Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport of Geotechnical ExplorationGFA INTERNATIONAL FLORIDA'S LEADING ENGINEERING SOURCE Report of Geotechnical Exploration Proposed Three -Story Residence 7928 S Ocean Drive (Lot 8 Diamond Sands) St. Lucie County, Florida September 28, 2018 GFA Project No. 18-8332.00 For: Phoenix Realty Homes o n. n o. a o vvnou +.. :!'�� �.cuLnnvvvn000aooDvoon.anv4 ]•, /„• '!/ :c;4c¢¢vovnoo.vnvoD.o.vo¢o¢ouurLnn,. _ L acvooa0000aoav0000000 oanovc.non..nu fib ncoD¢c¢ on o. o Q° noon. QD nova Do n v v n n o c a nc.o; Do.aonvo.. oo.o.o.aDo � �aoovD000QD¢aac.un, � y?yy ar^�i" .bn00 Q°.o..Q°000.Qao. laaQaaQ DD D n.CnP00 n nucoo, u ra ovooDoQ .Qv.oay... p' .aoo..aoonvo¢anoa.nununcucc,- na.a.vQaavavoeor ao.n.Q000n.an.vDo.000vauvuL.:•„� , ( Rp,a.0.p.o pan o• oor ona.. ...n -v... ovn000a. coo Doono.ovoovnDacos v•ctL _{�. �< Y vvvv..vv.vvoovvao.oDODooaoao¢noDoa u..v n• ..no.aQ.aov...ovoon.o.oaDovaD.DDovoDv ¢•' sac -� s +\• •-/ ..Qn.nn.nnn... G.an.n.nn..Dan..G..nDDUc onn' �^7P.vaoQvvQvv.vov.oDv....o.aavc.:. :u ¢C � M�• - nn •'1.n o.n...00n000.nov.a.aonQanaDac, . Uaaa[ an..Qoovno D.anDn. o..vvov..vvv..oD¢r. ,. co.c .Donvva r. nveevoea0000000ava.Dv?t4 ooeaoo � ,.a.� � ovov000.00cocooa.0000c� -,ono.o �;i' r ..vn00000.vv.v.ov.oavc, 1 va000aovn...n.o.o.vDc• coo � _ � 000vo°o.o.n°000.°oocc. vaaco nno. a. o v v-• �goc �O1 vv.aovvvaoao a' o o...o.aoovac ' vovvvaoDacaDL• i Moo.no. a. D�. t� 00000v°oo.. °..oa°a..anc } 'v 000°.n°aoo. ovvvvvQvvv, j 'a.oDcv n+: vOQDnaUu +�•-,a.oacvc .na.6op n vvDe u acuuu • .•n ?n c -. o. o o a o o.. � DODaanaa.a. � ! -- eoo.a..vQ. - n.0000a000 - `a000°o eopO � 6 a oaoQaoova �v: voa0000avnvn ,"-- ,aQa.vC NA A��� r „nva000avv ,i ' a aonoaoaoa -- •. ,n novv.v..v ccov000vvo � a oaoo.nava +ac.o.000000 v-tr o n0000v000000 .\ �. ocova000no.°.00n°°v v.000..oQ.vvvvo..aoa �avo.000vno.v.o.o...po. 'r .n.onQvnao¢nDc.vnaDuvvDv�,:uvvo__ �. ��V�.C., "+4 C'+VUU V'Lc4c44GUVV.CnCatl4��. --� lU u:.J UJCJ J•. C ..D J....ae' �• Juuv.aao;: DID • Z-.. a..... n a a D n a a ¢!• _,•.LliUV_�u lnCOnanUnDnUCDC ,_�__ �nCaV �•i .1 .ODt 4'.an. Un:r n-, ' Florida's Leading Engineering Source Environmental - Geotechnical - Construction Materials Testing - Threshold and Special Inspections - Plan Review & Code Compliance September 28, 2018 Phoenix Realty Homes Attn: Mr. Alan Tarpell 1760 N Jog Road, Suite 120 West Palm Beach, Florida 33411 Subject: Report of Geotechnical Exploration Proposed Three -Story Residence 7928 S Ocean Drive (Lot 8 Diamond Sands) St. Lucie County, Florida GFA Project No. 18-8332.00 Dear Mr. Tarpell: 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 (18-8332.00), 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. Based on conversations with the client, we understand the project consists of constructing a three -level residence. Since the residential structure (or a portion thereof) will be located east of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL), a pile supported foundation is required. The main residence will be elevated above a lower level garage that may have walls and ground floor slab of frangible breakaway design. We assume the structure will utilize conventional design and construction and be supported by columns founded upon the pile foundations. Project -specific structural design loads have not been provided to us. For the foundation recommendations presented in this report, we assumed the maximum column load will be 50 kips and the maximum wall loading (if applicable) will be 3 kips per linear foot. Based on current site grades, we estimate that up to 2 feet of fill will be required to achieve final grade. 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) - www.teamgfa.com OFFICES THROUGHOUT FLORIDA Proposed Three -Story Residence Geotechnica/ Exploration Report 7928 S Ocean Drive, St. Lucie County, Florida September 28, 2018 GFA Project No. 18-8332.00 Page 2 of 12 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 medium dense to very dense fine sand (SP) to an approximate depth of 33.5 feet, then very loose to loose silt (ML) to a depth of 38.5 feet, and then medium dense silty fine sand and dense fine sand (SP) to the boring termination depths of approximately 40 feet below the existing ground surface. Please refer to Appendix D - Record of Test Borings for a detailed account of each boring. GFA recommends that the .proposed residence be supported by a deep foundation system consisting of augered cast -in -place (ACIP) piles. Based on our analysis, GFA estimates that a 16-inch diameter ACIP pile installed to a depth of 20 feet below the existing ground surface can provide a maximum allowable axial compressive capacity 'of 40 tons and a maximum tension capacity of 3.5 tons. GFA estimates that a 16-inch-diameter ACIP pile installed'to a depth of 30 feet below the existing ground surface can provide a'maximum allowable axial compressive capacity of 27 tons and a maximum tension capacity of 7.5 tons. For the ground supported frangible walls and on -grade concrete floor slabs, a maximum allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 psf may be used for shallow foundation design. The subgrade soils should be improved (densified) with compaction from the stripped grade prior to constructing the foundation pads and performing the footing excavations. The top 2 feet below stripped grade should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent density prior to placing fill to achieve final grade. Fill (including stem wall backfill) should be placed in 12-inch lifts and compacted to achieve a minimum 95 percent density. After completing the footing excavations, the subgrade to a depth of 2 feet below bottom of footings should be compacted to achieve a minimum 95 percent density. Scour elevations used in pile capacity calculations 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. GF Proposed Three -Story Residence 7928 S Ocean Drive, St. Lucie County, Florida GFA Project No. 18-8332.00 Geotechnical Exploration Report September 28, 2018 Page 3 of 12 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project and look forward to a continued association. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments, or if we may further assist you as your plans proceed. Respectfully Submitted, GFA International, Inc. Florida C�VtiN61616f #ythorization No. 4930 �oMN• cENSF ' 3218 i/O�• STATE RIDP cl —Z Y-19 Senior P.r9�i1 iel Florida Registftl No. 63218 Distribution: Mr. Alan Tarpell — Phoenix Realty Homes Craig Van Collie, E.I. Project Manager 1 pdf Proposed Three -Story Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 7928 S Ocean Drive, St Lucie County, Florida September 28, 2018 GFA Project No. 18-8332.00 Page 4 of 12 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................5 1.1 Scope of Services............................................................................................................5 1.2 Project Description...........................................................................................................5 2.0 OBSERVATIONS.................................................................................................................5 2.1 Site Description................................................................................................................5 2.2 Field Exploration..............................................................................................................6 2.3 Visual Classification.........................................................................................................6 2.4 Geomorphic Conditions....................................................................................................6 2.5 Hydrogeological Conditions..............................................................................................7 3.0 ENGINEERING EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..............................................7 3.1 General............................................................................................................................7 3.2 Pile Foundation Design....................................................................................................7 3.3 Pile Installation..................................................................................................................9 3.4 Foundations for Ground Level Frangible Walls...............................................................10 3.5 Ground Level Floor Slabs (Frangible).............................................................................10 3.6 Site Preparation.............................................................................................................10 3.7 Vibration Monitoring.......................................................................................................11 4.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS.....................................................................................................12 5.0 BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS..................................................................................12 Appendix A - Vicinity Map Appendix B - Test Location Plan Appendix C - Notes Related to Borings Appendix D - Record of Test Borings Appendix E - Pile Capacity Graphs Appendix F - Discussion of Soil Groups GF Proposed Three -Story Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 7928 S Ocean Drive, St. Lucie County, Florida September 28, 2018 GFA Project No. 18-8332.00 Page 5 of 12 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 are provided within this report: 1. Prepare boring logs depicting the subsurface soil conditions encountered during our field exploration. 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 exploration with respect to foundation support for the proposed structure. 4. Provide recommendations with respect to foundation support of the structure, including allowable soil bearing capacity, bearing elevations, and foundation design parameters. 5. Provide site preparation procedures for the proposed construction. 1.2 Project Description Based on conversations with the client, we understand the project consists of constructing a three -level residence. Since the residential structure (or a portion thereof) will be located east of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL), a pile supported foundation is required. The main residence will be elevated above a lower level garage that may have walls and ground floor slab of frangible breakaway design. We assume the structure will utilize conventional design and construction and be supported by columns founded upon pile foundations. Structural design loads have not been provided to us. For the foundation recommendations presented in this report, we assumed the maximum column load will be 50 kips and the maximum wall loading (if applicable) will be 3 kips per linear foot. Based on current site grades, we estimate that up to 2 feet of fill will be required to achieve final grade. 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 The project site was heavily wooded with trees and shrubs. Limited clearing by the client was necessary for GFA to access the boring locations. The grade at the site was estimated to be even to slightly below the adjacent roadway at the time of drilling. The Atlantic Ocean bordered the eastern side of the property. Gf� Proposed Three -Story Residence Geotechnica/ Exploration Report 7928 S Ocean Drive, St. Lucie County, Florida September 28, 2018 GFA Project No. 18-8332.00 Page 6 of 12 2.2 Field Exploration Two (2) standard penetration test (SPT) borings, advanced to depths of approximately 40 feet below the existing ground surface, were completed for this study. The locations of the borings are illustrated on the Test Location Plan in in Appendix B. The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) method was used as the investigative tool within the borings. The SPT tests were performed in substantial accordance with ASTM D 1586, "Penetration Test 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. The soil samples recovered from the borings were visually classified and their stratification is illustrated on the boring logs in Appendix D. It is noted that soil conditions may vary between the strata interfaces indicated on the logs. The soil boring data reflect information from the specific test locations only. 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 construction. 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 existing site features and other landmarks. 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 recovered soil samples, no laboratory testing was deemed necessary. Samples of the soils encountered during our field exploration will be held 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 (8). These are sandy soils and organic soils are not indicated. It should be noted that 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 - Record of Test Borings. The logs contain the soil descriptions and the penetration resistance (N-values) logged during the drilling and sampling activities. The classifications and descriptions shown on GFi � Proposed Three -Story Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 7928 S Ocean Drive, St Lucie County, Florida September 28, 2018 GFA Project No. 18-8332.00 Page 7 of 12 the logs are generally based upon visual characterizations of the recovered soil samples using the Unified Soil Classification System, modified as necessary to describe typical Florida conditions. -See Appendix F - Discussion of Soil Groups, for a detailed description of various soil groups. The subsurface soil conditions encountered at the boring locations generally consisted of medium dense to very dense fine sand (SP) to an approximate depth of 33.5 feet, then very loose to loose silt (ML) to a depth of 38.5 feet, and then medium dense silty fine sand and dense fine sand (SP) to the boring termination depths of approximately 40 feet below the existing ground surface. 2.5 Hydrogeological Conditions On the date of our field exploration, the groundwater table was encountered at depths of approximately 5.0 and 6.7 feet below the existing ground surface. The groundwater table will fluctuate seasonally depending upon local rainfall and other site specific and/or local influences, including the water level in the nearby Atlantic Ocean with tidal influences. 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 geotechnical 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 loads. 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 residential structure (or portions thereof) will be located east of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL), a pile supported foundation is required. Frangible ground Proposed Three -Story Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 7928 S Ocean Drive, St Lucie County, Florida September 28, 2018 GFA Project No. 18-8332.00 Page 8 of 12 level floor slabs and garage walls may be either pile supported or supported upon spread footings (final design to be determined by others). GFA considered the following design criteria to develop pile foundation recommendations for the proposed structure: 1. For CCCL construction, the FDEP has established a 100-year storm elevation (bottom of lowest structural member) of +17.0 or +17.9 feet NGVD (depends on location) -for structures within St. Lucie County. 2. For CCCL construction, the FDEP has established a 100-year storm erosion elevation (design scour elevation) of +2.7 feet NGVD for all of St. Lucie County. 3. A loss of soil support between the bottom of lowest structural member and design scour elevation (+2.7 feet NGVD) was considered in the pile capacity analyses. 4. The residence will utilize conventional construction and be supported by columns terminating on pile caps slightly below the ground floor level. Fill will be placed to achieve final (or near final) grade before installing the pile foundations, and top of piles (bottom of pile caps) would be about +8 feet NGVD/+6.5 feet NAVD. Considering the subsurface conditions encountered at the boring locations, GFA recommends that a deep foundation system consisting of augered cast -in -place (ACIP) piles be used for support _ of the proposed residence. ACIP pile design should be in accordance with the applicable sections of the Florida Building Code (2017), Sixth Edition, the latest edition of the Deep Foundations Institute's Augered Cast -In -Place Piles Manual, and other applicable federal, state, and local requirements. The results of our ACIP pile capacity evaluations are summarized in the table below. The lateral capacity and pile top deflection were calculated using the commercially available ALLPILE 7.0 software. ACIP Pile Recommendations for Pile Supported Structures Nominal Maximum Pile Pile Pile Top Recommended Pile Allowable Pile Allowable Grout Diameter Elevation Pile Tip Length Compression Tension Pile Lateral Strength in NGVD Elevation ft Capacity* Ca aci Capacity"(psi) 1.75 Tons 16 Unknown Unknown 20 40 tons 3.5 tons (Free Head) 12.5 Tons 5,000 Fixed Head 1.75 Tons 16 Unknown Unknown 30 27 tons 7.5 tons (Free Head) 12.5 Tons 5,000 Fixed Head * Pile Capacity Graphs shown in Appendix E. ** For calculated pile top deflection of % inches at top of pile elevation. Proposed Three -Story Residence 7928 S Ocean Drive, St. Lucie County, Florida GFA Project No. 18-8332.00 Geotechnical Exploration Report September 28, 2018 Page 9 of 12 The pile design curves resulting from our analysis are presented in Appendix E. If piles having either lesser or greater capacities are required other than those presented in the above table, GFA would be pleased to provide further recommendations upon request. The following notes are also applicable to the ACIP pile design: 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 shall 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. 3. The pile reinforcement should be sufficiently embedded in the pile cap to afford a fixed end connection, as required. 3.3 Pile Installation Pile design and installation should be in accordance with the applicable sections of the Florida Building Code and other applicable federal, state and local requirements. In addition, piles should be installed in accordance with the following: 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. Adiacent 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. GFi � Proposed Three -Story Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 7928 S Ocean Drive, St. Lucie County, Florida September 28, 2018 GFA Project No. 18-8332.00 Page 10 of 12 7. Grout Factor - The minimum acceptable grout factor (i.e. actual grout volume divided by theoretical grout volume) should be 1.1. 3.4 Foundations for Ground Level Frangible Walls The footings may be designed using a maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,500 psf. Shallow foundations should be embedded a minimum of 12 inches below final grade. The embedment should be measured from- the lowest adjacent grade. Isolated column footings should be at least 24 inches in width. Continuous strip footings should have a width of at least 18 inches regardless of contact pressure. Once site preparation has been performed in accordance with the recommendations outlined in Section 3.6 of this report, the soils should readily support any structures bearing upon shallow foundations. For such structures, settlements are estimated not to exceed 1-inch total and 0.5- inch differential. Footings and columns should be structurally separated from any ground level floor slabs, as they will be loaded differently and at different times, unless a monolithic mat foundation is designed. 3.5 Ground Level Floor Slabs (Frangible) Ground level floor slabs may be supported directly on the existing grade or on granular fill following the foundation site preparation and fill placement procedures outlined in Section 3.6 of this report. We recommend that a modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pounds per cubic inch (pci) be considered during design. The ground floor slabs should be structurally separated from walls and columns to allow for differential vertical movement, unless a monolithic mat foundation is designed. Water vapor is likely to rise through the granular fill and condense below the base of floor slabs. If moisture entry into the slabs is not desirable, an appropriate moisture vapor barrier should be installed at the slab bottom - subgrade interface. 3.6 Site Preparation Our recommendations. for preparation of the site and fill placement and compaction are presented below. This approach to improving and maintaining site soils has been found to be successful on projects having similar soil conditions. 1. Initial site preparation should consist of performing stripping (removing surface vegetation, near surface roots, and other deleterious matter) and clearing operations. This should be performed within, and to a distance of five (5) feet beyond, the perimeter of the footprint of the planned construction. Foundations and the below grade remains of any other structures that are within the construction area should also be removed. Similarly, utility lines within the limits of the proposed construction should also be removed, relocated, or properly abandoned so that they will not adversely impact overlying structures. 2. The stripped areas should be proof rolled and compacted until the upper 2 feet of soil achieve a density of at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557). We recommend using a steel drum vibratory roller or track -mounted equipment Proposed Three -Story Residence 7928 S Ocean Drive, St Lucie County, Florida GFA Project No. 18-8332.00 Geotechnical Exploration Report September 28, 2018 Page 11 of 12 having sufficient static weight to achieve the required compaction. Density tests should be performed on the proof rolled 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 1556). Hand Cone Penetrometer (HCP) tests may also be performed to evaluate soil density. 3. Fill material may then be placed in the building pad area as required. The fill material should be inorganic (classified as SP, SW, GP, GW, SP-SM, SW-SM, GW-GP, GP -GM) containing not more than 5 percent (by weight) organic materials. Fill materials having silt/clay-size soil fines contents of more than 12 percent should not be used. Each lift should be compacted and tested prior to the placement of the next lift. Density tests should be performed within the fill at a frequency of not less than one test per 2,500 square feet per lift in the building area, or a minimum of three (3) tests per lift, whichever is greater. 4. Fill which will be compacted using full-size vibratory compaction equipment should be placed lifts having a maximum thickness of 12 inches. If the roller is operating in the static mode or if track -mounted equipment is used for compaction, the lift thickness should be reduced to 8 inches. Fill that will be compacted using hand -operated or portable equipment, such as vibratory sleds, jumping jacks, or walk -behind rollers, should have a maximum lift thickness of 6 inches. 5. For shallow spread footings placed on either structural fill or compacted native granular soils, the final bearing subgrade should be tested for compaction and observed by an engineer or geologist or his/her representative to determine if the soils are free of organic and/or deleterious materials. Density tests should be performed at a frequency of not less than one (1) density test per each isolated column footing and one (1) test per each seventy five (75) lineal feet of wall footings. 6. Following installation of the ACIP piles and construction of the pile caps, the areas next to the pile caps will also require backfilling. Each lift of backfill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557). We anticipate that portable equipment will be required for compaction of the backfill. 7. The contractor should consider the final design contours and grades contained in the project plans when executing backfilling and compaction operations. 3.7 Vibration Monitoring The proposed construction will be within proximity 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. GF� Proposed Three -Story Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 7928 S Ocean Drive, St. Lucie County, Florida September 28, 2018 GFA Project No. 18-8332.00 Page 12 of 12 4.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS This consulting report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Phoenix Realty Homes, the current owner(s), and other members of the design team for the proposed residence located at 7928 S Ocean Drive (Lot 8 Diamond Sands) in St. Lucie County, Florida. This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted local geotechnical 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 and specifications 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 calculations 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 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 descriptions represent our interpretation of the subsurface conditions at the designated boring locations on the specific date drilled. Any third -party reliance of our 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. Gf� Appendix A - Vicinity Map 60 .; M , Appendix B - Test Location Plan Gfi� Test Location Plan: 7928 S Ocean Drive, St. Lucie County, FL 'M,iq',he.'lle, Fr8h'klJ'h,,,GFA-- Saint: Lucie :County PrQpe.rty. Apprai's& ,;A,p ril, 3,, 2018, 11128 0 A0075 0.015 'om -Mi 0 0L015-- :0.03 0.06-km aid Is k0twaflabVd. 000PV09MOISSM Loot! C01,111 FMPtMfAPPM15.r.AIfrqIt tserued. Approximate Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Boring Locations Appendix C - Notes Related to Borings Gfi� 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 for a 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 cone tip resistance recorded when pushing the cone 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. The 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. Relative density for 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 I 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 Loose 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 Very Stiff >30 1 >50 Hard 10. Grain size descriptions are as follows: Description Particle Size Limits Boulder Greater than 12 inches Cobble 3 to 12 inches Coarse Gravel 3/4 to 3 inches Fine Gravel No. 4 sieve to 3/4 inch Coarse Sand No. 10 to No. 4 sieve Medium an No. 40 to No. 10 sieve Fine Sand No. 200 to No. 40 sieve Fines(Silt/Clay) Smaller than No. 200 sieve 11. Definitions for modifiers used in soil/rock descriptions: Proportion I Modifier Approximate Root Diameter Modifier <5% Trace Less than /32" Fine roots 5% to 12% Little 1/32" to 1/4" Small roots 12% to 30% Some '/a" to 1" Medium roots 30% to 50% And 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 Gfi� Appendix D - Record of Test Borings GF� LOG OF BORING SPT-1 GFA International PAGE 1 OF 1 �,y� RNAri��py CLIENT Phoenix Realty Homes PROJECT NAME Lot 8 Diamond Sands PROJECT NUMBER 18-8332.00 PROJECT LOCATION 7928 S Ocean Dr., St. Lucie County DRILLING CONTRACTOR GFA International Inc. HOLE DEPTH 40 ft HOLE DIAMETER DRILLER PM/RM DATE STARTED 8/24/18 COMPLETED 8/24/18 DRILL RIG Simco GROUND WATER LEVEL: VAT TIME OF DRILLING 6.70 ft METHOD SPT LATITUDE 27.31941 LONGITUDE-80.22606 NOTE: HAMMER TYPE w SPT N VALUE A p U o > U w U 20 40 60 80 �-- o- P: — Q =O o_ O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION �m w O �z - > �z LO Zz PL MC LL w" O >�- w qQ� (g � Z m O U Z � g p p 20 0 60 80 ❑ FINES CONTENT (%) ❑ ui O 20 40 60 80 Light brown fine sand, trace shell (SP) 1 1 2 1 3 1 3 2 13 17 14 20 5 3 17 34 20 8 Q 4 10 18 12 e 5 10 12 22 10 17 6 27 24 17 41 15 7 15 26 62 20 36 8 23 25 30 55 25 9 18 24 25 49 30 33.5 Gray silt (ML) 10 2 35 2 4 38.5 Gray fine sand with few shell fragments (SP) 11 13 zz 40.0 35 "v Bottom of borehole at 40.0 feet. LOG OF BORING SPT-2 GFA International PAGE 1 OF 1 'RNAi1�aPv CLIENT Phoenix Realty Homes PROJECT NAME Lot 8 Diamond Sands PROJECT NUMBER 18-8332.00 PROJECT LOCATION 7928 S Ocean Dr., St. Lucie County DRILLING CONTRACTOR GFA International Inc. HOLE DEPTH 40 ft HOLE DIAMETER DRILLER PM/RM DATE STARTED 8/24/18 COMPLETED 8/24/18 DRILL RIG Simco GROUND WATER LEVEL: �ZAT TIME OF DRILLING 5.00 ft METHOD SPT LATITUDE 27.31928 LONGITUDE-80.22624 NOTE: HAMMER TYPE W o, o o ♦ SPT N VALUE A p U n i �m r u) W C✓ ��- U 20 40 60 80 PL MC LL 1�I d W" Q >� =O a 0 J MATERIAL DESCRIPTION g w > 0z O¢ m D �z W Zz a W 0 L O � Z 0 Z O z O z 20 40 60 80 W W 20 0 ❑ FINES CONTENT (%) ❑ 20 40 60 80 Light brown fine sand, trace shell (SP) 2 1 2 2 4 2 3 2 8 14 10 5 17 3 20 az 60 38 5 4 i6 26 15 7 5 15 24 :c 10 21 13.5 o Light brown cemented sand (GP) 6 20 22 15 o p 3z 54 O o p OCl 18.5 Brown fine sand with shell fragments (SP) 7 20 26 20-33 59 23.5 Gray fine sand with few shell fragments (SP) 8 28 25 2s 54 28.5 Dark gray fine sand, trace shell (SP) 9 11 30 23 42 65 33.5 Gray silt (ML) 10 2 3L14 35 3 38.5 �� Gray fine sand and silt (SM) 11 2 a :................ ......:....... • 40.0 Bottom of borehole at 40.0 feet. Appendix E - Pile Design Curves Gr TMPOP ALL -PILE CWReck SOM6R ua ommel= LbelSeEb ALLOWABLE CAPACITY vs FOUNDATION DEPTH so so 81 81 72 72 Q. 63 63 CL } Y M a Or 54 v 54 U A N U 45 C 45 C U O a 36 36 n E 27 27 18 18 9 9 01 0 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 Foundation Depth, L A Foundation Depth, L -ft CiWiTech Software Figure 1 Lateral Capacity with a Free Head Condition ALL -PILE cklirrecieairsre wmMMCimm LCeesedb (Zp) DEFLECTION, yt -in p-ft -1.00 0 Lateral Moment Vertical pt Slope Max. No. Load Load Load at Top at Top Moment (kip) (kip-ft) (kip) (in) (in6n) (kip-ft) 1 0.5 1.0 80.0 0.1 0.00 4.1 2 1.5 3.0 80.0 0.2 0.00 12.6 3 2.5 5.0 60.0 0.3 0.00 21.3 4 3.5 7.0 80.0 0.5 0.01 30.3 5 4.0 8.0 80.0 0.6 -0.01 34.7 6 4.5 9.0 80.0 0.7 -0.01 392 7 5.0 10.0 80.0 0.8 -0.01 43.6 Civiffech Software PILE DEFLECTION vs LOADING Single Pile, Khead=1, Khc=1 0 +1.00 Figure 2 Depth (Zp) from Pile Top-ft 0� 10- 20 - 30 - 40 - 50 - 60 - �ERYASNN� Lateral Capacity with a Fixed Head Condition ALL -PILE CWrreai SMare IM ICIIIMCIDOM Lbeise= Depth (Zp) DEFLECTION, yt -in from Pile Top-ft -0.50 0 Lateral Slope Vertical yt Slope Max. No. Load Restraint Load at Top at Top Moment ((1p) (inAn) (kip) (in) (inAn) (kip-ft) 1 2.5 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.00 -10.3 2 7.5 0.0 10.0 0.1 0.00 -34.3 3 12.5 0.0 10.0 0.2 0.00 -59.8 4 17.5 0.0 10.0 0.3 0.00 -85.8 5 20.0 0.0 10.0 0.4 0.00 -100.0 6 22.5 0.0 10.0 0.4 0.00 -113.3 7 25.0 0.0 10.0 0.5 0.00 -126.7 CIWITech Software PILE DEFLECTION vs LOADING Single Pile, Khead=5, Kbc=2 0 +0.50 Figure 2 fromh (Zp) Pile Top-ft 0- 10- 20 - 30 - 40 - 50 - 60 - Appendix F - Notes Related to Borings GFi� 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 noticeably change 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 "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. GFR 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. Gfi�