The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutReport of Geotechnical ExplorationGFA. INTERNATIONAL 1=LORIDKS LEADING ENGINEERING SOURCE Report of Geotechnical Exploration 4824 Watersong Way Residence 4824 Watersong Way Fort Pierce, Florida sty® aj May 7, 2020 GFA Project No. 20=0071.00 For: Coastal Construction and Design, .Inc. GOO Geotechnical • Construction da's Leading.Engineering Source and Special Inspections • Plan Review & Code Compliance May 7, 2020 -= Mr. Mario Arbucci Coastal Construction and Design, Inc. 4832 Watersong Way Fort Pierce, Florida 34949 Subject: Report of Geotechnical Exploration 4824 Watersong Way Residence 4824 Watersong Way, Fort Pierce, Florida GFA Project No.20-0071.00 Dear Mr. Arbucci: GFA International,. Inc: (GFA) has completed the 'subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering evaluation for the above referenced project in accordance with the geotechnical and engineering service agreement for this project. The.scope of services was completed in accordance with our Geotechnical Engineering Proposal No. 20-0071.00 dated April 27, 2020, planned in conjunction with and authorized by you.. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of our subsurface exploration was to classify the nature of the subsurface soils and general geomorphic conditions at the site and evaluate their impact upon the proposed construction. This report contains the results of our subsurface exploration and our engineering interpretations of these with respect to the project characteristics described to us, including providing recommendations for site preparation and design of the foundation system. Per our recent telephone discussions and email correspondence with you, GFA understands - that a new three -level residence is planned for construction at the referenced property. Since the structure (or a portion thereof) will be located east of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL), a pile supported foundation is required. We have been providedwith. a Site Plan prepared by James Bushouse, Inc. illustrating the location of the proposed residence on the property. Specific foundation design information was not provided to GFA. However, based on prior projects in the immediate area and for the purposes of this report, we anticipate that the residential structure will be supported by 14-inch diameter augered cast -in -place .(ACIP) piles and grade beams. The recommendations provided herein are based upon the above considerations. If the stated conditions are incorrect or if project description is revised, please inform GFA so that we may review our recommendations with respect to any modifications. 607 NW Commodity Cove • Port St. Lucie, Florida, 34986. - . (772);924-3575 , - .(772) 924.3580 (fax) . _ _ 4824 Watersong Way Residence 4824 Watersong Way, Fort Pierce, Florida GFA Project No. 20-0071.00 Geotechnical Exploration Report May 7, 2020 Page 2 of 10 Two (2) standard penetration test (SPT) borings, advanced to a depth of approximately 40 feet below the existing ground surface, were completed for this study. The subsurface soil conditions encountered at the boring locations generally consisted of loose to dense fine sand (SP), fine sand with clay (SP-SC), and clayey fine sand (SC.) in the upper 15 feet of the soil -profile. Seams of organic silt (OL, Muck) were also present within the upper 10 feet in boring: B-1. These soils were underlain by medium dense to very dense fine sand (SP) containing varying amounts of silt and shell to the boring, termination depths. The results of the borings indicate that a foundation system consisting of ACIP piles and grade beams will be suitable for the proposed residence. Axial compressive and tension capacities for 147inch diameter ACIP piles having lengths of 25, 30,,and 35 feet were developed'for the project. The results of our analysis are contained in Table 3.2.1 in Section 3.2. of this report. .Note that the pile installation lengths in the table are relative to the current ground surface. The piles will be longer or shorter based on depth of fill added or elevation adjustments. .. .. Subgrade soils should be improved (densified) with compaction from the stripped grade prior to constructing any ground supported/structural slabs. The top 2 feet below stripped grade should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of modified Proctor (ASTM D 1557) maximum dry density prior to placing fill to achieve final grade. Fill required to attain design grades should be placed in 12-inch lifts and compacted to achieve the same criteria stated above. Scour elevations used in pile capacity calculations are those provided by the Florida DEP for coastal construction but may notbe adequate for actual scour elevations exceeding the DEP assumptions that may occur in hurricane events. Therefore, our analysis is limited to the DEP scour elevation criteria. Additional. scour analysis was not included in our scope of work. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you during this phase of the project and look forward to a continued association. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you ihave any questions or comments, or if we may further assist you as your plans proceed. No. 4930 JoFi6t, i o*'�O`�`��-2v Erik Soderstrom, E.I. Seniot &GiGeotechnical Department Manager Florida lbtrstlA'Rto.63218 Distribution: Mr. Mario Arbucci —Coastal Construction and Design, Inc. 1 pdf 61F 4824 Watersong Way Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 4824 Watersong Way, Fort Pierce, Florida May 7, 2020 GFA Project No. 20-0071.00 Page 3 of 10 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................:...............................................................................4 1.1 Scope of Services............................................................................................................4 1.2 Project Description...........................................................................................................4 2.0 OBSERVATIONS.................................................................................................................4 2.1 Site Description..::............................................................................................................4 2.2 Field Exploration..............................................................................................................5 2.3 Visual Classification.........................................................................................................5 2AGeomorphic Conditions....................................................................................................5 2.5 Hydrogeological Conditions..............................................................................................6 3.0 ENGINEERING EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS..............................................6 3.1 General ....................................... :.................................................................................... 6 3.2 Pile Foundation Design..................:..................................................................................6 3.3 Pile Foundation Installation..............................................................................................8 3.4 Site Preparation...............................................................................................................8 3.5 Fill Placement and Compactioin......................................................................................:9 3.6 Quality Control and Vibration.Monitoring..........................................................................9 4.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS.....................................................................................................10 5.0 BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS..................................................................................10 Appendix A - Vicinity Map Appendix B - Test Location Plan Appendix C - Notes Related to Borings Appendix D - Log of Boring Records Appendix E - Discussion of Soil Groups GFP 4824 Watersong .Way Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 4824 Watersong Way, Fort Pierce, Florida May 7, 2020 GFA Project No.'20-0071.00 Page 4 of 10 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Scope of Services The objective of our geotechnical services was to collect subsurface. data for the subject project, summarize the, test results, and -discuss any apparent site conditions that may have geotechnical significance for building construction. The following scope of services is provided within this report: . 1. Prepare logs depicting the subsurface soil. conditions encountered in the borings. 2. Review the soil samples obtained during our field exploration for classification and.additional testing if necessary. 3. Evaluate the existing soil conditions found during our explorationwith respect to ACIP pile foundation support for the proposed structure. 4. Provide recommendations with respect to ACIP pile foundation support of the structure, including, pile diameter, capacity, length, and other pile design and installation criteria. 5. Provide recommendations for site preparation and earthwork construction. 1.2 Project Description Per our recent telephone discussions and email correspondence with you, GFA understands that a new three -level residence is planned for construction at the referenced property. Since the structure (or a:portion thereof) will be located east of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL), a pile supported foundation is required. We have been provided with a Site Plan prepared by James Bushouse, Inc. illustrating the location of the proposed residence on the property. . Specific foundation design information was not provided to GFA. However, based on prior projects in the immediate area and for the purposes of this report, we anticipate that the residential structure will be supported by 14-inch diameter augered cast -in -place (ACIP) piles and grade beams. The recommendations provided herein are based upon the above considerations. If the stated conditions are 'incorrect or if project description is revised, please inform GFA so that we may _ review our recommendations with respect to any modifications. 2.0 OBSERVATIONS 2.1 Site Description At the time of our field exploration, the majority of the property was generally grassy with some — miscellaneous vegetation. An existing residence was located south of the site, an undeveloped lot to the north -,,the Atlantic Ocean to the east, and Watersong Way and Highway AM to the west. GFH 4824 Watersong Way Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 4824 Watersong'Way, Fort Pierce, Florida May7, 2020 GF4 Project No.. 20-0071.00 Page 5 of 10 2.2 Field Exploration Two (2) standard penetration test (SPT) borings, advanced to a depth of approximately 40 feet below the existing ground surface, were completed for this study. The boring depths were established based upon our knowledge of vicinity soils and confined to the zone of soil likely to be influenced by the proposed foundation construction. The approximate location of the borings at the property is illustrated on the Test Location.Plan in in Appendix B. The Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were performed in general accordance with ASTM D 1586; "Standard Test Method. for Standard Penetration .Test (SPT) and Split -Barrel Sampling of Soils." The SPT test procedure consists of driving a 1.4-inch I.D. split -barrel sampler into the soil profile using a.140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows per foot, for the second and third 6-inch increment; is referred to as the N-value. The N-value has been empirically correlated with various soil properties and provides an indication of soil strength. Site specific survey staking for the borings was not provided for. our. field. exploration. The indicated depth and location of the borings were approximated based upon existing grade and estimated distances and relationships to the adjacent properties and Watersong.Way, 2.3 Visual Classification Soil samples recovered from our. field exploration were returned to our.laboratory where they were visually classified.by a geotechnical engineer in general"accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D 2487). After reviewing the samples, .no laboratory testing was deemed necessary. The samples will be retained in our laboratory. for 30 days and then discarded unless we are notified otherwise in writing. The recovered samples were not evaluated, either visually or analytically, for chemical composition or environmental hazards. GFA would be pleased to perform these services .for an additional fee, if required. 2.4 Geomorphic Conditions The geology of the site as mapped on the USDA Soil Survey website consists of Canaveral fine sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes (10) and Kesson-Terra Ceia complex, tidal (35). These are sandy soils and organic soils are not indicated. The Soil Survey generally extends to a maximum depth of 80 inches below ground surface and is not indicative of deeper soil conditions. The boring logs resulting from our field exploration are presented in Appendix D - Log of Boring Records. The boring logs contain the soil descriptions and the standard penetration test (SPT) N-values values logged during the drilling and sampling activities. It is noted that the soil borings reflect information from the specific boring locations only and that soil conditions may vary between the strata interfaces indicated on the logs. .The soil classifications and descriptions shown on the logs are generally based upon visual characterizations of the recovered samples using the Unified Soil Classification System. See Appendix E - Discussion of Soil.Groups, for a detailed description of various soil groups. GfR 4824 Watersong Way. Residence 4824 Watersong Way, Fort Pierce, Florida GFA Project No. 20-0071.00 Geotechhical Exploration Report May 7, 2020 Page 6 of 10 The subsurface soil conditions encountered at the boring locations generally consisted of loose to dense fine sand (SP), fine sand with clay (SP-SC), and clayey fine sand (SC) in the upper 15 feet of the soil profile. Seams of organic silt (OL, Muck) were also present within the upper 10 feet in boring. B-1. These soils were underlain by medium dense to very dense fine sand (SP) containing varying amounts of silt and shell to the boring termination depths. 2.5 Hydrogeological Conditions On the date of our field exploration (May 5, 2020), groundwater was recorded at approximate depths of 5 and 6 feet at the boring locations. Note that the groundwater table will fluctuate seasonally depending upon local rainfall and other site specific and/or, local factors,. including tidal influences from the'Atlantic Ocean. Brief ponding of stormwater may occur across the site after heavy or extended rainfall events. No additional"evaluation was included in our scope of work in relation to the wet seasonal high groundwater table or any existing well fields in the vicinity. Well fields may influence water table levels and cause significant. fluctuations. If a more comprehensive water table analysis is necessary, please contact our office for additional guidance. 3.0 ENGINEERING EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 General Our geotecbnical engineering evaluation of the site and subsurface conditions at the property, with respect to the planned construction, and our recommendations for site preparation and foundation support,, are based upon (1) our site, observations, (2) the field data obtained, and (3) our understanding of the project information, and structural conditions as presented in this report. If the stated conditions are incorrect, or if the project description is revised, please inform GFA so that we may review our recommendations with respect to any modifications. We note that the applicability of geotechnical recommendations is very dependent upon project characteristics, specifically (1) improvement locations, (2) grade alterations, (3) and actual applied. structural (bads. For that reason, GFA must be provided with and review the preliminary and final site and grading plans, and structural design loads to validate all recommendations provided in this report. Without performing this review,'our recommendations should not be relied upon for final design or construction of any site improvements. 3.2 Pile Foundation Design Since the residence (or portions thereof) will be located east of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL), a pile supported foundation is required. GFA considered the 'following design criteria to develop pile foundation recommendations for the proposed residence: For CCCL construction, the FDEP has established a 100-year storm elevation (bottom of lowest structural, member) of +17.0 to +17.9 feet NGVD (depends on location) for structures within St. Lucie County. GFP 4824 Watersong Way Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 4824 Watersong Way, Fort Pierce, Florida May 7, 2020 GFA Project No. 20-0071.00 Page 7 of 10 2. For CCCL construction, the FDEP has established a 100-year storm erosion elevation (desigrr scour elevation) of 2.7 NGVD for all of St. Lucie County. 3. A loss of soil support between the bottom of lowest structural member and the design scour elevation (2,7 NGVD).was considered in the pile capacity analyses. 4. The residence will utilize typical construction and be supported on columns terminating on pile caps slightly below: the ground floor elevation. We assume that fill will be placed to achieve final (or near final) grade before installing the pile foundations, and top of piles (bottom of pile caps) will be approximately +8 feet NGVD. Based on the soil profile revealed by the, SPT borings, it is GFA's opinion that the residential structure can,be supported by a deep foundation system of 1.4-inch diameter augered-cast-in- place (ACIP) piles and grade beams. ACIP pile design should be in accordance with the applicable sections of the 2017 Florida Building Code, Sixth Edition, thelatest edition.`of the Deep: Foundations Institute's Augered Cast -In -Place Piles Manual, and, other applicable federal, state, and, local requiremerits. The results of our ACIP ,pile capacity analysis are summarized in Table 3.2.1 below. The evaluations were performed using the commercially available ALLPILE 7.0 software. Table 3.2.1 —ACIP Pile Design. Recommendations for 14-Inch Diameter Piles Nominal Pile Diameter. in . Pile Top Elevation Recommended Pile Tip Elevation. Pile Length 11 Maximum Allowable Pile Compression Capacity, - Pile Allowable Tension Capacity Grout Strength (psi). 14 Unknown Unknown. 25 30tons 6tons 5,000 14 Unknown Unknown 30 35 tons 8.5 tons 51000 14 Unknown Unknown 35 40tons 11tons 5;000 The design pile .depths in the above table are based on installing the piles at the site grade existing at the boring locations at the time of. drilling. Any fill required to raise the site to achieve design grade will result in the piles being longer based upon the thickness of the placed fill. If piles having depths and/or capacities other than those presented in the above table are desired, GFA will be pleased to provide further recommendations upon request. The.following notes are also applicable to the ACIP pile design: 1. GFA assumed that the piles will have a minimum of 1 percent steel reinforcement for the analysis. ACIP piles should be .reinforced over their entire length for tension capacity. The reinforcement should be as designed by the project Structural Engineer.. 2. Structural stresses in the piles may impose a more severe limitation on the design capacity. Therefore, we recommend the allowable.stresses'be verified for the selected pile section by the project Structural Engineer. GfP 4824 Watersong Way Residence 4824 Watersong;Way, Fort Pierce, Florida GFA Project No: 20-0071.00 Geotechnical Exploration Report May 7, 2020 Page 8 of 10 3. The pile reinforcement should be sufficiently embedded in the pile cap to afford a fixed end connection, as required. 3.3 Pile Foundation Installation Pile installation should be in accordance with the. applicable 'sections of the 2017 Florida Building Code, Sixth Edition and other applicable federal, state, and local requirements. In addition, piles should be installed in accordance with the following: 1. Pile Length - The proposed piles should be installed as determined by the inspecting Geotechnical Engineer., 2. Spacing - Piles installed in groups should be spaced at.a center -to -center distance of not less than 3 pile diameters. 3. Plan. Location; - The center of the top of any pile at cut-off should be displaced laterally no more than 3 inches from the, position shown on the plans. This applies to both single piles and piles installed in,groups. 4. Vertical Alignment - The vertical alignment of the piles should not deviate from the plumb by more than 1/4 inch per foot of length. 5. Reinforcing Cage Positioning - The top of the reinforcing cages installed in the piles should not be more than 6 inches above and no more than 3 inches below the positions shown in the _plans. The reinforcing cages should •be positioned concentrically within the grouted pile shaft. The grout cover over longitudinal reinforcing bars should not be less than 3 inches. Reinforcing centralizers should be placed at maximum spacing of 15 feet at the lower portion of the pile and at 5 feet from the top of the cage. 6. Adjacent Piles - A minimum elapsed time of 12 hours should be specified for the installation of piles located within 5 feet, center -to -center, of each other. 7. Grout Factor - The minimum acceptable grout factor (i.e. actual grout volume divided by the theoretical grout volume) should be 1.1. 3.4 Site Preparation Initial site preparation should consist of removing all surface vegetation, near surface roots, and other deleterious materials within, and to five (5) feet beyond, the perimeter of the footprint of the planned construction. Foundations and the below grade remains of former structures that are within the footprint of the new construction should also be removed. Similarly, utility lines should be removed or properly abandoned so that they will not adversely impact new overlying structures. 6.r 4824 Watersong Way Residence 4824 Watersong'Way, Fort Pierce, Florida GFA Project No. 20-0071.00 3.5 Fill Placement and Compaction Geotechnical Exploration Report May 7, 2020 Page 9 of 10 Prior to initiating fill placement, the stripped surface should be compacted until the upper 2 feet of soil achieves at least 95 percent of modified Proctor maximum ,dry density (ASTM D 1557). We recommend using a steel drum vibratory roller having sufficient static weight to achieve the required compaction. Density tests should be performed on the compacted surface at a frequency of not less than one test per 2,500 .square feet, or a minimum of three (3) tests, whichever is greater: The density tests should be performed using either the nuclear method (ASTM D 6839) or the sand cone method(ASTM D 1556). Hand Cone Penetrometer (HCP) tests may also be performed to evaluate soil density. Fill required for the project should be inorganic (i.e., contain less than 5 percent .by weight organic materials) and classified as SP, SW, GP, GW, SP-SM, SW-SM,. GW-GP, or GP.=GM. GFA does not recommend using fill materials having silticlay-size .soil fines contents exceeding 12 percent. In general, fill required to attain, design gradesshould be placed in maximum 12-inch thick loose lifts, and compacted to at least. 95 percent of modified Proctor maximum, dry density (ASTM D 1551). Each lift of fill should be compacted, and.tested prior to the placement of the next lift. Density tests should be performed within the fill at the same frequency noted above. Following installation of the ACIP piles and construction of the pile caps and grade beams, the areas next to the pile caps and grade beams will require backfilling. This fill should be placed in maximum 8-inch thick loose lifts and compacted to at least 95 percent of modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557). The compaction should be performed using portable equipment, such as vibratory sleds, jumping jacks, or walk -behind rollers. 3.6 .Quality Control and Vibration Monitoring We strongly recommend that a GFA representative be on site throughout the ACIP pile installation. This is necessary to determine if the piles are ,being installed in accordance with the project plans and specifications, provide an accurate record of the installation, and provide an opportunity to correct any anomalous conditions during the pile placement work. In addition, the grout mix used to form the piles should be sampled and tested for strength on a regular basis. The construction will be close to nearby residential structures and roadways that could be susceptible to. damage from. vibrations generated at the site during site preparation and foundation installation. We recommend that these structures and other bordering landmarks be monitored using a seismograph to determine the extent of vibration absorption they are experiencing during all aspects of construction. The seismograph used for monitoring at the site should have the capability to measure ground velocities along .vertical, transverse, and longitudinal axes. The project Structural Engineer should establish allowable ground velocities that the bordering facilities can safely withstand without incurring damage. A proposal for GFA personnel to provide the vibration monitoring during construction will be provided upon request. GFP 4824 Watersong Way Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 4824 Watersong Way, Fort Pierce, Florida May 7, 2020 GFA Project No. '20-0071.00 Page 10 of 10 4.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS' This consulting report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Coastal Construction and Design, Inc. and members of the design team for the proposed -new residence located at 4824 Watersong Way in .Fort Pierce, Florida. This ,report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted local geotechn'ical. engineering practices; no other warranty is expressed or implied. The evaluation submitted in this report is based in part upon the data collected during a field exploration: However, the nature and extent of variations throughout the subsurface profile may not become evident until construction. If variations then appear evident, it may be necessary to reevaluate the information and professional opinions provided in this report. In the event changes are made in the nature, design, or location of the proposed residence, the evaluation and opinions contained in.this report should not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed, and conclusions modified or verified in writing by GFA. - GFA should be provided the opportunity to review the final foundation plans andspecifications to determine if GFA's ,recommendations, have been .properly interpreted, communicated, and. implemented. If GFA: is not afforded the opportunity to participate in construction related, aspects of foundation installation as recommended in this report or any report addendum, GFA cannot accept responsibility for the interpretation of our recommendations made in this report or - . in a report addendum for foundation performance. Scour elevations used in pile capacity evaluations are those, provided by the Florida DEP for coastal construction but may not be adequate for actual scour elevations exceeding the DEP assumptions that may occur in hurricane events. Therefore, our analysis is limited to the DEP scour elevation criteria. Additional scour analysis,was not included in our scope of work. 5.0 BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS The analysis and recommendations submitted in this report are based on the data obtained from the borings performed at the locations indicated on the Test Location Plan in Appendix B. This report does not reflect any variations which may occur between or away from the borings. While the borings are representative of the subsurface conditions at their locations and vertical reaches, local variations characteristic of the subsurface soils within the region are anticipated and may be encountered. The delineation between. soil types shown' on the boring logs is approximate and the descriptionsrepresent our interpretation of the subsurface conditions at the designated boring locations on the specific date drilled. Any third -party ,reliance of this geotechnical report or parts thereof is strictly prohibited without' the expressed written consent of GFA International, Inc. The applicable SPT methodology (ASTM D 1586) used in performing our borings, and for determining penetration resistance, is specific to the sampling tools utilized and does not reflect the ease or difficulty to advance other tools or materials. GFP Appendix A -Vicinity Map r/6,A G Site Vicinity Map 4824 Watersong Way Residence 'yrFRNAT�o�'Py 4824 Watersong Way, Fort Pierce, Florida PROJECT NO: 20-0071.00 DRAFTED BY: JR REVIEWED BYc JK DATE: 5/6/2020 Appendix B - Test Location Plan GfH Test Location Plan G 4824 Watersong Way Residence /yrFRNATf��P� f 4824 Watersong Way, Fort Pierce, Florida PROJECT NO: 20-0071.00 DRAFTED BY: JR REVIEWED BY: JK DATE: 5/6/2020 / / ROR1pA STA PLANE CODRDDIATL \ _ MAD °gip US SURVEY FEET / N 1112411,535 `af E 596013.915 FND %- IRC. LB B 4286 5.2y \ Q\ - .\ O-\ / 1f-:' .• (iFTiCHYARK. ELEV. - 8.20'>( 62\ Gam\,'VACANT' \' 1- 10RIDA STATE PLANE COORDINATE; I h 1 \ NAD �y US SURVEY FED . x 5.7 N 1112357.420 vi \ E 695895.071 _ 4 6.3 Y FND i(,' 9i0. LB 14268 NSF' 0 I: C (El 9 -2E 1 51 d 5• a \ F11D „/ek� JO .. �V � 9 • ifs 0 �� ..ti:..,� \, \\ � LOT 38 Vi END C -1` x 5,64286 ` 81 •LSO.URK 4.8ELEV1-,,!r7s". ,7pE xJ \ O 4.72 °. 0 L`� 0 INLET s k 4be ,. ..% ,� A, L 39 . V� ' O �iP � FND S$ IR,rVACANT RET[NPON PO Al �. ' �5. '"'—'�BENCHNARK' _ 'L am LEY / 4.5J. LANE COORORiATEh O ` n.V n.atDA SLATE PLANEICOORDINATE �p4eY ' T f NO NAIL a& DIS(� trs MAD % US SURVEY FEET !r 227158 �._e Os Lr A 4% , ,. J \ Ft N 111224.'135` '•� d \ 9B 49B��.PfNL44AR _ g sL_��, .. , _ iEn 895944654^,, Legend Approximate 40' Standard Penetration Test Boring Locations Appendix C - Notes Related to Borings �FH NOTES RELATED TO BORING RECORDS AND GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE PROFILES 1. Groundwater levels (if encountered) were recorded either during or following the boring completion on the date, indicated. Fluctuations in groundwater levels are common - see the. report text fora discussion.. 2. The boring locations were identified in the field by estimated distances and offsets from existing reference marks and/or other site landmarks. 3. The completed boreholes.were backfilled to adjacent site grade using drilling spoils and patched with asphalt cold mix in pavement areas. 4. The Log of Boring records represent our interpretation of soil conditions based on visual classification of the soil samples recovered from the borings. 5. The Log of Boring records are subject to the limitations, conclusions, and recommendations presented in the report text. 6. The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N-values contained on the Log of Boring records refer to the total blow counts of a 140-pound drop hammer falling 30 inches required to drive a split -barrel sampler a total distance of 12 inches into soil strata at specific depth intervals. 7. The Hand Cone Penetrometer (HCP) values contained on Log of Boring records and the Cone Penetration Test (CPT) values contained on the Cone Penetration Sounding logs refer to the cane tip resistance recorded when pushing the cane tip into the soil strata at specific depth intervals. 8.. The soil and/or, rock strata. interfaces shown on the Log of Boring records are approximate and may vary from those shown on the logs. Tne soil and/or rock descriptions shown on the Log of Boring records refer to conditions at the specific location tested. Soil/rock conditions may vary between test locations. 9. Relativedensityfor coarse -grained soils(sands/gravels) and consistency for fine-grained soils (silts/clays) are described as follows: Coarse Grained Soils (Sands and Gravels) .. Fine Grained Soils (Silts.and Clays)'.. SPT N-Value HCP Value . (kg/cm) .. CPT Value (tsf) Relative Density . SPT N-Value HCP Value (kg/cm) . CPT Value (tsf) Consistency 0-4 0-16 0-20 Very Loose :0-2 0-20 0-3 Very Soft 5-10 . 17-36 21-40 1Loose 3-4' 21-35 - 4-6 Soft 11-30 '.37-116 41-120 Med. Dense 5-8 . >35 7-12._ Firm - . 31-50 117-196 .121-200 Dense .9-15 - - 13-25 -Stiff - >50 .. > 196 .. >200 ,. Very Dense :. 16=30 26-50 - Ve y .Stiff >30 - >50 Hard 10. Grain size descriptions areas follows: Description; Particle Size Limits Boulder Greater than 12 inches - Cobble' • 3 to 12 inches Coarse Gravel /4 to 3 inches Fine Gravel No. 4 sieve to 314 inch ..Coarse Sand ' No: 10 to No. 4 sieve: Medium Sand No. 40 to No. 10 sieve - - fine Sande No. 200ao No. 40 sieve fines S ttCla Smaller than No. 200.sieve . 11. Definitions for modifiers used in soil/rock descriptions: Proportion Modifier Approximate Root Diameter Modifier <5% Trace 1 Less than /32" Fine roots °/d 5% to 12 : Little '13 to,'/a" Small roots 12%to30% Some' 1 '/4°to'1". Medium roots -30% to 50%. '. And I Greater than .1". Large roots Organic Soils: Soils containing vegetative tissue in various stages of decomposition having a fibrous to amorphous texture. Usually having a dark brown to black color and an organic odor: Organic Content Modifiers: <25%: Slightly to Highly Organic;' 25%.to 75%: Muck; >75%: Peat G� Appendix D - Log -of Boring Records GfH GFA International,odiyInc. LOG OF BORING B-1 Por NW Commodity Cove Port Saint Lucie, Florida '34986 PAGE 1 OF 2 Gf (772) 924-3575- �.`.RNPT�aP CLIENT Coastal Construction and Design. Inc. PROJECT NAME '4824 Watersong Way Residence PROJECT NUMBER 20-0071.00 PROJECT LOCATION 4824 Watersong Way, Fort Pierce. -Florida DRILLING CONTRACTOR GFA International Inc. HOLE DEPTH 40 it HOLE DIAMETER 3 in DRILLER JBISK - DATE STARTED 515/20; COMPLETED. 5/5120 DRILL RIG Simco GROUND WATER LEVEL: -VAT TIME OF DRILLING 6.0011 .METHOD SPT LATITUDE LONGITUDE NOTE: .. .. HAMMER -TYPE. . J K �w w 3~z w U _ W. �v .. wzzz. 0— o v o. a 0= ¢ O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION z w 6 w Z,. m0 Z�- r�20 O wO U U U Topsoil (1.6)' Brown and grayfine sand vdth Gay (SP-SC) .5 1 10 15 2.0 Gray fine sand (SP) e 14 20 :34 20' .• 4.5' — 5.0 Dark brown organic silt (OL; Muck) 3 S 3 2 112 15 Gray fine sand, little silt; trace shell (SP) 12 4 2 12 24 5 5 4 3 4 7 9.5 to.o .Dark brown organic silt (OL, Muck) Dark grey clayey fine sand, trace shell (SC) , 2 6 '2 1 3 2 12.0 Gray fine sand, little shell (SP) 10 21 23 8 31 33 64 -- (Continued Next Page) i GFA Coniendit� . LOG. OF BORING B-1 607 NWCbmmoditI Cove 607N 6f Port Saint Lucia, Florida 34986 PAGE 2 OF 2 (772) 924-3575 '.RNFP.4' CLIENT Coastal Construction and Design inc. PROJECT NAME 4824 Watersono Wav Residence PROJECT NUMBER 20-0071.00 PROJECT LOCATION 4824 WatersongWay. Fort Pierce.. Florida w JW 3� uj � _ o: Nv. U� w v �. m O > MATERIAL DESCRIPTION :.0 z. LL z u1 wz O Z c7 EO O .06 O 0 0 Gray fine send, little shell (SP) (continued _x :9 13 ii 33 25 '. x 10 1fi si 39 30— II i 33.5 19 . Gray fine sand, littlesill, trace shell (SP) i 71 22 42- .. 85 i : 3a.5' zs Gray fihe sand with sill, little shell (SP-SM) 12 75, 31. ::• .. 40.0 Bottom of borehole at 40.0 feet. i International, Inc. OF BORING B-2 607NW Commodity CoveLOG OGFA Port Saint Lucie, Florida 34986 PAGE 1 OF 2 t(772)924-3575, CLIENT Coastal Construction and Design, Inc. PROJECT NAME 4824 Watersong Way Residence PROJECT NUMBER 20-0071.00 PROJECT LOCATION 4824Watersong Way, Fort Pierce..Flonda • DRILLING CONTRACTOR GFA International Inc. HOLE DEPTH 40 ft HOLE DIAMETER 3 in DRILLER JB/SK DATE STARTED 515120 COMPLETED 515120 DRILL RIG Simco GROUND WATER LEVELS! -AT TIME OF DRILLING 5.00ft .METHOD SPT.-- "LATITUDE ' LONGITUDE NOTE: .. HAMMER.TYPE .tu MO v¢ �d �, O > MATERIAL DESCRIPTION o Z p e3 W co U Z O uWZ. 00 20 U 0 U U Topsoil (1'�' . -e Brown and gray fine sand with clay (SP-SC) " 13 22 12.0 Gray fine sand; trace shell (SP). 1s 2 .. 15 37 22 "Gray clayey fine sand (SC) 5—X3 15 16 M6.0 21 39 24 Gray fine sand, trace shell (SP) 13 4 16 e 21 ' 8.0 Dark brown -gray fine sand, trace silt and shell (SP) 4 5 3 3 8 3 10 13.5 "5 Gray fine sand, little. shell (SP) 8 s 5 15 31 7 33 82 (Continued Next Page) I u International, C. - LOG OF BORING B-2 6GFA07 607 NW Commodity PortSainfLuGe, da 34986 PAGE 2 OF 2 Florida3 (772) 924-3575, . �aNATON CLIENT Coastal Construction and Design. Inc. PROJECT NAIVE 4824 Watersong Way Residence PROJECT NUMBER 20-0071.00 PROJECT LOCATION 4824 Watersong Way, Fort Pieroe..Florlda �G J .. ruoVJw VoH eOF O� wE i ; p MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 9 Zm 0 W W N Z 00 U U p Gray fine sand, little shell (SPY (continued): ' - - x 8 30 220 42 .• 25 35 9 255 26 51 30 33.5 Brown fine sand,.little'shell (SPY' x 10 zs 22 41 35— — — — Gray fine sand, little shell (SPY 11 zz ie 31 ' .. 40.0 Bottom of borehole at 40.0 feet. Appendix E - Discussion of Soil Groups GFA DISCUSSION OF SOIL GROUPS COARSE GRAINED SOILS General. A soil is classified as coarse -grained if more than 50 percent of a representative sample of the material is retained on the No. 200 sieve. GW and SW Groups: These groups comprise well -graded gravelly and sandy soils containing little or no plastic fines (less than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve). The low fines content does not noticeablychange the shear strength characteristics of these soils and does not interfere with their free -draining characteristics. GP and SP Groups. Poorly graded gravels and sands containing little or no plastic fines (less than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve) are in the GP and SP groups. The materials can be called uniform gravels, uniform sands, or non -uniform mixtures of very coarse materials and very fine sand,with. intermediate sizes lacking (sometimes, called skip -graded, gap -graded, or step -graded). This last group.often results from borrow pit excavation in which gravel and sand layers are mixed. GM and SM Groups. In general, the GM and SM groups comprise gravels or sands with fines (more than 12 percent passing the No. 200 sieve) having little or no plasticity. The plasticity index and liquid limit of soils in these groups plot below the M.A. line on the. plasticity chart. The gradation of the material is not considered significant and both well and poorly graded materials are included. GC and SC Groups. In general, the GC and SC groups comprise gravelly or sandy soils containing, fines (more than 12 percent passing the No, 200 sieve) having plasticity characteristics. The plasticity index and liquid limit of soils in these groups plot above the "A line on the plasticity chart. FINE GRAINED SOILS General. A soil is classified as fine-grained if more than 50 percent of a representative sample of the material passes the No. 200 sieve. _ ML and MH Groups. These groups comprise inorganic silts (ML) and elastic silts (MH) having either low (L) or high (H) liquid limits, respectively. ML soils have a liquid limit of less than 50 while MH soils have a liquid limit of 50 and greater. Silts and elastic silts can also ,contain varying; amounts of sand, and gravel. Also included in this group are loess sediments and rock flours. _ CL and CH Groups. These groups comprise low plasticity (lean) clays (CL) and medium to high plasticity (fat) clays (CH) having either low (L) or high (H) liquid limits, respectively. CL soils have a liquid limit of less than 50 while CH soils have a liquid limit of 50 and greater. The low plasticity clays can also be sandy clays or silty clays. The moderate to high plasticity clays can also be sandy clays and include some volcanic clays. GFH OL and OH Groups. These groups comprise organic silts and clays. The soils are characterized by the presence of organic odor and/or dark color. The OL and OH soils are differentiated by determining and comparing their liquid limit values before and after oven drying representative soil samples. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS The highly organic soils are usually very soft and compressible and have undesirable construction characteristics. Particles of leaves, grasses, branches, or other fibrous vegetative matter are common components of these soils. They are not subdivided and are classified into one group with the symbol PT. Peat humus and swamp soils with a highly organic texture are typical soils of the group. GF�