Report - Geo-Report_Sch A_Hwy-386.pdf

GEOCONSULT

Geotechnical engineers providing geotechnical engineering solutions .... Patricia A. Crumley, MECEE Tirso A. Alvarez, PhD Alan R. Crumley, MSCE

P.O. BOX 362040, SAN JUAN, PUERTO RICO 00936-2040 TEL (787) 783-3585 FAX (787) 793-0410 Founded 1981 – Peer Reviewed by ASFE www.geoconsult.us

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

LANDSLIDE REMEDIATION

PR-568 KILOMETER 25.8

Corozal, Puerto Rico

January 10, 2019

INTRODUCTION

This report presents recommendations for remediation of a minor landslide on a steep slope on the side of roadway PR-568 at kilometer 25.8 in Corozal, Puerto

Rico. Work was conducted under contract to Barrett Hale Alamo (BHA), whose design will be submitted to the Puerto Rico Highway and Transportation Authority

(PRHTA). An advance report was submitted on December 17, 2018. Work was conducted in accordance with our proposal dated April 18, 2018, modified May 3, 2018, and BHA's notice to proceed dated November 12, 2018.

The site is located about six kilometers southwest from the town of Corozal, just before reaching kilometer 25.8 (Figure 1). At this point, the roadway sharply curves. Slopes above (east) from the road are quite steep and appear to be in rock.

Slopes below the road (due west) are also steep, on the order of 34 to 36 degrees.

PR-568, kilometer 25.8

Geotechnical Engineering Report

The slope is heavily vegetated and there are no signs of slides over most of the slope, that is, there are no obvious slid zones or tilted trees as seen from the road.

The exception occurs just past and below the roadway, where a shallow slide is visible, at or near the vertex of the roadway curve. This shallow slide stops at the pavement’s edge and will likely eventually enter the roadway. A safety barrier is in place, extending 12.7 meters along the side of the road. The slide was noted as part of the damages caused by Hurricane María in 2017.

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

Weathered volcanic rocks outcrop in the area; a portion of the geologic map for the area is shown on Figure 2. The initial boring locations had to be revised due to the steep slope angle and unsafe conditions for drilling on the slope. In addition, access on the roadway is highly restricted because of traffic, also considering that there is insufficient space for drilling on the roadway while also maintaining traffic.

The final boring locations are indicated on Figure 3. Boring logs and laboratory test results are included in Appendix A.

On the gulley opposite the slide area, weathered rock was found one foot below ground surface to the depth drilled, 20 feet. Borings were then drilled on either side of the slide area since the narrow road did not allow for traffic if we drilled at the exact slide area, two on one side and one on the other. On the outer roadway side, the nearest boring to the slide area showed dense and hard low plasticity clayey sand (SC, PI = 13), followed by weathered rock at a depth of ten feet. Two more borings on either side showed the same profile (SC, PI = 11), with weathered rock at depths of 8 to 10 feet.

The necessary remediation involves mitigation and repair of a shallow slide on a very steep slope. A massive slide is not observed nor has such a slide been reported. The following solutions are intended to provide a stable roadway slope near the pavement edge. Note that the roadway will require temporary closure in order to conduct these repairs. Appendix B includes photographs of the area. To better understand the following discussion, Figure 4 presents a portion of the topographic plan on which two profile locations are shown. Then, Figure 5 presents two sections; one from the topographic plan, the other inferred from visual inspection and field notes (Figure 6).

Given the narrow space and vegetation, the roadway will need to be closed for any of the methods here presented.

ALTERNATE A

Drilled cased shafts, contiguously installed, can provide stability to the upper areas. If properly sized, and if taken deep enough, these piles will not require tiebacks or additional restraints, even with the steep slopes below. I have preliminarily selected 16-inch diameter steel casings, which would require 18-inch bores into which the permanent casings would be inserted with concrete and any needed reinforcement. Pile casings can be 3/8-inch or 1/2 inch, depending on the lateral load requirements. The piles will depend on the structural analysis, but a wall thickness of 0.5 inches and pile lengths of 25 feet below the top of pavement can be assumed. The piles can be installed along a straight line, slightly minimizing the existing road curvature.

It is noted that the contractor must install a stable frame to initiate drilling on the slope surface and to achieve a straight line of side-by-side piles. The tops of the piles can be joined by a capbeam that could be extended upward to create a safety barrier. Backfill behind the wall into the roadway can consist of clean gravel (less than 5% fines) with gradation 3/8 inch to 3 inches.

For preliminary cost estimates, assume a repair length of 50 feet with 25-foot piles, with installation locations every 20 inches to install the 16-inch casings. While the solution would be an effective repair to the existing situation, installation of the drilled piles would be very difficult.

ALTERNATE B

H-piles can be installed into predrilled holes, with precast concrete panels installed between pile pairs. Typical spacings will depend on the pile sizes. See

Figure 5. As in the previous alternate, the piles can be installed along a straight line, slightly minimizing the road curvature.

Using a repair length of 50 feet, assume a spacing of five feet for 12x53 piles, or seven feet for 14x73 piles. Depending on availability and the structural engineering design, other convenient H-pile sizes can be considered. The length of piles is 25 feet, measured below the top of pavement. The predrilled hole will need to accommodate the H-pile plus any required concrete cover.

ALTERNATE C

The third alternate consists of micropiles installed in repeating vertical and inclined patterns that repeat every three feet. Please refer to Figure 7. This layout is a variation or repetition of the initial pali radice that in Italy started use of root piles

(later minipiles, now micropiles) about five decades ago. The idea is to create a root-like structure that will interact and provide surficial stability. Afterward, the area is covered with 6x6 wire mesh and then covered with shotcrete. This idea is now in common use throughout the United States. Micropiles (likely all vertical) can also be used to provide a suitable foundation for a retaining wall (Figure 8).

It is intended that the micropiles would be installed from the roadway with an articulated feeder that allows for inward drilling. Casing should be 6.75 inches, taken to a depth of 25 feet, whether vertical or inclined. The recommended inclination is 1:3 to 1:4 (these angles can alternate and vary).

Quantities should be calculated assuming that all piles are taken to a depth of 25 feet, whether vertical or inclined. Water would have to be diverted from the top of the roadway in order to prevent erosion at the top of the wall.

ALTERNATE D

A fourth alternate exists, a solution that appears to be well-suited for this situation. A gabion wall can be taken to a depth of nine feet below the existing pavement. The location of the wall face would follow the existing road perimeter.

The base of the wall will vary along the slide area, reaching nine feet below the existing pavement towards the center, a length that we estimate will be 17 feet. To the sides of this central area, the wall bottom will rise 1:1, coming to a depth of five feet for the remainder of the wall. See Figure 9 (and Figure 5, the review of the apparent slope variations). This comparison serves as the basis for our recommendation that a gabion wall be considered. For design of this wall, an allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 pounds per square foot may be used. If confirmed by a cost analysis, a gabion wall would be the best solution. Gabion walls are being used for landslide repairs in two projects about three kilometers further inland.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Four alternates were previously presented and are under review. Our recommendations are summarized below. Nonetheless, the reader is warned that no conclusions may be made without reading the entire report.

1. Alternate A consists of drilled cased shafts, contiguously installed. These piles will probably not require tiebacks or additional restraints, even with the steep slopes below. I have preliminarily selected 16-inch diameter steel casings into 18-inch bores. Pile casings can be 3/8-inch or 1/2 inch, depending on the lateral load requirements. The piles will depend on the structural analysis, but a wall thickness of 0.5 inches and pile lengths of 25 feet below the top of pavement can be assumed. The piles can be installed along a straight line, slightly minimizing the existing road curvature. The pile tops can be joined by a capbeam that could be extended upward to create a safety barrier. Backfill behind the wall into the roadway can consist of clean gravel (less than 5% fines) with gradation 3/8 inch to 3 inches.

2. Under Alternate B, H-piles can be installed into predrilled holes, with precast concrete panels installed between pile pairs. Typical spacings will depend on the pile sizes. The piles can be installed along a straight line, slightly minimizing the road curvature. Subject to structural design, initially assume a spacing of five feet for 12x53 piles, or seven feet for 14x73 piles. Depending on availability and the structural engineering design, other convenient H-pile sizes can be considered. The length of piles is 25 feet, measured below the top of pavement.

3. Another solution would be use of micropiles installed in a staggered pattern, Alternate C. To my knowledge, this solution has not been previously used in

Puerto Rico. It is, however, a viable solution used on a worldwide basis.

Micropiles would be installed in repeating vertical and inclined patterns that repeat every three feet. Afterward, the area is covered with 6x6 wire mesh and then covered with shotcrete. It is intended that the micropiles will be installed from the roadway with an articulated feeder that allows for inward drilling. Casing should be 6.75 inches, taken to a depth of 25 feet, whether vertical or inclined. The recommended inclination is 1:3 to 1:4 (these angles can alternate and vary).

4. Alternate D proposes a gabion wall, which appears to be well-suited for this situation. The wall can be taken to a depth of nine feet below the existing pavement, subject to review by a geotechnical engineer on excavation to confirm that an adequate level is reached. The location of the wall face would follow the existing road perimeter. The base of the wall will vary along the slide area, reaching nine feet below the existing pavement towards the center. To the sides of this central area, the wall bottom will rise at approximately 1:1 (to be modified in the field in accordance with observations), coming to a depth of five feet for the remainder of the wall.

For design of this wall, an allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 pounds per square foot may be used. If confirmed by a cost analysis, a gabion wall would be the best solution. The wall must include a drainage system to remove water with a designed filter system. The bottom of the wall towards the slope should also be protected to avoid erosion beneath the front of the wall. Gabion mats can be used as indicated by the topography.

5. It is noted that water flows along the opposite side of the road along a shallow depression that is almost useless, although it is quite wide and takes away from the available level roadway area. A major contribution to the life of any of these solutions would entail reduction of water flows over the road into the present slide location. We suggest that consideration be given to installation of a deeper trench or gulley on the inner side of the road, perhaps a stone-lined drainage pathway (an armored ditch) or a concrete-lined gulley. This drain could be taken to the culvert that is found about 16 meters away from the northern telephone pole. The headwall on the slope side

(outer face) has also slid and could be repaired as part of more-robust repair effort. By installing this deeper gulley, the roadway could be moved or extended slightly inward.

FINAL COMMENTS

Since the information from borings is discrete, some level of interpolation was required to cover all the area of interest. These data interpolations were based on engineer’s judgment, supported by boring logs, results of laboratory tests and site geologic map. However, some differences between the assumed subsoil profiles and the actual site conditions might occur because local ground conditions may change over short distances.

This report was based on design concepts, parameters and constraints that have been made known to us by the completion of this document. Any subsequent design changes would require a revision of the geotechnical recommendations herein presented to confirm that they would be suited for the new design.

Alan R. Crumley, PE January 10, 2019 License 5828 San Juan, Puerto Rico File No. 3008-18

Geotechnical Engineers

P.O. Box 362040, San Juan P.R. 00936 Tel. (787) 783-3585 / www.geoconsult.us

Project Reference Sheet No.Code No.

Project No.

Description Scale: None Date: 15 Dec. 2018 By: PAC Revised: ARC

Repairs to Roadway PR-568, kilometer 25.8

General Location Plan, Corozal

Figure

3008-18

N Corozal

Figure 1. Site Location Plan for Corozal, San Juan, Puerto Rico.

From USGS Topographic Map for Corozal Quadrangle, Puerto Rico, 1972

Geotechnical Engineers

P.O. Box 362040, San Juan P.R. 00936 Tel. (787) 783-3585 / www.geoconsult.us

Project Reference Sheet No.Code No.

Project No.

Description Scale: None Date: 15 Dec. 2018 By: PAC Revised: ARC

Repairs to Roadway PR-568, kilometer 25.8 Geology, Corozal Figure

3008-18

CRETACEOUS

Kn: dark greenish-gray to dark greenish-black basaltic tuff Kna: dark gray andesite lava Knb: Los Negros Formation, dark gray basaltic lava

UPPER CRETACEOUS OR LOWER TERTIARY:

Tkci: Cibuco Formation, dark gray massive conglomerate and breccia conglomerate

From Geologic Map of the Corozal Quadrangle, by Arthur E. Nelson, USGS Map I-473, 1967

P.O. Box 362040, San Juan P.R. 00936

Tel. (787) 782-3554 / Fax (787) 793-0410

Project Reference Sheet No.Code No.

Project No.

Description Scale: None

Date: 15 Dec. 2018 By: PAC Revised: ARC

Repairs to Roadway PR-568, kilometer 25.8

Boring Locations Figure

3008-18

Geoconsult Boring id

Geoconsult Boring id

Geoconsult Boring id

Alan Crumley Text Box

QR-1

Alan Crumley Text Box

QR-2

Alan Crumley Text Box

QR-3

Alan Crumley Text Box

QR-4

Geoconsult Boring id

Alan Crumley Line

Alan Crumley Line

Alan Crumley Text Box Possible section shown in field notes, see Figures 5 & 6.

Alan Crumley Text Box Section shown on Figure 5

Alan Crumley Text Box

GEOCONSULT

PR-568

Report dated January 10, 2019 Figure 4

Text Box

GEOCONSULT

PR-568

Report dated January 10, 2019 Figure 5

Alan Crumley Oval

Alan Crumley Callout Inferred from field notes upon visual inspection

Alan Crumley Text Box Potential gabion wall front view at bottom

Line

GEOCONSULT

PR-568

Report dated January 10, 2019 Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

APPENDIX A

Boring logs

Laboratory test results

0.00

-4.00

-10.00

FILL: clayey sand some gravel, brown, gray

CLAYEY SAND, medium dense, olive yellow

WEATHERED ROCK sampled as sandy gravel some clay, greenish gray

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

S-9

40/5"

40/4"

40/2"

40/3"

40/5"

40/4"

40/2"

40/3"

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG

BORING No.: QR-1

PROJECT:

PR-568 Km. 25.8

JOB:

SHEET 1

OF

LOCATION: Corozal, PR DRILLER/DRILL RIG: Carlos I. Diaz / CME-55

COORDINATES: DATE STARTED: 12-18-18 DATE COMPLETED: 12-18-18

DESCRIPTION BY: Rommel Cintron SURFACE ELEVATION (ft):

GROUNDWATER (ft): Initial: Not Found Final: ENGINEER: Rommel Cintron DRILLING METHOD: Hollow-Stem Auger 2.25" ID TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 20.5

N W Qu

"N" - Number of blows required to drive the sampling spoon a distance of 12 in. with a 140 lbs hammer falling 30 in.

"W" - Natural Moisture Content in percentage of dry weight. Initial G.W. Depth "Qu" - Unconfined Compressive Strength in tons per square foot. Final G.W. Depth "Rc" - Core recovery in percent for each successive run. "RQD" - Rock quality designation.

"WH" - Sample was recovered by advancing the sampler with the weight of the hammer.

"P" - A "P" in the Unconfined Compressive Strength test indicates the use of the pocket Penetrometer.

ELEV

(ft)

0.00

DEPTH

(ft) DESCRIPTION

LE

G

EN

D

SA

M

PL

E

N O

TY

PE

BL

O

W S

SPT

N

W Qu RC RQD%

20 40 60 80

1 2 3 4Qu

N-W

Alan R. Crumley Text Box Coordinates:

251926.0542 N

208873.4268 E

TE = 363.40 m

0.00

-2.00

FILL: clayey sand trace gravel, olive yellow

WEATHERED ROCK sampled as sandy gravel with clay, greenish gray

Do... some clay

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

S-9

40/5"

40/5"

40/5"

40/5"

40/5"

40/4"

40/1"

40/4"

40/5"

40/5"

40/5"

40/5"

40/5"

40/4"

40/1"

40/4"

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG

BORING No.: QR-2

PROJECT:

PR-568 Km. 25.8

JOB:

SHEET 1

OF

LOCATION: Corozal, PR DRILLER/DRILL RIG: Carlos I. Diaz / CME-55

COORDINATES: DATE STARTED: 12-17-18 DATE COMPLETED: 12-17-18

DESCRIPTION BY: Rommel Cintron SURFACE ELEVATION (ft):

GROUNDWATER (ft): Initial: Not Found Final: ENGINEER: Rommel Cintron DRILLING METHOD: Hollow-Stem Auger 2.25" ID TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 20.5

N W Qu

"N" - Number of blows required to drive the sampling spoon a distance of 12 in. with a 140 lbs hammer falling 30 in.

"W" - Natural Moisture Content in percentage of dry weight. Initial G.W. Depth "Qu" - Unconfined Compressive Strength in tons per square foot. Final G.W. Depth "Rc" - Core recovery in percent for each successive run. "RQD" - Rock quality designation.

"WH" - Sample was recovered by advancing the sampler with the weight of the hammer.

"P" - A "P" in the Unconfined Compressive Strength test indicates the use of the pocket Penetrometer.

ELEV

(ft)

0.00

DEPTH

(ft) DESCRIPTION

LE

G

EN

D

SA

M

PL

E

N O

TY

PE

BL

O

W S

SPT

N

W Qu RC RQD%

20 40 60 80

1 2 3 4Qu

N-W

Alan R. Crumley Text Box Coordinates:

251929.5864 N

208878.3539 E

TE = 363.39 m

0.00

-2.00

-10.00

FILL: clayey sand some gravel, brown, gray

CLAYEY SAND, medium dense, brownish yellow

Do... medium dense to dense, olive yellow

WEATHERED ROCK sampled as sandy gravel with clay, greenish gray

Do... some clay

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

S-9

S-10

40/5"

40/5"

40/3"

40/5"

40/4"

40/5"

40/3"

40/5"

40/4"

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG

BORING No.: QR-3

PROJECT:

PR-568 Km. 25.8

JOB:

SHEET 1

OF

LOCATION: Corozal, PR DRILLER/DRILL RIG: Carlos I. Diaz / CME-55

COORDINATES: DATE STARTED: 12-17-18 DATE COMPLETED: 12-17-18

DESCRIPTION BY: Rommel Cintron SURFACE ELEVATION (ft):

GROUNDWATER (ft): Initial: Not Found Final: ENGINEER: Rommel Cintron DRILLING METHOD: Hollow-Stem Auger 2.25" ID TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 25.5

N W Qu

"N" - Number of blows required to drive the sampling spoon a distance of 12 in. with a 140 lbs hammer falling 30 in.

"W" - Natural Moisture Content in percentage of dry weight. Initial G.W. Depth "Qu" - Unconfined Compressive Strength in tons per square foot. Final G.W. Depth "Rc" - Core recovery in percent for each successive run. "RQD" - Rock quality designation.

"WH" - Sample was recovered by advancing the sampler with the weight of the hammer.

"P" - A "P" in the Unconfined Compressive Strength test indicates the use of the pocket Penetrometer.

ELEV

(ft)

0.00

DEPTH

(ft) DESCRIPTION

LE

G

EN

D

SA

M

PL

E

N O

TY

PE

BL

O

W S

SPT

N

W Qu RC RQD%

20 40 60 80

1 2 3 4Qu

N-W

Alan R. Crumley Text Box Coordinates:

251910.2882 N

208876.1484 E

TE = 364.38 m

0.00

-2.00

-8.00

FILL: clayey sand some gravel, brown, dark brown

CLAYEY SAND, medium dense to dense, brown, dark brown

WEATHERED ROCK sampled as sandy gravel with clay, dark brown, dark gray

Do... sampled as sandy gravel

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

40/5"

40/2"

40/1"

40/5"

40/5"

40/2"

40/1"

40/5"

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG

BORING No.: QR-4

PROJECT:

PR-568 Km. 25.8

JOB:

SHEET 1

OF

LOCATION: Corozal, PR DRILLER/DRILL RIG: Carlos I. Diaz / CME-55

COORDINATES: DATE STARTED: 12-17-18 DATE COMPLETED: 12-17-18

DESCRIPTION BY: Rommel Cintron SURFACE ELEVATION (ft):

GROUNDWATER (ft): Initial: Not Found Final: ENGINEER: Rommel Cintron DRILLING METHOD: Hollow-Stem Auger 2.25" ID TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 15.5

N W Qu

"N" - Number of blows required to drive the sampling spoon a distance of 12 in. with a 140 lbs hammer falling 30 in.

"W" - Natural Moisture Content in percentage of dry weight. Initial G.W. Depth "Qu" - Unconfined Compressive Strength in tons per square foot. Final G.W. Depth "Rc" - Core recovery in percent for each successive run. "RQD" - Rock quality designation.

"WH" - Sample was recovered by advancing the sampler with the weight of the hammer.

"P" - A "P" in the Unconfined Compressive Strength test indicates the use of the pocket Penetrometer.

ELEV

(ft)

0.00

DEPTH

(ft) DESCRIPTION

LE

G

EN

D

SA

M

PL

E

N O

TY

PE

BL

O

W S

SPT

N

W Qu RC RQD%

20 40 60 80

1 2 3 4Qu

N-W

Alan R. Crumley Text Box Coordinates:

251903.6119 N

208874.1167 E

TE = 364.90 m

(X=NO)PERCENTFINERSIZE

PASS?SPEC.*PERCENTSIEVE

Project No:

Project:

Client:

Elev./Depth:Location:

Date:Source of Sample:Sample No.:

Remarks

Classification

Coefficients

Atterberg Limits

Material Description

AASHTO=USCS=

Cc=Cu=

D10=D15=D30=

D50=D60=D85=

PI=LL=PL=

Particle Size Distribution Report

P E R C E N T F

IN

E R

100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001500

GRAIN SIZE - mm

% +75 MM % GRAVEL % SAND % SILT % CLAY

i n i n i n

-1 /2 i n i n

/4 i n

/2 i n

/8 i n

0.0 11.1 76.0 12.9

Figure7938

PR-568 Km. 25.8, Corozal, PR

GeoConsult

4-6'Corozal, PR

12/28/18Project SiteQR-1

Tested by: A. Roman

Checked by: Rommel Cintron Aponte, MSCE, PE

A-2-6(0)SC

0.1070.411 0.9911.453.97

113322

Clayey sand

(no specification provided)

JACA & SIERRA

TESTING LABORATORIES

San Juan, Puerto Rico

100.0 99.4 88.9 68.5 30.6 17.4 12.9

.5 in.

.375 in.

#4 #10 #40

#100 #200

Rectangle

(X=NO)PERCENTFINERSIZE

PASS?SPEC.*PERCENTSIEVE

Project No:

Project:

Client:

Elev./Depth:Location:

Date:Source of Sample:Sample No.:

Remarks

Classification

Coefficients

Atterberg Limits

Material Description

AASHTO=USCS=

Cc=Cu=

D10=D15=D30=

D50=D60=D85=

PI=LL=PL=

Particle Size Distribution Report

P E R C E N T F

IN

E R

100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001500

GRAIN SIZE - mm

% +75 MM % GRAVEL % SAND % SILT % CLAY

i n i n i n

-1 /2 i n i n

/4 i n

/2 i n

/8 i n

0.0 0.3 65.9 33.8

Figure7938

PR-568 Km. 25.8, Corozal, PR

GeoConsult

4-6'Corozal, PR

1/2/19Project SiteQR-3

Tested by: R. De Jesus

Checked by: Rommel Cintron Aponte, MSCE, PE

A-2-6(1)SC

0.2420.4081.13

133724

Clayey sand

(no specification provided)

JACA & SIERRA

TESTING LABORATORIES

San Juan, Puerto Rico

100.0 99.7 95.5 60.9 42.8 33.8

.375 in.

#4

#10 #40

#100 #200

Rectangle

APPENDIX B

Photographs

PR‐568, Kilometer 25.8

101‐ Looking north

102‐ Deep gulley

103‐ Drilling at boring QR‐2

104‐ Gulley at slide area

105‐ Gulley

106‐ Slide area

107‐ Note wide shoulder on inner roadway.

108‐ Same as above

109‐ General view

110‐ Looking south

111‐ View of slide area

112‐ Cramped curve

113‐ Location of boring QR‐3

114‐ Boring QR‐3

115‐ Note relatively wide shoulder and narrow roadway.

116‐ Same as above

117‐ Inlet for pipe crossing, 16 meters north from telephone pole

118‐ Same as above

119‐ Outlet culvert

120‐ Culvert has slid and could be repaired.

121‐ Same as above

122‐ Boring QR‐3

123‐ Truck heading north

124‐ Same truck

BLANK PAGE