gp29 church camp landslide church camp gp29 250 m wide
play

GP29 Church Camp Landslide Church Camp GP29 ~250 m wide and ~200 m - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

GP29 Church Camp Landslide Church Camp GP29 ~250 m wide and ~200 m in length to the river Ponding water Background The river valley is a pre-glacial valley with drift deposits to about 50m- 100m depth. It is unknown if the


  1. GP29 – Church Camp Landslide

  2. Church Camp GP29

  3. ~250 m wide and ~200 m in length to the river Ponding water

  4. Background • The river valley is a pre-glacial valley with drift deposits to about 50m- 100m depth. • It is unknown if the slide predated the highway possibly ancient deep seated landslide. • Highway was widened in 2013 for a new NBL likely constructed over backscarp. • Karl Engineering Consultants Ltd. Installed 3 Slope Inclinometers to 36 m and 3 piezometers • Primary cause due to river erosion at the toe and high ground water regime

  5. Localized Landslides

  6. 2015 Lidar

  7. Additional Geotechnical Investigation • Drilled 9 test holes auger and wet rotary • Three SIs installed to 51 m with 3 pneumatic piezometers to hopefully catch deep seated movement • Two SIs installed to 36 and 39 m deep with 2 pneumatic piezometers • Three tests holes 6.6 m to 11.1 m deep with standpipes for re-alignment information

  8. 6.6 m 6.6 m 36.1 m 51.2 m 51.4 m 11.1 m Gas Well Heads 51.4 m 39.2m 6.6 m

  9. Findings from Investigation FIGURE 17102 PIEZOMETRIC DEPTHS FOR HWY 2:70 11.8 km SOUTH OF RYCROFT -10 PN17-3C -8 PN17-3B PN17-4B -6 PN17-1A -4 Frozen GROUNDWATER DEPTH (m) PN17-1B PN17-4C PN17-2A Ground Surface -2 PN17-2B PN17-2C PN17-3B 0 PN17-3C PN17-4A 2 PN17-4B PN17-4C PN17-5A 4 PN17-5B SP17-6 6 SP17-7 SP17-8 SP17-9 8 10 12 14/Aug/13 23/Sep/13 2/Nov/13 12/Dec/13 21/Jan/14 2/Mar/14 DATE

  10. SI17-3 43 m (586.4 m elev.)

  11. SI17-4 44.3 m (586.8 Elev.) Wasn’t read in January because pneumatics were frozen and stuck inside

  12. Karl’s old SIs

  13. Remedial Measures • Landslide is too large and deep for pile wall or toe berm • Re-alignment of the highway is most cost effective option • Well heads in farmers field will need to be taken into consideration • WSP will be completing the re-alignment design

  14. 70 m Setback 110 m Setback Well heads Bridge

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend