The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutGEOTHECNICAL EXPLORATION UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION LOWER PROPOSED RESIDENCE 1069 NETTLES BOULEVARD JENSEN BEACH, FLORIDA UES PROJECT No. 3330.2100171 .0000 REV#1 PREPARED FOR: Rob and Angie Lower 1011 Croton Drive Alexandria, Virginia 22308 Attn: Mr. and Mrs. Lower PREPARED BY: Universal Engineering Sciences 607 NW Commodity Cove Port St. Lucie, Florida 34986 (772) 924-3575 September 8, 2021 Consultants in: Geotechnical Engineering • Environmental Sciences • Construction Materials Testing • Threshold Inspection UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES Consultants In:Geotechnical Engineering a Environmental Sciences Geophysical Services•Construction Materials Testing•Threshold Inspection Building Inspection•Plan Review• Building Code Administration September 8, 2021 Mr. and Mrs. Lower 1011 Croton Drive Alexandria, Virginia 22308 Subject: Report of Geotechnical Exploration Lower Proposed Residence 1069 Nettles Boulevard, Jensen Beach, Florida UES Project No. 3330.2100171.0000 REV#1 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Lower Universal Engineering Sciences (UES) 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 general accordance with our Geotechnical Engineering Proposal No. 21-1059.00 dated June 30, 2021, planned in conjunction with and authorized by you. Slight modifications to the scope were made due to access issues from the trailer occupying the subject property presently. 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 foundation design and site preparation. Per our prior telephone discussions and email correspondence with you, UES understands that you intend to develop the lot located at 1069 Nettles Boulevard in Jensen Beach, Florida. The subject property is currently occupied by a trailer. Design plans, details, or specific structural loads were not provided to UES. For the foundation recommendations presented in this report, we assumed a maximum wall loading of 4 kips per linear foot and a maximum column load of 40 kips. The recommendations provided herein are based upon the above considerations. If the stated conditions are incorrect or if the project description is revised, please inform UES 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) Lower Proposed Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 1069 Nettles Boulevard, Jensen Beach, Florida September 8, 2021 UES Project No. 3330.2100171.0000 REV#1 Page 2 of 10 One (1) standard penetration test (SPT) borings (B-1), advanced to an approximate depth of 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 medium dense fine sand (SP), fine sand with silt (SP-SM) and silty fine sand (SM) to the termination depths. Considering the results of the SPT boring, UES recommends that the proposed residence be supported by a deep foundation system consisting of augered cast-in-place (ACIP) piles. Axial compressive and tension capacities for both 14-inch and 16-inch diameter ACIP piles were developed for the project. The results of our analysis are contained in the tables in Section 3.2 of this report. Note that the pile installation lengths in the tables are relative to the current ground surface at the boring location. 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 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. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service during this phase of the 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, Universal Engineering Sciences Florida Registry No. 4930 ""-- Digitally signed by t}.PSOOCEN eMDro;%; g Y g Thomas D -* No 9414 *" Montano:A014100000001 This item has been digitally signed and sealed by Thomas D. Montano, P.E. on the date adjacent to the seal. Printed copies of this document are not considered 7818498DCD000019A3 signed and sealed and the signature must be verified on any electronic copies. %FSS OORONA4" Date:2021.09.09 09:18:57 04'00' Thomas D. Montano, P.E. Andrew S. Melici, E.I. Branch Manager Project Manager Florida Registration No. 84146 Distribution: Mr. and Mrs. Lower 1 pdf ®UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES Lower Proposed Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 1069 Nettles Boulevard, Jensen Beach, Florida September 8, 2021 UES Project No. 3330.2100171.0000 REV#1 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 2.4 Geomorphic 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 Instalation .............................................................................................. 7 3.4 Site Preparation .............................................................................................................. 8 3.5 Fill Placement and Compaction....................................................................................... 8 3.6 Quality Control and Vibration Monitoring ......................................................................... 9 4.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS...................................................................................................... 9 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 ®UNIVERSAL` ENGINEERING SCIENCES Lower Proposed Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 1069 Nettles Boulevard, Jensen Beach, Florida September 8, 2021 UES Project No. 3330.2100171.0000 REV#1 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 the proposed residential construction. The following scope of services is 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 residence. 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 prior telephone discussions and email correspondence with you, UES understands that you intend to develop the lot located at 1069 Nettles Boulevard in Jensen Beach, Florida. The subject property is currently occupied by a trailer. Design plans, details, or specific structural loads were not provided to UES. For the foundation recommendations presented in this report, we assumed a maximum wall loading of 4 kips per linear foot and a maximum column load of 40 kips. The recommendations provided herein are based upon the above considerations. If the stated conditions are incorrect or if the project description is revised, please inform UES so that we may review our recommendations with respect to any modifications. 2.0 OBSERVATIONS 2.1 Site Description The project site is located at 1069 Nettles Boulevard as illustrated on the Site Vicinity Map in Appendix A. At the time of our field exploration, the property was occupied by a trailer which provided access issues resulting in a modification to the scope of the geotechnical investigation. ®UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES Lower Proposed Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 1069 Nettles Boulevard, Jensen Beach, Florida September 8, 2021 UES Project No. 3330.2100171.0000 REV#1 Page 5 of 10 2.2 Field Exploration One (1) standard penetration test (SPT) borings (B-1), advanced to an approximate depth of 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 planned construction. The locations of the borings are illustrated on the Test Location Plan 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 of the borings was not provided for our field exploration. The indicated depth and location of each boring were approximated based upon existing grade and estimated distances and relationships to the existing residence and other landmarks on the property. 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 soil 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. LIES will 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 Arents, 0 to 5 percent slopes. These are sandy soils and organic soils are not indicated. However, since Arents are areas where the soils have been generally altered by grading, shaping, and covered with fill, the soils can be variable. Note that the Soil Survey generally extends to a maximum depth of 80 inches below ground surface and is not indicative of deeper soil conditions. Boring logs resulting from our field exploration are presented in Appendix D - Log of Boring Records. The logs contain the soil descriptions, the standard penetration test (SPT) N-values during the drilling and sampling activities. Note that the soil boring data reflect information from the specific test locations only and the 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. ®UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES Lower Proposed Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 1069 Nettles Boulevard, Jensen Beach, Florida September 8, 2021 UES Project No. 3330.2100171.0000 REV#1 Page 6 of 10 The subsurface soil conditions encountered at the boring locations generally consisted of loose to medium dense fine sand (SP), fine sand with silt (SP-SM) and silty fine sand (SM) to the termination depths. 2.5 Hydrogeological Conditions On the date of our field exploration (August 10, 2021), groundwater was encountered in the boring at an approximate depth of 4 feet below the ground surface. The groundwater table typically fluctuates seasonally depending upon local rainfall and other site specific and/or local 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 UES 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, UES 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 Based on the soil profile revealed by the SPT boring, it is UES's opinion that the residential structure can be supported by a deep foundation system consisting of augered-cast-in-place (ACIP) piles and grade beams. ACIP pile design should be in accordance with the applicable sections of the 2020 Florida Building Code, S 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 analysis are summarized in Tables 3.2.1 and 3.2.2 below. The evaluations were performed using the commercially available ALLPILE 7.0 software. ®UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES Lower Proposed Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 1069 Nettles Boulevard, Jensen Beach, Florida September 8, 2021 UES Project No. 3330.2100171.0000 REV#1 Page 7 of 10 Table 3.2.1 —ACIP Pile Design Recommendations for 14-Inch Diameter Piles Recommended Pile Maximum Allowable Pile Allowable Grout Nominal Pile Pile Top Pile Tip Length Pile Compression Tension Strength Diameter in Elevation Elevation ft Capacity Capacity (psi) 14 Unknown Unknown 25 48 kips 11 kips 5,000 14 Unknown Unknown 30 44 kips 14 kips 5,000 Table 3.2.2—ACIP Pile Design Recommendations for 16-Inch Diameter Piles Recommended Pile Maximum Allowable Pile Allowable Grout Nominal Pile Pile Top Pile Tip Length Pile Compression Tension Strength Diameter in Elevation Elevation ft Capacity Capacity psi 16 Unknown Unknown 25 58 kips 12 kips 5,000 16 Unknown Unknown 30 57 kips 17 kips 5,000 The design pile depths in the above tables are based on installing the piles at the site grade existing at the boring location at the time of drilling. Please note that the pile depths chosen for analysis were selected due to weight restrictions on roadways needed to be used in order to access the property with the proper equipment. 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 tables are desired, UES will be pleased to provide further recommendations upon request. The following notes are also applicable to the ACIP pile design: 1. UES 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. 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 2020 Florida Building Code, Seventh 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. ®UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES Lower Proposed Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 1069 Nettles Boulevard, Jensen Beach, Florida September 8, 2021 UES Project No. 3330.2100171.0000 REV#1 Page 8 of 10 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. 3.5 Fill Placement and Compaction 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 material required for the project 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. UES does not recommend using fill materials having silt/clay-size soil fines contents exceeding 12 percent. In general, fill required to attain design grades should be placed in maximum 12-inch thick loose lifts and compacted to at least 95 percent of modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557). Each lift of fill should be compacted and tested prior to ®UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES Lower Proposed Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 1069 Nettles Boulevard, Jensen Beach, Florida September 8, 2021 UES Project No. 3330.2100171.0000 REV#1 Page 9 of 10 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 UES 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 proposed 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 UES personnel to provide the vibration monitoring during construction will be provided upon request. 4.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS This consulting report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Mr. And Mrs. Lower and other members of the design team for the proposed residence located at 1069 Nettles Boulevard in Jensen Beach, Florida. This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted local geotechnical engineering practices; no other warranty, either express or implied, is made. 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 information and professional opinions provided in this report. In the event changes are made in the nature, design, or location of the proposed structure, 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 UES. UES should be provided the opportunity to review the final foundation plans and specifications to determine if UES's recommendations have been properly interpreted, communicated, and implemented. If UES is not afforded the opportunity to participate in construction related aspects of foundation installation as recommended in this report or any report addendum, UES cannot accept responsibility for the interpretation of our recommendations made in this report or in a report addendum for foundation performance. ®UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES Lower Proposed Residence Geotechnical Exploration Report 1069 Nettles Boulevard, Jensen Beach, Florida September 8, 2021 UES Project No. 3330.2100171.0000 REV#1 Page 10 of 10 5.0 BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS The recommendations presented 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 variations which may occur between borings. While the borings are representative of the subsurface conditions at their respective locations and for their vertical reaches, local variations characteristic of the subsurface soils of 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 express written consent of Universal Engineering Sciences. The applicable SPT methodology (ASTM D 1586) used in performing our borings, and for determining penetration resistance and soil relative density, is specific to the sampling tools utilized and does not reflect the ease or difficulty to advance other tools or materials. ®UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES Appendix A - Vicinity Map g]UNIVERSAL° ENGINEERING SCIENCES Site Vicinity Map Lower Proposed Residence 1069 Nettles Boulevard, Jensen Beach, Florida i Project No. 3330.2100171.0000 Drafted by: JR Reviewed By: ES Date: 8/17/2021 Site Location , rY _ l O i 4 h � 1 {� a ,4 N Appendix B - Test Location Plan g]UNIVERSAL° ENGINEERING SCIENCES , � s • *� r i dor { • � i • i �i - �R i� •�t� ` 4 •. ` -%'Y '' • • - � OF Appendix C - Notes Related to Borings g]UNIVERSAL° ENGINEERING SCIENCES 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 HCP Value CPT Value Relative SPT HCP Value CPT Value Consistency N-Value (kg/cm ) (tsf) Density N-Value (kg/cm ) (tsf) 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 1 Hard 10. Grain size descriptions areas 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 Sand 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 Small roots 12%to 30% Some 1/4"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 gJUNIVERSAL° ENGINEERING SCIENCES Appendix D - Log of Boring Records g]UNIVERSAL° ENGINEERING SCIENCES Universal Engineering Sciences LOG OF BORING B-1 607 NW Commodity Cove Port Saint Lucie, Florida 34986 PAGE 1 OF 1 ° (772)924-3575 a a CLIENT Rob and Angie Lower PROJECT NAME Lower Proposed Residence o PROJECT NUMBER 3330.2100171.0000 PROJECT LOCATION 1069 Nettles Boulevard,Jensen Beach, FL z W DRILLING CONTRACTOR Florida Geotechnical Drilling HOLE DEPTH 40 ft HOLE DIAMETER 3 in U o DRILLER DATE STARTED 8/10/21 COMPLETED 8/10/21 W 3 DRILL RIG CME-45 GROUNDWATER LEVEL:-ZAT TIME OF DRILLING 4.00 ft o METHOD SPT LATITUDE LONGITUDE NOTE: HAMMER TYPE w U ^ ^ ^ o uJ o 0 0 w �^ d dao �Z J =U Z) cnH ZH o w Q 0-O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION w z_w w w Q Q� pp0 > �J OZ �Z �Z o �Z 0 Z O 20 O 00 IL p U 0 U a w 6 Concrete(4") 0 X 7 1 s 13 . Light brown fine sand,trace silt and shell fragments(SP) 0 6 0 8 2 8 16 4.0_ 6 Gray silty fine sand,trace shell fragments(SM) N 4 W 5 3 4 8 6.0 LU 4 Gray fine sand with silt,trace shell fragments(SP-SM) W 4 a 9 .• 8.0 2 5 Gray fine sand,trace silt and shell fragments(SP) 0 2 4 0 10 4 d a d w p 4 6 44 8 S 15 6 o 0 N O M M 6 IL 7 6 13 LU Cn 20 8 r U W O IL w w 6 8 8 8 16 w 25 �0 0 a j 28.0 10 Gray fine sand,trace silt,shell fragments and cemented sand(SP) N 9 18 28 30 s o c� w Q d 10 10 10 1—X— � 21 a 35 0 n 38.0 O 6 11 4 Light gray fine sand,trace silt and shell fragments(SP) a 6 1040 40.0 Bottom of borehole at 40.0 feet. Appendix E - Discussion of Soil Groups g]UNIVERSAL° ENGINEERING SCIENCES 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. g]UNIVERSAL° ENGINEERING SCIENCES 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. g]UNIVERSAL° ENGINEERING SCIENCES