L’ shaped portion of land extending to some 0.25 hectares
located between Kensal Road and the Grand Union Canal Paddington Branch. The site is
currently occupied by the Saga Centre on the western portion whilst The Old Gramophone
Works covers the remainder. The current general arrangement is given at Figure 1 at
Appendix A.
A full site description is available in the Phase 1 report to which the reader is referred.
2
Development proposals
It is intended to undertake significant remodelling of the site which includes demolishing the
collection of buildings to the rear of the Saga Centre. A basement (double height in part) is
proposed under the entirety of the site comprising The Old Gramophone Works and the
demolished buildings; a part basement exists under the Saga Centre and will be retained. The
Saga Centre will be extended to 5 storeys for commercial space whilst The Old Gramophone
Works and the demolished buildings will be extended to 6 storeys to provide commercial with
residential above.
The basement proposals are shown on Figure 2 of Appendix A. Figure 3 is a section through
the western part of the site (Saga Centre) whilst Figure 4 is a section showing the proposals
for The Old Gramophone Works (OGW).
4336-2 v2 2
3
Geology
Published records of the British Geological Survey (BGS) indicate the site to lie on London
Clay. No superficial deposits are mapped at the subject site.
4
Field work
The extent of the field work was specified by the Consulting Engineer and comprised three
boreholes drilled by light percussive techniques to depths of 10, 20 & 25 m. In addition, four
hand dug trial pits were carried out to ascertain the depth and type of the existing foundations.
Five trial pits were originally specified but TP4 could not be undertaken due to its location.
Trial Pit 1 was started by hand in the small ‘terrace’ at the rear of the OGW but the buried
structures were too deep for hand excavation without shoring. Trial Pit 1 was therefore
moved slightly east and was excavated by machine in the far north east corner of the OGW.
The location of all exploratory points is shown on Figure 1 at Appendix A.
Representative soil samples were recovered from the boreholes and trial pits for subsequent
laboratory examination and testing; whilst Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were carried out
as appropriate. Details of the strata encountered are provided on the Borehole and Trial Pit
Records at Appendix B; together with particulars of the samples recovered, groundwater
observations and SPT results. The profile of SPT with depth is also presented at Figure 5 of
Appendix A.
A schematic section of the existing foundations are available with the Trial Pit Records at
Appendix B.
4336-2 v2 3
Standpipes were installed in BHs 1 & 3 to allow monitoring of groundwater levels. The results
are discussed in Section 6.2.
5
Laboratory testing
The following laboratory tests were conducted on soil samples recovered during the field
work:-
Natural moisture content: to assess the in situ condition of the soil.
Liquid and Plastic Limits: to classify cohesive soil into behavioural groups.
Unconsolidated undrained triaxial compression: to determine the shear
strength of cohesive material and thus to assess its load bearing capacity.
One-dimensional consolidation: to determine the deformation characteristics
of clay under applied loading and unloading.
Swelling pressure: to ascertain the pressures induced by the excavation for the
basement.
Soluble sulphate and pH value: for the specification of buried concrete.
Contamination: chemical analyses to detect the presence of contaminants as
indicated by the Phase 1 Assessment, viz:-
Metals & metalloids: Total arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel,
selenium and zinc. Water soluble boron and hexavalent
chromium.
Organic: Petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), polyaromatic hydrocarbons
(PAH) and phenols.
Others: Asbestos screen and Waste Acceptance Criteria
(WAC) full solid waste suite and 2 stage leachate suite.
4336-2 v2 4
Results of these tests are presented at Appendix C and the variation of shear strength with
depth is shown at Figure 6 of Appendix A.
6
Ground conditions
6.1
Stratigraphy
The stratigraphy of the site as revealed by the investigation is described in detail at Appendix B
and in general terms hereafter.
6.1.1
Made Ground
Made Ground was encountered in all exploratory locations under a surfacing of concrete or
tarmac over concrete and was observed to a maximum depth of 2.60 m in BH3.
The Made Ground encountered comprised both cohesive and granular material, the latter
generally comprising fragments of brick, concrete and flint, often in a matrix of silt and sand
sized particles. The cohesive Made Ground was represented by a sandy clay with fragments of
the same man-made detritus found in the granular portion.
Trial pits 1 and 2 were terminated in Made Ground whilst TP5 was terminated in concrete.
The Made Ground in TP1 was odorous and stained with oil.
4336-2 v2 5
6.1.2
Superficial deposits
Although not mapped at this location by the BGS, material underlying the Made Ground in
BH1 and TP3 is not considered representative of London Clay and has been classed as
Superficial deposits for the purposes of this report. The deposit was found to be thin in BH1
where 0.60 m was proved whilst TP3 was terminated in clay at 1.34 m depth. The deposits
were represented by a dark grey and brown mottled clay.
6.1.3
London Clay
London Clay was proved beneath the Made Ground/ Superficial Deposits and continued to the
limit of investigation of 25 m depth.
The London Clay was initially represented by a brown grey clay which is consistent with the
upper, weathered portion of the London Clay and extended to between 7 and 8 m depth.
This was underlain by a fissured dark grey clay which is typical of the unweathered material and
continued to the limit of investigation.
Triaxial testing indicates the weathered London Clay to be firm to stiff whilst the unweathered
portion is stiff to very stiff. An Atterberg Limit performed on a sample of London Clay
confirms the very high plasticity expected of this material.
6.2
Groundwater
Boreholes 1 and 2 and trial pits 2 to 5 were dry during drilling/excavation. Borehole 3
recorded a slow seepage at 4.8 m depth which only rose to 4.75 m during the subsequent 20
4336-2 v2 6
minute observational pause in drilling. However, the speed of drilling and the use of casing to
support the bore may have masked any small inflows and impinged upon the accuracy of the
observations. Trial pit 1 recorded water in the Made Ground below 0.64 m depth.
Details of all groundwater observations during drilling/excavation are provided on the
appropriate Borehole and Trial Pit Record.
Standpipe readings taken during subsequent monitoring visits recorded the depth to
groundwater in BH1 decreasing from 6.40 to 4.66 m whilst water in BH3 rose from 1.66 to
1.54 m depth.
7
Discussion
7.1
General
The site has evidently already carried development and the investigation has revealed Made
Ground to be present. It is possible that other pockets of Made Ground may also be present;
perhaps deeper, of different character or associated with the remains of construction; even
though not detected by this investigation.
All remnants of previous construction should be removed prior to redevelopment to enable
the proposals to be constructed without hindrance and to perform satisfactorily.
In view of the proposed double basement, piled foundations are recommended. However,
when detailed loadings are known, spread foundations might be possible should loading be
appropriate and design information can then be provided.
4336-2 v2 7
7.2
Piled foundations
Either driven or bored piles would be suitable in the ground conditions found at this site.
However, compared with bored piling, construction of driven piles generates greater noise and
vibration which may not be acceptable in this environment. Consideration of the various
advantages and disadvantages of the different pile types suggests CFA piles to be preferred.
They avoid many of the installation difficulties that would otherwise be experienced;
particularly the need for casing through the Made Ground and the need to control
groundwater inflows. Piles constructed by CFA means are therefore recommended and
parameters for their preliminary design are provided in Tables 1 and 2. The recommendation
assumes that suitable access will be available for the necessary plant.
No shaft friction will be generated within 1m of pile cut off level which is assumed to equate to
7 m below Kensal Road.
Table 1: Design parameters for CFA piles - Shaft friction
IgnoreIncreases linearly from 60 to 110 kPa
0.0 - 7.07.0 - 25.0
All materialLondon Clay
Ultimate unit shaft frictionTypicaldepth, m
Stratum
Table 1 has been derived in conjunction with an adhesion factor of 0.6 in the London Clay.
Table 2: Design parameters for CFA piles - End bearing capacity
Increases linearly from 1190 to 2620 kPa15.0 - 25.0 London Clay
Ultimate unit end bearing capacityTypicaldepth, m
Stratum
4336-2 v2 8
Factors of safety must be applied to derive the allowable working load from the ultimate values
given in the tables. Unless successful load tests indicate a lower value may be adopted, a factor
of 3 on both shaft friction and end bearing is recommended.
As an example, the tables predict that a single pile of 450 mm diameter installed to 20.0 m
depth will have an allowable working load of approximately 540 kN. Alternatively. A 600 mm
diameter pile, bored to the same depth would have an allowable load capacity of about
750 kN. Total settlement of such piles is not expected to exceed about 5 - 10 mm as the
working load will be carried wholly in shaft friction.
Evidently it would be possible to utilise other pile types and different geometries. Further
advice could be given on the load capacity for any other configuration which may be under
consideration.
The actual load capacity achieved in practice depends upon the precise installation procedures.
Advice should therefore be sought from specialist contractors to verify the load capacity and
settlement characteristics of their particular piles in the ground conditions revealed by this
investigation.
7.3
Excavations
7.3.1
Stability
All material likely to be encountered in general construction activities should be regarded as
unstable. Some apparent stability may be present immediately on excavation, especially where
4336-2 v2 9
there is a high clay content, but this must not be relied upon. All excavations should therefore
be supported at all times unless battered to a safe angle of repose.
Provision of adequate support is especially important for the safety of personnel when
required to work in or close to excavations. Particular care should be exercised where
excavations are close to existing structures including highways to ensure they do not
experience any loss of support. Temporary and permanent works should be designed to resist
the additional lateral earth pressures arising from any superimposed loads in addition to those
generated by the soil itself, without significant deformation.
Sheet pilling or a secant wall are both possible geotechnical solutions for the temporary works.
A contiguous piled wall is not recommended due to the presence of water at shallow depth.
7.3.2
Retaining walls
Lateral earth pressures will act upon the basement walls and both temporary and permanent
works should be designed to accommodate the lateral earth pressures without significant
deformation, and also any increase that may result from nearby superimposed loadings.
Lateral earth pressures may be calculated in conjunction with the parameters of Table 3.
Table 3: Material parameters in terms of effective stress
20*22*
00
1.82.0
Made GroundLondon Clay
Effective angle of internalshearing resistance,
degrees
Effectivecohesion
BulkdensityMg/m3
Material
* based on engineering assessment
4336-2 v2 10
7.3.3
Groundwater
The two sets of standpipe readings indicate that water was at some 1.5 to 4.6 m depth and is
therefore within the depth of construction.
The chosen method of excavation support will extend down into the London Clay for both
support and to lengthen the flow path for groundwater. Once complete, the basement area
can be pumped out (if required) prior to excavation. Some residual inflows can be expected,
but these should be able to be controlled by conventional pumping from shallow sumps. The
amount of pumping will depend upon the water tightness of the walls but generally results in
low rates of groundwater ingress.
No attempt should be made to lower the general groundwater level as the cone of depression
will extend beyond the site boundaries and may well induce excessive settlement in
surrounding property or other structures.
The basement should be tanked to ensure it is watertight and designed to withstand
hydrostatic uplift forces. It should be noted that these may exceed the dead load of the
structure during the early phases of construction.
Reference to ‘The Lost Rivers of London’ indicates that the site is not located on an historic
water course.
7.3.4
Soil swelling
Excavation of the new basement will reduce the vertical stress that acts upon the soil and thus
generate swelling at formation level. Swelling has two distinct phases; elastic recovery which
4336-2 v2 11
will take place immediately the load is removed followed by long term swelling at decreasing
rate over the ensuing years. The elastic component will be removed during final trimming of
the excavation and is thus likely to be unnoticed.
The magnitude of long term swelling has been assessed from the consolidation test data on the
assumption that the same geological factor applies to swelling as it does to consolidation.
Published data comparing the results of long term monitoring of basement construction with
the magnitude of swelling derived from conventional analysis has indicated that significant
swelling only occurs when the reduction in vertical effective stress is more than 20 % of the
vertical effective stress prior to excavation. This philosophy has been incorporated into the
present analysis.
The estimated long term swelling in the London Clay is calculated at some 50 mm in the
centre of the excavation with approximately half that amount occurring midway along the sides
and one quarter in the corners. A void should therefore be incorporated beneath the
basement slab to allow for the anticipated swelling, or the basement designed to withstand the
uplift forces.
Undisturbed samples have been subject to laboratory swelling tests to determine the swelling
pressure produced by removal of the soil and saturation with water. The results of the
analysis indicate that the swelling pressure is some 50 to 60 % of the weight of the soil
removed.
4336-2 v2 12
7.4
Contaminant analysis
7.4.1
Solid phase
Contaminant testing was undertaken on selected soil samples and the results compared with
the limited number of CLEA2 Soil Guideline Values (SGVs) for commercial land use that have
been published to date. Where not available from that source, reference has also been made
to the LQM/CIEH S4ULs for Human Health Risk Assessment3. Appropriate trigger levels are
given with the results at Appendix C.
Analysis for metals and metalloids revealed all determinands to be below the commercial
triggers.
No phenols were recorded above the limit of detection for the test of 5 mg/kg.
Analysis for TPH recorded very low levels, even from the odorous material in TP1. A
maximum total concentration of 123 mg/kg was recorded in TP1 at 1.5 m depth. None of the
LQM GACs were exceeded. Concentrations of BTEX were recorded in both samples
analysed but at levels below the relevant triggers. The presence of BTEX is the likely source
of the odours noted during the field work.
Five samples were analysed for speciated PAHs, with a maximum of 327 mg/kg total PAH
recorded in BH2 at 0.40 m depth. Only dibenzo(ah)anthracene was recorded above the
4336-2 v2 13
3 The LQM/CIEH S4ULs for Human Health Risk Assessment. Land Quality Press, 2015
2 The Contaminated Land Exposure Assessment Model, Department for Environment, Food and RuralAffairs, The Environment Agency, R & D Publications SGV 1 et al., March 2002
commercial GAC of 3.5 mg/kg with a concentration of 5.4 mg/kg; all other determinands were
below the GAC or less than the limit of detection for the test of 0.1 mg/kg.
Analysis for asbestos was carried out on three samples. No asbestos fibres were detected.
Nevertheless, it is recommended that appropriate health and safety precautions, such as
detailed in HS(G)664 and elsewhere, should be followed by the construction workforce and
others who may come into contact with potentially contaminated soil. They should be agreed
with the Health and Safety Executive and are likely to include, but not be restricted to, the
following:-
maintenance of good standards of personal hygiene.
wearing personal protective clothing that is changed and cleaned frequently to
eliminate skin contact.
prevention of ingestion by using washing and changing facilities at all break
times.
prohibition of eating, drinking or smoking between break times.
controlling the spread of dust and airborne mists to prevent inhalation.
7.4.2
Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC)
Two samples were subject to the WAC full solid waste suite and the WAC 2 stage leachate
suite. The results have been compared to the criteria contained in the Landfill Regulations
2002 as amended and are presented at Appendix D.
4336-2 v2 14
4 Protection of workers and the general public during the development of contaminated land HS(G)66 Health and Safety Executive, 1991
Within the solid waste suite, all results were within the Inert Waste Landfill criteria limits.
Parameters determined on the compliance leaching test were also predominately within the
Inert Waste Landfill criteria limits save for sulphate and total dissolved solids on both samples.
The results put the waste into the Stable Non-reactive Hazardous waste in non-hazardous
Landfill category.
The contamination test results and the WAC results should be forwarded to the contractor
appointed to undertake any spoil removal. Transfer notes and chain of custody sheets should
be retained for all arisings removed from site.
7.5
Further discussion
The Consulting Engineers have received some preliminary feedback from the Royal Borough of
Kensington & Chelsea (RBKC) regarding the Phase I and Phase 2 reports issued for the site.
The feedback recommends further work is undertaken. The following discussion responds to
the issues raised by RBKC.
The Phase I Assessment revealed that the site has been subject to residential, commercial and
unknown use over the course of its development history. Of particular note was the presence
of a Paint Works on the 1935 map which became a Gramophone Record Works by 1969.
Both of these Works occupied the building known as The Old Gramophone Works. The site
was no longer labelled as a Gramophone Record Works by the mapping of 1987 although it is
understood that it became a recording studio for Trojan Records.
The risk assessment contained within the Phase I report indicated there to be a medium
potential risk of contamination arising from the previous uses of the site. Surrounding uses
form a low risk of potential contamination migrating to the subject site. Although potentially
4336-2 v2 15
contaminative activities have taken place within the vicinity of the subject site, the underlying
London Clay has negligible permeability and is a nonaquifer. The London Clay will severely
retard any migration, both laterally and vertically due to its very low permeability and high
adsorbancy. Any potential contamination on site is therefore unlikely to migrate off site.
Similarly, any off site contamination is unlikely to migrate to the subject site.
Oil filled cables are known to run along the towpath immediately to the north of the site.
Odorous and stained material was encountered in TP1 and is considered to be associated with
a leak from these cables. Other, localised contamination may be present within the site
boundary if the cables have leaked elsewhere. If such material is encountered during
redevelopment works it should be stockpiled separately and tested to ensure correct disposal.
It is beholden on the owners of the oil filled cables to fix any leaks and remediate any land
affected by such leaks.
Whilst it is acknowledged that the Paint Works and Gramophone Works are more likely than
not to have caused some localised contamination, the Phase I Risk Assessment and the Phase 2
recommendations are predicated on the proposal to excavate a large basement (see Figure 2),
resulting in the removal of all potentially contaminated soils within its footprint. Therefore,
there would seem little benefit in testing soils for potential contamination that will be removed
from site, as any potential risk that may have been generated from these soils will have been
removed, thus removing the risk driver.
On sites with a similar mixed use history a Remedial Action Plan has been produced which
outlines the strategies to be employed during the redevelopment works, with particular
emphasis paid to potential contamination and we would consider this an appropriate tool to
allay the Council’s Environmental Quality Officer’s concerns.
4336-2 v2 16
During the course of the development a watching brief shall be maintained under the
supervision of the site manager who should be suitably experienced in managing sites that have
a potential to be ‘contaminated’.
A watching brief consists of a record of any observations of contamination made during the
course of development by any member of staff, including contractors and visitors. In addition,
a photographic record should be kept of key stages of development including any
contamination encountered, formation levels of excavations (including reduced level/mass
excavations) and soft landscaping etc. Staff briefings and a discovery strategy will also be
outlined.
7.6
Buried concrete
Laboratory tests on soil samples yielded a maximum soluble sulphate concentration of 1.46 g/l
which results in a Design Sulphate Class5 of DS-2.
The groundwater is considered to be mobile and all pH determinations were in excess of 6.5.
Therefore the Aggressive Chemical Environment for Concrete, ACEC, is classed as AC-2.
R G ChapmanAP GEOTECHNICS LTD.27 January 2016
This report has been prepared for the sole and specific use of Resolution Property Limited for the purpose of theredevelopment of 326 Kensal Road, London W10 5BZ and should not be relied upon by any third party. Any otherpersons who use any information contained herein without the written permission of AP GEOTECHNICS LTD. do soat their own risk. The copyright to this report remains the property of AP GEOTECHNICS LTD.
4336-2 v2 17
5 Concrete in aggressive ground. BRE Special Digest 1. Building Research Establishment, 2005
PROCEDURAL NOTES for GROUND INVESTIGATIONS
General
This report is based upon data obtained from field descriptions of the strata and examination of the samples by anengineer, together with the results of in situ and laboratory tests as appropriate. Responsibility cannot be acceptedfor variations in ground conditions between and around any of the exploratory points that is not revealed by thedata. Whilst the report may offer an opinion on the ground conditions between exploratory points and below thedepth of investigation, this is for guidance only and no liability is accepted for its accuracy. Unless specificallyincluded in the report, it should be assumed that no testing has been carried out in respect of asbestos or JapaneseKnotweed and no liability is inferred or will be accepted.
Drilling procedure
Boring by light cable percussion drilling allows the ground conditions to be reasonably well established. However, acertain amount of disturbance is inevitable and some mixing of soils can occur.
Sampling procedure
"Undisturbed" samples of predominantly cohesive soils are taken with a 100mm diameter open tube sampler,generally in accordance with BS 5930: 1999.
Where appropriate, or where an undisturbed sample is unsuccessful, disturbed samples are recovered and sealedinto polythene bags.
Groundwater samples are taken when water is encountered in sufficient quantity.
Standard penetration tests
The test is conducted generally in accordance with BS 1377: Part 9: 1990. The sampler tube is subject to a seatingdrive of 150mm into the soil at the base of the borehole. Results are given on the Borehole Records as the numberof blows required to drive the sampler tube a further 300mm and this is known as the “N” value. Where thedriving resistance is such that full penetration is not achieved, the test is generally terminated after 50 blows and theactual distance penetrated is recorded.
Groundwater
Groundwater observations necessarily reflect the conditions encountered at the time of the exploratory work.Long term monitoring of standpipes is usually required to establish an equilibrium water level since the normal rateof boring is too fast to permit steady state conditions to be achieved.
Groundwater levels are subject to variations caused by changes in drainage conditions and seasonal climaticchanges.
Water may necessarily be added to advance the bore whilst casing may be required to maintain an open hole.These can both mask subsequent groundwater observations and are therefore noted on the individual BoreholeRecord.
July 2007
APPENDICES
A Figures
Figure 1: Site PlanFigure 2: Basement PlanFigure 3: Saga Centre SectionFigure 4: The Old Gramophone Works SectionFigure 5: SPT ProfileFigure 6: Shear Strength Profile
B Borehole and Trial Pit Records
Symbols and AbbreviationsBorehole RecordsTrial Pit Records
C Laboratory Test Results
Summary of Geotechnical TestsOne-dimensional consolidationContaminants in SoilWaste Acceptance Criteria
FIGURES
APPENDIX A
© AP GEOTECHNICS LTD. Figure 5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
SPT N Value
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Dep
th, m
BH1 BH2 BH3
SPT PROFILE326 Kensal Road
London W10
© AP GEOTECHNICS LTD. Figure 6
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Undrained cohesion, kPa
0
5
10
15
20
25
Dep
th, m
BH1 BH2 BH3
SHEAR STRENGTH PROFILE326 Kensal Road, London W10
BOREHOLE AND TRIAL PIT RECORDS
APPENDIX B
Location
Ground Level (mOD)
Dates
Site
Client
Engineer
Number
JobNumber
Sheet
Wat
er
Legend InstrDescriptionDepth
(m)(Thickness)
Depth(m)
Level(mOD)Sample / Tests Field Records
Remarks Scale(approx)
LoggedBy
Figure No.4336.BH1
1:50 ljs
150mm cased to 3.00m
326, KENSAL ROAD, LONDON, W10 5BZ
Resolution Property Limited
Heyne Tillett Steel
BH1
4336
See site plan29/06/2015-30/06/2015
Produced by the GEOtechnical DAtabase SYstem (GEODASY) (C) all rights reserved
Boring Method Casing Diameter
Borehole
CasingDepth
(m)WaterDepth
(m)
Cable Percussion
0.5 hrs clean up working area
(0.15) 0.15
CONCRETE with ¾" re-bar
0.5 hrs erecting heras fencing
0.30 D1
Borehole dry
(0.40) 0.55
MADE GROUND: Red brick fragments in a brown sandy clay matrix
0.60 D2 (0.45)
1.00
MADE GROUND: Soft to firm dark grey and black slightly sandy clay with fine gravel of flint, brick and occasional ash
1.10 D31.20-1.65 U1 45 blows (0.60)
1.60
Firm dark grey and brown mottled CLAY
2.00-2.45 U2 45 blows
2.50 D4
3.00-3.45 U3 50 blows
3.50 D5
4.00-4.45 U4 55 blows
4.50 D6
5.00-5.45 U5 55 blows
5.50 D7
6.50-6.95 SPT N=19 3,4/4,4,5,6
(6.10)
7.70
Firm to stiff brown grey CLAY
Stiff to very stiff dark grey CLAY7.90 D88.00-8.45 U6 70 blows
8.50 D9
9.50-9.95 SPT N=24 3,4/5,6,6,7
Excavating from 0.00m to 1.20m for 1.25 hours.
1/3
Location
Ground Level (mOD)
Dates
Site
Client
Engineer
Number
JobNumber
Sheet
Wat
er
Legend InstrDescriptionDepth
(m)(Thickness)
Depth(m)
Level(mOD)Sample / Tests Field Records
Remarks Scale(approx)
LoggedBy
Figure No.4336.BH1
1:50 ljs
150mm cased to 3.00m
326, KENSAL ROAD, LONDON, W10 5BZ
Resolution Property Limited
Heyne Tillett Steel
BH1
4336
See site plan29/06/2015-30/06/2015
Produced by the GEOtechnical DAtabase SYstem (GEODASY) (C) all rights reserved
Boring Method Casing Diameter
Borehole
CasingDepth
(m)WaterDepth
(m)
Cable Percussion
Stiff to very stiff dark grey CLAY
(17.30)
....claystone from 10.50m to 10.75m
11.00-11.40 U7 75 blows
11.45 D10
12.50-12.95 SPT N=26 4,4/5,6,8,7
14.00-14.45 U8 75 blows
...becoming fissured14.50 D11
15.50-15.95 SPT N=30 3,5/6,7,8,9
17.00-17.45 U9 80 blows
17.50 D12
18.50-18.95 SPT N=32 4,6/6,8,9,9
Chiselling from 10.50m to 10.75m for 0.25 hours.
2/3
Location
Ground Level (mOD)
Dates
Site
Client
Engineer
Number
JobNumber
Sheet
Wat
er
Legend InstrDescriptionDepth
(m)(Thickness)
Depth(m)
Level(mOD)Sample / Tests Field Records
Remarks Scale(approx)
LoggedBy
Figure No.4336.BH1
1:50 ljs
150mm cased to 3.00m
326, KENSAL ROAD, LONDON, W10 5BZ
Resolution Property Limited
Heyne Tillett Steel
BH1
4336
See site plan29/06/2015-30/06/2015
Produced by the GEOtechnical DAtabase SYstem (GEODASY) (C) all rights reserved
Boring Method Casing Diameter
Borehole
CasingDepth
(m)WaterDepth
(m)
Cable Percussion
Stiff to very stiff dark grey CLAY20.00-20.45 U10 85 blows
20.50 D13
21.50-21.95 SPT N=35 4,7/7,8,10,10
....claystone from 22.10m to 22.40m
23.00-23.45 U11 90 blows
23.50 D14
24.55-25.00 SPT N=36 4,6/8,9,9,10
(17.30)
25.00
25.00 D15
Complete at 25.00m
Chiselling from 22.10m to 22.40m for 0.25 hours.
3/3
Location
Ground Level (mOD)
Dates
Site
Client
Engineer
Number
JobNumber
Sheet
Wat
er
LegendDescriptionDepth
(m)(Thickness)
Depth(m)
Level(mOD)Sample / Tests Field Records
Remarks Scale(approx)
LoggedBy
Figure No.4336.BH2
1:50
150mm cased to 1.50m
326, KENSAL ROAD, LONDON, W10 5BZ
Resolution Property Limited
Heyne Tillett Steel
BH2
4336
See site plan30/06/2015-01/07/2015
Produced by the GEOtechnical DAtabase SYstem (GEODASY) (C) all rights reserved
Boring Method Casing Diameter
Borehole
CasingDepth
(m)WaterDepth
(m)
Cable Percussion
(0.05) 0.05 TARMAC
Borehole dry and backfilled with arisings1 hr waiting to gety onto BH position due to parked vans
(0.15) 0.20
MADE GROUND: Crushed aggregate
0.5 hrs erecting heras fencing
0.40 D1
0.25 hrs reinstating
(0.40) 0.60
MADE GROUND: Soft to firm dark grey and black slightly sandy clay with fine gravel of flint, brick and occasional ash
(0.25) 0.85 CONCRETE (0.40) 1.25 MADE GROUND: Concrete rubble
1.40 D21.50-1.95 U1 50 blows
2.00 D3
2.50-2.95 U2 50 blows
3.00 D4
3.50-3.95 U3 55 blows
4.00 D5
4.50-4.95 SPT N=17 2,3/4,4,4,5
6.00-6.45 U4 60 blows
6.50 D6
(5.95)
7.20
Firm to stiff brown grey CLAY with selenite crystals
7.30 D7
7.50-7.95 SPT N=20 3,4/4,5,5,6
9.05-9.50 U5 70 blows
9.55-10.00 SPT N=23 2,4/5,5,6,79.55 D8
(2.80)
10.00
Stiff fissured dark grey CLAY
Chiselling from 0.60m to 0.85m for 0.25 hours. Chiselling from 0.85m to 1.25m for 0.75 hours. Excavating from 0.00m to 0.85m for 0.5 hours.
10.00 D9
1/1
Location
Ground Level (mOD)
Dates
Site
Client
Engineer
Number
JobNumber
Sheet
Wat
er
Legend InstrDescriptionDepth
(m)(Thickness)
Depth(m)
Level(mOD)Sample / Tests Field Records
Remarks Scale(approx)
LoggedBy
Figure No.4336.BH3
1:50 ljs
150mm cased to 3.00m
326, KENSAL ROAD, LONDON, W10 5BZ
Resolution Property Limited
Heyne Tillett Steel
BH3
4336
See site plan02/07/2015
Produced by the GEOtechnical DAtabase SYstem (GEODASY) (C) all rights reserved
Boring Method Casing Diameter
Borehole
CasingDepth
(m)WaterDepth
(m)
Cable Percussion
11
(0.05) 0.05 TARMAC
0.5 hrs clean up working area
(0.05) 0.10
CONCRETE
0.50 D1
1.30-1.75 SPT(C) N=20 4,6/3,7,7,3
(1.90)
2.00
MADE GROUND: Bricks and brick fragments in a matrix of silt and sand sized particles with voids
(0.20) 2.20
CONCRETE
2.30-2.75 SPT(C) N=10 2,2/2,3,3,22.30 D2 (0.40)
2.60
MADE GROUND: Soft brown grey sandy clay with brick fragments
2.80 D3
3.00-3.45 U1 45 blows
3.50 D4
4.00-4.40 U2 45 blows
4.45 D5
slow seepage(1) at 4.80m, rose to 4.75m in 20 mins.
4.80 W1
5.00-5.40 U3 45 blows
5.45 D6
6.50-6.95 SPT N=20 3,3/4,5,5,6
....claystone from 7.90m to 8.15m
(5.50)
8.10
Firm to stiff brown grey CLAY
Stiff fissured dark grey CLAY8.20 D78.30-8.75 U4 60 blows
8.80 D8
9.80-10.25 SPT N=22 3,4/4,5,6,7
Chiselling from 2.00m to 2.20m for 0.5 hours. Chiselling from 7.90m to 8.15m for 0.25 hours. Excavating from 0.00m to 1.20m for 1.25 hours.
1/2
Location
Ground Level (mOD)
Dates
Site
Client
Engineer
Number
JobNumber
Sheet
Wat
er
Legend InstrDescriptionDepth
(m)(Thickness)
Depth(m)
Level(mOD)Sample / Tests Field Records
Remarks Scale(approx)
LoggedBy
Figure No.4336.BH3
1:50 ljs
150mm cased to 3.00m
326, KENSAL ROAD, LONDON, W10 5BZ
Resolution Property Limited
Heyne Tillett Steel
BH3
4336
See site plan02/07/2015
Produced by the GEOtechnical DAtabase SYstem (GEODASY) (C) all rights reserved
Boring Method Casing Diameter
Borehole
CasingDepth
(m)WaterDepth
(m)
Cable Percussion
Stiff fissured dark grey CLAY
11.30-11.75 U5 70 blows
11.80 D9
12.80-13.25 SPT N=26 3,5/5,6,7,8
14.30-14.75 U6 75 blows
14.80 D10
15.80-16.25 SPT N=29 2,5/6,7,7,9
....claystone from 17.20m to 17.40m
17.50-17.95 U7 80 blows
18.00 D11
19.00-19.45 SPT N=32 4,5/7,8,8,9
(11.90)
20.00
Chiselling from 17.20m to 17.40m for 0.25 hours.
20.00 D12
2/2
Location
Ground Level (mOD)
Dates
Site
Client
Engineer
Number
JobNumber
Sheet
Wat
er
LegendDescriptionDepth
(m)(Thickness)
Depth(m)
Level(mOD)Sample / Tests
1:20 4336.TP1
326, KENSAL ROAD, LONDON, W10 5BZ
Resolution Property Limited
Heyne Tillett Steel
TP1
4336
See site plan23/07/2015
Produced by the GEOtechnical DAtabase SYstem (GEODASY) (C) all rights reserved
Plan.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Trial Pit
DimensionsExcavation Method
WaterDepth(m)
Field Records
Remarks
Scale (approx) Logged By Figure No.
Trial Pit
Floating product on water in base of pitWater in clay below 0.64 m depth.
(0.19)
0.19
CONCRETE
0.50 C1
(0.45)
0.64
MADE GROUND: Fragments of brick, concrete and flint in a clay matrix
1.00 C2
1.50 C3
2.00 C4
(1.52)
2.16
MADE GROUND: Soft grey, brown and black slightly sandy clay with gravel of flint, brick and concrete. Odorous and wet
2.16 C5
Complete at 2.20m
1/2
Location
Ground Level (mOD)
Dates
Site
Client
Engineer
Number
JobNumber
Sheet
Wat
er
LegendDescriptionDepth
(m)(Thickness)
Depth(m)
Level(mOD)Sample / Tests
1:20 4336.TP2
326, KENSAL ROAD, LONDON, W10 5BZ
Resolution Property Limited
Heyne Tillett Steel
TP2
4336
See site plan19/07/2015
Produced by the GEOtechnical DAtabase SYstem (GEODASY) (C) all rights reserved
Plan.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Trial Pit
DimensionsExcavation Method
WaterDepth(m)
Field Records
Remarks
Scale (approx) Logged By Figure No.
Trial Pit
(0.17)
0.17
CONCRETE
(0.03) 0.20
MADE GROUND: Grey, black and brown fragments of concrete, flint and bituminous gravel in a matrix of silt and sand sized particles
0.20 C1
Complete at 0.25m
1/2
Location
Ground Level (mOD)
Dates
Site
Client
Engineer
Number
JobNumber
Sheet
Wat
er
LegendDescriptionDepth
(m)(Thickness)
Depth(m)
Level(mOD)Sample / Tests
1:20 4336.TP3
326, KENSAL ROAD, LONDON, W10 5BZ
Resolution Property Limited
Heyne Tillett Steel
TP3
4336
See site plan06/07/2015
Produced by the GEOtechnical DAtabase SYstem (GEODASY) (C) all rights reserved
Plan.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Trial Pit
DimensionsExcavation Method
WaterDepth(m)
Field Records
Remarks
Scale (approx) Logged By Figure No.
Trial Pit
(0.09) 0.09
TARMAC
(0.30)
0.39
CONCRETE
0.50 C1 (0.29)
0.68
MADE GROUND: Grey brown fragments of brick, concrete and flint in a matrix of silt and sand sized particles
1.00 C2
(0.50)
1.18
MADE GROUND: Brown gravel of fine to coarse flint and occasional fine brick in a matrix of silt and sand sized particles, locally clayey
1.33 C3
(0.16) 1.34
Soft to firm brown CLAY (wet)
Complete at 1.35m
1/2
Location
Ground Level (mOD)
Dates
Site
Client
Engineer
Number
JobNumber
Sheet
Wat
er
LegendDescriptionDepth
(m)(Thickness)
Depth(m)
Level(mOD)Sample / Tests
1:20 4336.TP5
326, KENSAL ROAD, LONDON, W10 5BZ
Resolution Property Limited
Heyne Tillett Steel
TP5
4336
See site plan18/07/2015
Produced by the GEOtechnical DAtabase SYstem (GEODASY) (C) all rights reserved
Plan.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Trial Pit
DimensionsExcavation Method
WaterDepth(m)
Field Records
Remarks
Scale (approx) Logged By Figure No.
Trial Pit
Trial pit excavated through concrete to 0.64 m depth. Hole then drilled to 1.2 m depth and still in concrete. Hole drilled in middle of floor and encountered concrete and hole drilled adjacent to opposite column and found the same. It may therefore be a raft
(0.09) 0.09
CONCRETE
(0.06) 0.15
MADE GROUND: Shingle
(1.05)
1.20
CONCRETE
Complete at 1.20m
1/2
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
APPENDIX C
Project: 326 KENSAL ROAD, LONDON, W10 5BZ Project No: 4336-2Client: Resolution Property Limited Sheet No: 1/3Agent: Heyne Tillett Steel
CLASSIFICATION TRIAXIAL COMPRESSION - TOTAL STRESS CHEMICALLocation Sample Depth Description Natural Liquid Plastic Plast. Passing Mod. Class Type Moisture Bulk Radial Deviator Cohesion Sulphate (SO4) pH
No Moisture Limit Limit Index 425µm Plast. Content Density Stress Stress cu, kPa cu, kPa Water SoilContent Index assuming Øu, deg (Sol)
m % % % % % % % Mg/m³ kPa kPa Øu = 0 g/l g/l
BH1 U2 2.00 Firm brown grey CLAY UU 27 2.02 40 105 52 0.28 7.99102
U3 3.00 Firm brown grey CLAY UU 27 2.01 60 136 68102
U4 4.00 Stiff brown grey CLAY UU 29 1.98 80 159 80 0.91 8.57102
U5 5.00 Stiff brown grey CLAY UU 32 1.94 100 162 81102
U6 8.00 Stiff dark grey CLAY UU 28 1.98 160 200 100102
U7 11.00 Stiff dark grey CLAY UU 27 2.02 220 273 136102
U8 14.00 Very stiff dark grey CLAY UU 27 2.01 280 303 151 0.57 8.68102
U9 17.00 Very stiff dark grey CLAY UU 27 2.00 340 339 169102
Note: Soil Classification based upon unmodified Plasticity Index
© AP GEOTECHNICS LTD.
SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICAL TESTS
Project: 326 KENSAL ROAD, LONDON, W10 5BZ Project No: 4336-2Client: Resolution Property Limited Sheet No: 2/3Agent: Heyne Tillett Steel
CLASSIFICATION TRIAXIAL COMPRESSION - TOTAL STRESS CHEMICALLocation Sample Depth Description Natural Liquid Plastic Plast. Passing Mod. Class Type Moisture Bulk Radial Deviator Cohesion Sulphate (SO4) pH
No Moisture Limit Limit Index 425µm Plast. Content Density Stress Stress cu, kPa cu, kPa Water SoilContent Index assuming Øu, deg (Sol)
m % % % % % % % Mg/m³ kPa kPa Øu = 0 g/l g/l
BH1 U10 20.00 Very stiff dark grey CLAY UU 26 1.93 400 323 162102
U11 23.00 Very stiff dark grey CLAY UU 25 1.99 460 430 215102
BH2 U1 1.50 Firm brown grey CLAY UU 28 1.97 30 99 50102
U2 2.50 Firm brown grey CLAY UU 30 1.99 50 135 68 1.46 8.45102
U4 6.00 Stiff brown grey CLAY 30 74 29 45 100 CV UU 30 1.95 120 185 92 0.81 7.99102
U5 9.05 Stiff dark grey CLAY UU 30 2.01 181 214 107 1.24 8.64102
BH3 U1 3.00 Firm brown grey CLAY UU 27 2.03 60 115 57 0.88 8.24102
U2 4.00 Firm brown grey CLAY UU 30 1.95 80 66 33(premature failure) 102
Note: Soil Classification based upon unmodified Plasticity Index
© AP GEOTECHNICS LTD.
SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICAL TESTS
Project: 326 KENSAL ROAD, LONDON, W10 5BZ Project No: 4336-2Client: Resolution Property Limited Sheet No: 3/3Agent: Heyne Tillett Steel
CLASSIFICATION TRIAXIAL COMPRESSION - TOTAL STRESS CHEMICALLocation Sample Depth Description Natural Liquid Plastic Plast. Passing Mod. Class Type Moisture Bulk Radial Deviator Cohesion Sulphate (SO4) pH
No Moisture Limit Limit Index 425µm Plast. Content Density Stress Stress cu, kPa cu, kPa Water SoilContent Index assuming Øu, deg (Sol)
m % % % % % % % Mg/m³ kPa kPa Øu = 0 g/l g/l
BH3 U3 5.00 Firm brown grey CLAY UU 31 1.96 100 116 58102
U4 8.30 Stiff dark grey CLAY UU 30 1.97 166 171 86102
U5 11.30 Stiff dark grey CLAY UU 28 1.96 226 243 122102
U6 14.30 Stiff dark grey CLAY UU 26 2.03 286 203 102102
U7 17.50 Stiff dark grey CLAY UU 26 2.03 350 277 139 0.71 8.22102
Note: Soil Classification based upon unmodified Plasticity Index
© AP GEOTECHNICS LTD.
SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICAL TESTS
Preparation
Orientation wthin sample
Particle density Mg/m3
Specimen details
Diameter mm
Height mm
Moisture Content %
Bulk density Mg/m3
Dry density Mg/m3
Voids Ratio
Saturation %
Average temperature for test oC
Swelling Pressure kPa
Settlement on saturation %
Remarks
Initials
Date:
Test Report by K4 SOILS LABORATORY
Unit 8 Olds Close Olds Approach
Watford Herts WD18 9RU
Tel: 01923 711 288
Email: [email protected]
Checked and Approved
K.P
04/08/2015
2519 Approved Signatories: K.Phaure (Tech.Mgr) J.Phaure (Lab.Mgr) MSF-5-R6 (Rev. 0)
90
0.835 0.764
94 112
1.90 2.02
1.47 1.53
140 0.746 0.12 18.84 18.11
90 0.764 0.21 29.0 31.8
Initial Final
280 0.717 0.022 74.91 -
280 0.765 0.19 8.3 140 0.0018
140 0.812
560 0.707 0.12 15 39 0.0034
kPa m2/MN m2/yr m2/yr Vertical
0.25 26 150 0.0014
90.0 0.835 - - - -
assumed 2.70
Test Method BS1377:Part 5:1990, clause 3 Date Test started 21/07/2015
Applied
Pressure Voids ratioMv
Cv
( t50, log )
Cv
( t90, root )Csec
Project ID 4336 Client AP Geotechnics Depth 8.00
Soil Description High strength fissured dark brown CLAY
Sample Type U
Sample Received 09/08/2015
Schedule received 09/08/2015
Project Started 14/07/2015
ONE DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION TEST Job Ref 19172
Borehole/Pit No. BH1
Site Name Kensal Road Sample No. 6
eo
0.640
0.660
0.680
0.700
0.720
0.740
0.760
0.780
0.800
0.820
0.840
Void
s R
atio
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
1 10 100 1000 10000
Cv m
2/y
r (
log tim
e)
Applied Pressure kPa
Preparation
Orientation wthin sample
Particle density Mg/m3
Specimen details
Diameter mm
Height mm
Moisture Content %
Bulk density Mg/m3
Dry density Mg/m3
Voids Ratio
Saturation %
Average temperature for test oC
Swelling Pressure kPa
Settlement on saturation %
Remarks
Initials
Date:
Test Report by K4 SOILS LABORATORY
Unit 8 Olds Close Olds Approach
Watford Herts WD18 9RU
Tel: 01923 711 288
Email: [email protected]
Checked and Approved
K.P
04/08/2015
2519 Approved Signatories: K.Phaure (Tech.Mgr) J.Phaure (Lab.Mgr) MSF-5-R6 (Rev. 0)
53
0.903 0.848
94 106
1.86 1.95
1.42 1.46
100 0.817 0.16 18.90 18.35
53 0.848 0.36 31.3 33.4
Initial Final
200 0.787 0.064 74.78 -
200 0.826 0.26 14 28 0.0023
100 0.873
400 0.765 0.17 10 6.3 0.0028
kPa m2/MN m2/yr m2/yr Vertical
0.33 31 63 0.0015
53.0 0.903 - - - -
assumed 2.70
Test Method BS1377:Part 5:1990, clause 3 Date Test started 21/07/2015
Applied
Pressure Voids ratioMv
Cv
( t50, log )
Cv
( t90, root )Csec
Project ID 4336 Client AP Geotechnics Depth 6.00
Soil Description High strength fissured brown CLAY with rare selenite crystals
Sample Type U
Sample Received 09/08/2015
Schedule received 09/08/2015
Project Started 14/07/2015
ONE DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION TEST Job Ref 19172
Borehole/Pit No. BH2
Site Name Kensal Road Sample No. 4
eo
0.720
0.740
0.760
0.780
0.800
0.820
0.840
0.860
0.880
0.900
0.920
Void
s R
atio
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
1 10 100 1000 10000
Cv m
2/y
r (
log tim
e)
Applied Pressure kPa
Preparation
Orientation wthin sample
Particle density Mg/m3
Specimen details
Diameter mm
Height mm
Moisture Content %
Bulk density Mg/m3
Dry density Mg/m3
Voids Ratio
Saturation %
Average temperature for test oC
Swelling Pressure kPa
Settlement on saturation %
Remarks
Initials
Date:
Test Report by K4 SOILS LABORATORY
Unit 8 Olds Close Olds Approach
Watford Herts WD18 9RU
Tel: 01923 711 288
Email: [email protected]
Checked and Approved
K.P
04/08/2015
2519 Approved Signatories: K.Phaure (Tech.Mgr) J.Phaure (Lab.Mgr) MSF-5-R6 (Rev. 0)
80
0.887 0.817
91 108
1.86 1.97
1.43 1.49
120 0.799 0.12 18.93 18.23
80 0.817 0.25 29.9 32.8
Initial Final
240 0.767 0.053 75.00 -
240 0.812 0.24 9.7 18 0.0027
120 0.866
480 0.745 0.15 0.89 8.8 0.0033
kPa m2/MN m2/yr m2/yr Vertical
0.27 11 13 0.0017
80.0 0.887 - - - -
assumed 2.70
Test Method BS1377:Part 5:1990, clause 3 Date Test started 21/07/2015
Applied
Pressure Voids ratioMv
Cv
( t50, log )
Cv
( t90, root )Csec
Project ID 4336 Client AP Geotechnics Depth 8.30
Soil Description High strength fissured dark grey CLAY
Sample Type U
Sample Received 09/08/2015
Schedule received 09/08/2015
Project Started 14/07/2015
ONE DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION TEST Job Ref 19172
Borehole/Pit No. BH3
Site Name Kensal Road Sample No. 4
eo
0.700
0.720
0.740
0.760
0.780
0.800
0.820
0.840
0.860
0.880
0.900
Void
s R
atio
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
1 10 100 1000 10000
Cv m
2/y
r (
log tim
e)
Applied Pressure kPa
Project: 326 KENSAL ROAD, LONDON, W10 5BZ Project No: 4336Client: Resolution Property Limited Sheet No: 1/1Agent: Heyne Tillett Steel
Loca
tion
Sample
Depth
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chrom
ium
Coppe
r
Lead
Merc
ury
Nickel
Selen
ium
Zinc
Boron
Chrom
ium
Phen
ols
Organ
ic Carb
on
TPH by
GCM
S
m
triva
lent
inorg
anic
water s
ol.
hexa
valen
ttot
. mon
ohyd
ric
tot.
C8 - C
10
C10 -
C12
C12 -
C16
C16 -
C21
C21 -
C35
C35 -
C40
Total
C8 -
C40
pH
BH1 D1 0.30 17.4 <0.5 34.8 32.9 146 0.7 26.3 <1.0 71.4 1.2 <0.8 <5 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0
BH2 D1 0.40 22.7 <0.5 40.5 59.5 329 0.9 32.6 1.3 334 2.9 <0.8 <5 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 4.8 <1.0 4.8
TP1 C1 0.50 22.9 1.3 40.4 53.6 601 1.0 26.6 <1.0 217 1.0 <0.8 <5 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0C2 1.00 <5
GAC¹ residential 3 627 2330 3750 291 4.3 210 commercial 348 8840 71700 665000 192000 35 1100000
CLEA² residential 32 170 130 350commercial 640 3600 1800 13000
Notes All units are mg/kg dry weight of soil unless otherwise stated, except for pH which is dimensionless
1. LQM/CIEH GAC given at 1% soil organic matter
2. CLEA SGVs given at 6% soil organic matter Exceptions denoted thus: Residential XXCommercial XX
© AP GEOTECHNICS LTD.
CONTAMINANTS IN SOIL
Project: 326 KENSAL ROAD, LONDON, W10 5BZ Project No: 4336Client: Resolution Property Limited Sheet No: 1/1Agent: Heyne Tillett Steel
Speciated Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons by GCMSLocation BH1 BH2 TP1 TP1 TP1 LQM/CIEHSample D1 D1 C1 C2 C3 GAC³
Depth, m 0.30 0.40 0.50 1.00 1.50 residential allotments commercial
Determinand Concentration, mg/kg
PAHNaphthalene <0.1 1.2 <0.1 0.3 16.1 1.5 4.1 200Acenaphthylene <0.1 4.7 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 170 28 84000Acenaphthene <0.1 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 8.6 210 34 85000Fluorene <0.1 0.5 <0.1 <0.1 6.3 160 27 64000Phenanthrene <0.1 7.2 <0.1 <0.1 20.1 92 16 22000Anthracene <0.1 4.5 <0.1 <0.1 2.5 2300 380 530000Fluoranthene 0.1 57.5 0.1 0.2 6.7 260 52 23000Pyrene 0.1 53.1 0.1 0.1 4.5 560 110 54000Benzo(a)anthracene <0.1 32.8 0.1 0.1 1.1 3.1 2.5 90Chrysene 0.1 35.4 0.1 0.2 1.5 6.0 2.6 140Benzo(b)fluoranthene <0.1 26.9 <0.1 0.1 0.6 5.6 3.5 100Benzo(k)fluoranthene <0.1 26.6 <0.1 0.2 0.5 8.5 6.8 140Benzo(a)pyrene 0.1 33.4 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.83 0.6 14Indeno(123-cd)pyrene <0.1 19.9 <0.1 0.2 0.7 3.2 1.8 60Dibenzo(ah)anthracene <0.1 5.4 <0.1 0.3 0.3 0.76 0.76 13Benzo(ghi)perylene <0.1 17.5 <0.1 0.5 0.5 44 70 650
Total PAH (16) <0.4 327 0.8 2.8 70.7
Notes
1. Total PAH = Sum of EPA16 identified components Exceptions denoted thus: Residential XX2. The results are expressed as mg/kg dry weight soil after correction for moisture content Commercial XX3. GAC given at 1% soil organic matter
© AP GEOTECHNICS LTD.
CONTAMINANTS IN SOIL
Project: 326 KENSAL ROAD, LONDON, W10 5BZ Project No: 4336Client: Resolution Property Limited Sheet No: 1/1Agent: Heyne Tillett Steel
Speciated Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Aromatic / Aliphatic Split with BTEX)Location TP1 TP1 LQM/CIEHSample C2 C3 GAC
Depth, m 1.00 1.50 residential allotments commercial
Determinand Concentration, mg/kg
Aromatic HydrocarbonsC5 - C7 0.04 <0.01 65 13 28000>C7 - C8 0.13 0.02 120 22 59000>C8 - C10 <1.0 <1.0 27 9 3700>C10 - C12 <1.0 9.7 69 13 17000>C12 - C16 <1.0 34.4 140 23 36000>C16 - C21 <1.0 47.9 250 46 28000>C21 - C35 21 30.9 890 370 28000>C35 - C40 <1.0 <1.0Total Aromatic Hydrocarbons 21.17 122.92
Aliphatic HydrocarbonsC5 - C6 <0.01 <0.01 30 740 3400>C6 - C8 1.02 0.02 73 2300 8300>C8 - C10 5.7 <1.0 19 320 2100>C10 - C12 6.6 <1.0 93 2200 10000>C12 - C16 <1.0 <1.0 740 11000 61000>C16 - C21 <1.0 <1.0>C21 - C35 32.4 <1.0>C35 - C40 3.9 <1.0Total Aliphatic Hydrocarbons 45.7 <1.0
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons 70.8 123
BTEX Concentration, µg/kg
Benzene 35.2 <10.0 330 70 95000Toluene 133 16.9 610000 120000 4400000Ethyl Benzene 49.1 177 350000 90000 2800000Xylenes* 112 356 230000 160000 2600000
NotesTotal = Sum of compounds above detection limit.GAC given at 1% soil organic matter Exceptions denoted thus: Residential XX*Results given as total of (ortho), (meta) and (para) xylene. SGV given is the lowest permissible value for any xylene compound Commercial XX
© AP GEOTECHNICS LTD.
CONTAMINANTS IN SOIL
45000 260000 1600000
Project: 326 KENSAL ROAD, LONDON, W10 5BZ Project No: 4336Client: Resolution Property Limited Sheet No: 1/1Agent: Heyne Tillett Steel
Location Sample Depth Asbestos identificationm Description of matrix Overall percentage of asbestos identified (approx.) Type of asbestos identified
BH1 D1 0.30 MADE GROUND none detected
BH2 D1 0.40 MADE GROUND none detected
TP1 C1 0.50 MADE GROUND none detected
© AP GEOTECHNICS LTD.
CONTAMINANTS IN SOIL