Client: Alberta Transportation Date: October 29, 2010 File No.: 15-16-229 Page 1 of 10 E File: H:\15\16\PH Geohazard Assessments\PH9 Shop and Overpass\Part B Assessments\2010\PH9 Shop and

Overpass 2010 PHOTOS.doc

SHOP SLIDE

Photo 1. Worsening of cracking across the footpath at the end of the Hwy 2 offramp.

Photo 2. Looking along the guardrail. Note the asphalt patching. The guardrail posts appear to have been replaced, potentially reducing the amount of bow in the guardrail.

Client: Alberta Transportation Date: October 29, 2010 File No.: 15-16-229 Page 2 of 10 E File: H:\15\16\PH Geohazard Assessments\PH9 Shop and Overpass\Part B Assessments\2010\PH9 Shop and

Overpass 2010 PHOTOS.doc

Photo 3. Looking across the road at the end of the median island. Note the dip in the road at the scarp for the lower slide bowl.

Photo 4. Looking SE-wards along the road at the top of the lower slide bowl. Note the asphalt patching in the area of previous cracking and vertical offset across the slide scarp (foreground).

Client: Alberta Transportation Date: October 29, 2010 File No.: 15-16-229 Page 3 of 10 E File: H:\15\16\PH Geohazard Assessments\PH9 Shop and Overpass\Part B Assessments\2010\PH9 Shop and

Overpass 2010 PHOTOS.doc

Photo 5. South flank of the lower slide bowl – note the cracking across the road at the slide backscarp.

Photo 6. Slide scarp below the road, either within the main lower slide bowl, or just beyond its southern flank. This scarp was first noted in 2009, but has not worsened significantly since then.

Client: Alberta Transportation Date: October 29, 2010 File No.: 15-16-229 Page 4 of 10 E File: H:\15\16\PH Geohazard Assessments\PH9 Shop and Overpass\Part B Assessments\2010\PH9 Shop and

Overpass 2010 PHOTOS.doc

Photo 7. Northern end of the slide backscarp shown in Photo 6 – the vertical offset is similar to last year. The crack is open to a depth of around 1 m at this location.

Photo 8. Looking NW-wards along the CNR line near the toe of the slope. There does not appear to be any obvious deflection of the rail line (though it is not known how frequently the line/ties are adjusted).

Client: Alberta Transportation Date: October 29, 2010 File No.: 15-16-229 Page 5 of 10 E File: H:\15\16\PH Geohazard Assessments\PH9 Shop and Overpass\Part B Assessments\2010\PH9 Shop and

Overpass 2010 PHOTOS.doc

Photo 9. Looking downslope along the sewer and water lines at the north end of the Shop Slide. There has not been any significant change in the backscarp at this location, though the soil continues to pull away around the piles, indicating continued creep movement.

Photo 10. Improved fire hose connection to the subdrain to the north of the sewer and water line in Photo 9.

Client: Alberta Transportation Date: October 29, 2010 File No.: 15-16-229 Page 6 of 10 E File: H:\15\16\PH Geohazard Assessments\PH9 Shop and Overpass\Part B Assessments\2010\PH9 Shop and

Overpass 2010 PHOTOS.doc

Photo 11. Fire hose discharge point, mid way up the slope. The fire hose carries water from the subdrain to the north of the sewer and water lines (see Photo 10). Flow is estimated to be 24 L/min. Note the biofouling / mineralisation below the discharge point. The fire hose should be extended down to the ditch along the CNR rail line.

Photo 12. Looking downslope from the fire hose discharge point at the waste berm.

Client: Alberta Transportation Date: October 29, 2010 File No.: 15-16-229 Page 7 of 10 E File: H:\15\16\PH Geohazard Assessments\PH9 Shop and Overpass\Part B Assessments\2010\PH9 Shop and

Overpass 2010 PHOTOS.doc

Photo 13. Toe of the slope, in the ditch along the CNR rail line, below the waste berm and fire hose discharge point. Weak/wet soil debris is flowing into the ditch.

OVERPASS SLIDE

Photo 14. Looking along the ditch at the CNR rail line. Note buckling at the toe of the concrete facing. Also note flow in the ditch. There are no other significant changes in this area of the overpass.