The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLetter; Standard Penetration TestUNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES Consultants In: Geotechnical Engineering • Environmental Sciences Geophysical Services • Construction Materials Testing • Threshold Inspection Building Inspection • Plan Review • Building Code Administration t December 16, 2019 K. Hovananian Homes, LLC & C. Homes at Florida, LLC 3601 Quantum Boulevard Boynton Beach, Florida 33426 Attention: Mr. Kevin Borkenhagen Reference: Limited Subsurface Exploratiol Proposed Residence at Lot #5 Waterstone Subdivision 5210 Armina Street LOCATIONS: Atlanta • Daytona Beach Fort Myers • Fort Pierce • Gainesville • Jacksonville Kissimmee Leesburg Miami Ocala • Orlando (Headquarters) • Palm Coast • Panama City • Pensacola • Rockledge Sarasota -- --- Tampa West Palm Beach Q J0 0 2020 Permitting Department St. Lucie County, FL Fort Pierce, Florida Universal Project No. 0330.1900096.0000 Dear Mr. Borkenhagen: Universal Engineering Sciences, Inc. (Universal) has recently completed a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) boring at the above referenced residential lot site in St. Lucie County, Florida. This SPT boring (135) was performed for an overall exploration by Universal, covering a total of 59 individual lots within the south-central sections of the Waterstone Subdivision in Fort Pierce, Florida. The results of this exploration are enumerated under Universal's Project #0330.1900096.0000, Report dated September 6, 2019. This limited exploration was performed in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. The purpose of the SPT boring (B5) was to analyze the subsurface soil conditions in general accordance with the Florida Building Code, Section 1803 (Geotechnical Investigations). The building pad subsurface soil conditions were explored by advancing a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) soil boring near the center of the lot (as staked by the client's representatives) to a depth of 10 feet below land surface (bls). Based on the results of the soils encountered, it is our opinion that the encountered soil conditions should be suitable for the support of a 12-inch wide or greater monolithic foundation slab embedded at least 12-inches, or shallow foundations embedded at least 18-inches, below lowest adjacent grade. Assuming that the encountered surficial strata within the house footprint, along with subsequent fill materials, are densified to at least 95% of the modified Proctor Test (ASTM D-1557), then a maximum allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf) is estimated for foundations designed and prepared according to good, standard indus�tr� practice. G CO0 j G 820 Brevard Avenue, Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321) 638-0808 Fax (321) 638-0978 www.UniversalEngineering.com Proposed Residence at 5210 Armina Street Universal Project No. 0330.1900096.0000 Fort Pierce, St. Lucie County, Florida Limited Subsurface Exploration If any soils are found which are different from those encountered in our boring location, our office should be contacted immediately so that we can make further recommendations and verify that the conditions stated in this letter are still valid. CLOSURE Please note that all other provisions and analysis listed in our previous geotechnical engineering report, which have not been changed in this letter, still remain in effect. For a further description of the scope and limitations of this report please review the document attached within Exhibit 1 'Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report' prepared by GBAIThe Geoprofessional Business Association. We appreciate the opportunity to be working with you on this project and look forward to a continued association. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you should have any questions, or if we may further assist you as your plans proceed. Sincerely yours, UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES, INC. Certificate of Authorization No. 549 Brad Faucett, M.S. P:E. Regional Engineer Florida"Registration-No. 33123 Attachments Boring Log Key to Boring Log Sheet Expanded View of Lot #5 Overall Boring Location Diagram GBA Document 1 — Client (by e-mail) UESDOCS# 1732983 2 820 Brevard Avenue, Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321) 638-0808 Fax (321) 638-0978 www.UniversalEngineering.com u UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES PROJECT NO.: 0330.1900096.0000 BORING LOG REPORT NO.: APPENDIX: A PROJECT: WatersWne Subdivision Emerson Ave Fort Pierce, Florida 2 CLIENT: K.Hovnanian Homes, LLC LOCATION: SEE EXPLORATION LOCATION PLAN • REMARKS: LOTS BORING DESIGNATION: BJ SHEET: 1 Of 1 SECTION: TOWNSHIP: SOUTH RANGE: EAST G.S. ELEVATION (ft): DATE STARTED: 914119 WATER TABLE (ft): 2.1 DATE FINISHED: 914119 DATE OF READING: 916/2019 DRILLED BY: PM/ PG EST. W.S.W.T. (ft): TYPE OF SAMPLING: € BLO MC PERYfi a � 3 w DESCRIPTION -zoo 0w PONT. INCREMENT zz H 3 < (%) (%) MR.) P,6) O 0 fine SAND with silt and clay lumps (fill), dark brown, [SP-SM] ' fine SAND, grey, [SP] 11,' 10-12-10 22 fine SAND with silt, dark brown, [SP-SM] 5— x .............. .... ..... ......................................... clayey fine SAND, brown, [SC] a..s.. -6 11 fine SAND with clay, broken shell and occasional cemented rock layers, gray, [SP-SC] 3-s-6 11 4-6-7 13 ......................................... BORING TERMINATED AT 10' 15 ............................................. ............................................ 20 ............................................. ............................................ y KEY TO BORING LOGS SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART' Sand or Gravel [SP,SW,GP,GW] $...................................................... Sand or Gravel with Silt or Clay I$PSM,SPSC] UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES, INC. LU w SIIN or Claayyeyy Sand or ravel [SV SC,GM,GC] N 6D 0 N 60 2 so ....................................................... a wON U z 4D z Sand or Gravellyy Silt or Clayy 30 Q[ML,CL-ML,CL,MH'CH,OL,OH] m O a ....................................................... a zo e70 wo Silt or Clayy with Sand or Gravel 10 [ML,CL-ML,CL,MH,CH,OL,OH] Uo 0 8$....................................................... 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 80 100 a", or Clayy LIQUID LIMIT [ML,CL-ML,CL,MH,CH,040H] PLASTICITY CHART 100 ........................ I .... .......................... N;19111201I_h41:wc1.I11-YAJ11=I*114 COARSE GRAINED SOILS FINE GRAINED SOILS WELL -GRADED SANDSISWI ' • • WELL -GRADED GRAVELS[GWI INORGANIC6ILTS [ML]XTPLASTICITI' POORLY -GRADED SANDS ISPI POORLY -GRADED GRAVELS [GPI INORGANIC SILTY CLAY LOW PLASTICITY D •: POORLY -GRADED SANDS WITH SILT ° POORLYGRADEO GRAVELS WITH SILT 11 INORGANIC CLAYS LOW TO MEDIUM .; ISPSMI p [GPGMJ PLASTIGTY[CLI POORLY -GRADED SANDS WITH CLAY ° POORLY -GRADED GRAVELS WITH CLAY fli INORGANIC SILTS HIGH PLASTICITY IMHI ISPSCI o IGPGCJ ' SILTYSANDS [SIM o o D SILTYGRAVELS IGMI In INORGANIC CLAYS HIGH PLASTICITY [CHI CLAYEYSANDS ISCI CLAYEY GRAVELS IGCI IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 2487- UNIFIED SOIL SILTY CLAYEY SANDS ISCSM] • CUSSIFIMT10N SYSTEM. "LOCALLY MAYBE KNOWN AS MUCK NOTES: w' DENOTES DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUE R -DENOTES REFUSAL TO PENETRATION P - DENOTES PENETRATION WITH ONLY WEIGHT OF DRIVE HAMMER WE -DENOTES GROUNDWATER TABLE NOT ENCOUNTERED NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS ORGANICCLAYS ORGANIC YS ACTT'[ LOW PLASTICITY SILTSICLAYS ®ORGANIC MEDIUMTOHIG PLAsnaTY [OHr' PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS v p WITH HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTSIPTr RELATIVE DENSITY (SAND AND GRAVEL) VERY LOOSE-0 to 4 Bla m t LOOSE-5 to 10 BlowsOt. MEDIUM DENSE- II to 30 BIOW&IL DENSE -31 to 60 BlowSHL VERY DENSE -more Nan 60 SlowsOt CONSISTENCY (SILT AND CLAY) VERY SOFT-0 to 2 SlowslR SOFT-3W48Iowa t FIRM-5 to 8 Blow5 t STIFF-8 to 1S BlowslR VERY STIFF -17 to 30 BlowslR HARD- more than 30 alowsft APPENDIX A.1 k: + ' p _ F' • R L1 1 it C. x ' r rl /. 1 Fr r _ t ED 18 ��= •50 ^ a.�y�� {'4YJ\ y j t r• - _ 43dW �17 •EMI81. f, 33®.:,. A ®.27 L� _G' 31 1 Geolechnical-Engineeping Report ---, The Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA) has prepared this advisory to help you — assumedly a client representative — interpret and apply this geotechnical-engineering report as effectively as possible. In that way, clients can benefit from a lowered exposure to the subsurface problems that, for decades, have been a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. If you have questions or want more information about any of the issues discussed below, contact your GBA-member geotechnical engineer. Active involvement in the Geoprofessional Business Association exposes geotechnical engineers to a wide array of risk -confrontation techniques that can be of genuine benefit for everyone involved with a construction project. Geotechnical-Engineering Services Are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of their clients. A geotechnical-engineering study conducted for a given civil engineer will not likely meet the needs of a civil - works constructor or even a different civil engineer. Because each geotechnical-engineering study is unique, each geotechnical- engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client Those who rely on a geotechnical-engineering report prepared for a different client can be seriously misled. No one except authorized client representatives should rely on this geotechnical-engineering report without first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it And no one - not even you - should apply this report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. Read this Report in Full Costly problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical- engineering report did not read it in its entirety. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elements only. Read this report in full. You Need to Inform Your Geotechnical Engineer about Change Your geotechnical engineer considered unique, project -specific factors when designing the study behind this report and developing the confirmation -dependent recommendations the report conveys. A few typical factors include: • the clienes goals, objectives, budget, schedule, and risk -management preferences; • the general nature of the structure involved, its size, configuration, and performance criteria; • the structure's location and orientation on the site; and • other planned or existing site improvements, such as retaining walls, access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Typical changes that could erode the reliability of this report include those that affect: • the sites size or shape; • the function of the proposed structure, as when its changed from a parking garage to an office building, or from a light -industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse; • the elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed structure; • the composition of the design team; or • project ownership. As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project changes- even minor ones - and request an assessment of their impact. The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that arise because the geotechnical engineer was not informed about developments the engineer otherwise would have considered. This Report May Not Be Reliable Do not rely on this report if your geotechnical engineer prepared it: • for a different client; • for a different project; • for a different site (that may or may not include all or a portion of the original site); or • before important events occurred at the site or adjacent to it; e.g., man-made events like construction or environmental remediation, or natural events like floods, droughts, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations. Note, too, that it could be unwise to rely on a geotechnical-engineering report whose reliability may have been affected by the passage of time, because of factors like changed subsurface conditions; new or modified codes, standards, or regulations; or new techniques or tools. !f your geotechnical engineer has not indicated an apply -by" date on the report, ask what it should be, and, in general, if you are the least bit uncertain about the continued reliability of this report, contact your geotechnical engineer before applying it. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis - if any is required at all - could prevent major problems. Most of the "Findings" Related in This Report Are Professional Opinions Before construction begins, geotechnical engineers explore a sites subsurface through various sampling and testing procedures. Geotechnical engineers can observe actual subsurface conditions only at those specific locations where sampling and testing were performed. The data derived from that sampling and testing were reviewed by your geotechnical engineer, who then applied professional judgment to form opinions about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual sitewide-subsurface conditions may differ - maybe significantly - from those indicated in this report. Confront that risk by retaining your geotechnical engineer to serve on the design team from project start to project finish, so the individual can provide informed guidance quickly, whenever needed. This Report's Recommendations Are Confirmation -Dependent The recommendations included in this report - including any options or alternatives - are confirmation -dependent. In other words, they are not final, because the geotechnical engineer who developed them relied heavily on judgment and opinion to do so. Your geotechnical engineer can finalize the recommendations only after observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. If through observation your geotechnical engineer confirms that the conditions assumed to exist actually do exist, the recommendations can be relied upon, assuming no other changes have occurred. 7hegeotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot assume responsibility or liability for confirmation - dependent recommendations ifyou fail to retain that engineer to perform construction observation. This Report Could Be Misinterpreted Other design professionals' misinterpretation of geotechnical- engineering reports has resulted in costly problems. Confront that risk by having your geotechnical engineer serve as a full-time member of the design team, to: • confer with other design -team members, • help develop specifications, • review pertinent elements of other design professionals plans and specifications, and • be on hand quickly whenever geotechnical-engineering guidance is needed. You should also confront the risk of constructors misinterpreting this report Do so by retaining your geotechnical engineer to participate in prebid and preconstruction conferences and to perform construction observation. Give Constructors a Complete Report and Guidance Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can shift unanticipated -subsurface -conditions liability to constructors by limiting the information they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent the costly, contentious problems this -practice has caused, include the complete geotechnical-engineering report, along with any attachments or appendices, with your contract documents, but be certain to note conspicuously that you've included the material far informational purposes only. To avoid misunderstanding, you may also want to note that "informational purposes" means constructors have no right to rely on the interpretations, opinions, conclusions, or recommendations in the report, but they may rely on the factual data relative to the specific times, locations, and depths/elevations referenced. Be certain that constructors know they may learn about specific project requirements, including options selected from the report, only from the design drawings and specifications. Remind constructors that they may perform their own studies if they want to, and be sure to allow enough time to permit them to do so. Only then might you be in a position to give constructors the information available to you, while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. Conducting prebid and preconstruction conferences can also be valuable in this respect. Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Some client representatives, design professionals, and constructors do not realize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disciplines. That lack of understanding has nurtured unrealistic expectations that have resulted in disappointments, delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. To confront that risk, geotechnical engineers commonly include explanatory provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeled "limitations, many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers responsibilities begin and end, to help others recognize thew own responsibilities and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should respond fully and frankly. Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered The personnel, equipment, and techniques used to perform an environmental study- e.g., a "phase -one" or "phase -two" environmental site assessment - differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical-engineering study. For that reason, a geotechnical- engineering report does not usually relate any environmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants. Unanticipated subsurface environmental problems have led to project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own environmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk -management guidance. As a general rule, do not rely on an environmental report prepared for a different client, site, or project, or that is more than six months old Obtain Professional Assistance to Deal with Moisture Infiltration and Mold While your geotechnical engineer may have addressed groundwater, water infiltration, or similar issues in this report, none of the engineers services were designed, conducted, or intended to prevent uncontrolled migration of moisture - including water vapor - from the soil through building slabs and walls and into the building interior, where it can cause mold growth and material -performance deficiencies. Accordingly, proper implementation of the geotechnical engineer's recommendations will not of itself be sufficient to prevent moisture infiltration. Confront the risk of moisture infiltration by including building -envelope or mold specialists on the design team. Geotechnical engineers are not building - envelope or mold specialists. /, GEOPROFESSIONAL �i BUSINESS ASSOCIATION Telephone: 301 /565-2733 e-mail: info@geoprofessional.org www.geoprofessional.org Copyright 2016 by Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA). Duplication, reproduction, or copying of this document, in whole or in part, by any means whatsoever, is strictly prohibited, except with GBA's specific written permission. Excerptlng, quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission of GBA and only for purposes ofscholarly research or book review Only members of GBA may use this document or its wording as a complement to or as an element ofa report ofany kind. Any other firm, individual, or other emity that so uses this ducmnent without being a GBA member could be committing negligent