HomeMy WebLinkAboutREPORT GEOTHECNICAL EXPLORATIONscANNEQ
By
aeap PAH1
GFA INTERNATIONAL
FLORIDA'S LEADING ENGINEERING SOURCE
Report of GeotI echnical Exploration
Proposed T o-Story Residence 7REC-EIV—ED--
Acquavista De elopment BLK A Lot 24416 A1A, St. Lucie County, Florida ` '9
J one 26, 2015
GFA Proct No.: 15-0786.00
For: AJT Construction Consulting, LLC
1,. Lucie cat-jr'Ry' Pormitting
� .,
p A ti !1
ll
9.'1Zz'r
�URCaT S t
�
`•s"�D'i�Mi��y��
�t�'a m � � c :x
zt W1
9
n
f A
.tau
m
-a n"WORK,
Since 1988
Environmental • Geotechnlcal • Construction
Florida's Leading
Source
Testing - Threshold and Special Inspections • Plan Review & Code Compliance
June 26, 2015
AJT Construction Consulting, LLC
Attention: Mr. Alan Tarpell
1760 N. Jog Road, Suite 140
West Palm Beach, Florida 33411
Site: Proposed Two -Story Resideg''ce
Acquavista Development BLNC A Lot 2
4416 A1A, St. Lucie County, Florida
GFA Project # 15-0786.00
Dear Mr. Tarpell:
GFA International, Inc. (GFA) has co pleted the subsurface exploration and geotechnical
engineering evaluation for the abov,e-re erenced project in accordance with ,the geotechnical
and engineering service agreement for his project. The scope of services was completed in
accordance with our Geotechnical Engineering Proposal (15-0986.00) dated May 7, 2015,
planned in conjunction with and authoriz d.by you.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of our subsurface explorati n was to classify the nature of the subsurface soils and
general geomorphic conditions and eva uate their impact upon the proposed construction. This
report contains the results of our su surface exploration at the site and, our engineering
interpretations of these, with respect o the project characteristics described to us including
providing recommendations for site pre surface
and the design of the foundation system.
Based on conversations with the cl ent, the project consists of constructing a two-story
residence. The residential structure (r portion thereof) will be located east of the Coastal
Construction Control Line (CCCL) anq therefore a pile supported foundation is required. GFA
was informed that the residence will be elevated above a lower level garage that will have walls
and ground floor slab of frangible brea away design.
The recommendations provided herei are based upon the above considerations. If the project
description has been revised, pleas inform GFA International so that we may review our
recommendations with respect to any odifications.
A total of one (1) standard penetration test (SPT) boring to a depth of approximately forty (40)
feet below ground surface (BGS) u%ere completed for this study. Additional borings and
soundings were performed on the adjacent lots and the information is used to supplement this
report.
521 NW Enterprise Drive - Port St. Lucie, Florida 34986 - (772) 924.3575 - (772) 924.35801
THROUGHOUT FLORIDA
Proposed Two -Story Residence Geotechnical Report
Acquavista Lot 2 (4416 A1A), St. Lucie County, i*L June 26, 2016
GFA Project No. 15-0786.00 I Page 2 of 11
The subsurface soil conditions encountered at this site (with information from borings and
soundings performed from adjacent lots), Generally consist of loose to medium sand (SP) to 4
feet, medium dense sand (SP) from 4 to '/z 2 feet, and then medium dense to very dense sand
(SP) with cemented sand seams and layers the boring termination depths. Please refer to
Appendix D - Record of Test Borings for a 4etailed account of each boring.
GFA recommends that the proposed resi ence be supported using a deep foundation system
consisting of augered cast -in -place (ACIP piles. Based on our analysis, GFA has estimated
that a 14 or 16-inch-diameter ACIP pile nstalled to a depth of 30 feet below grade existing
grade can provide a maximum allowable xial compressive capacity of 40 tons and a maximum
tension capacity of 12 tons.
For the ground supported frangible wallsl, an allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 psf may be
used for shallow footing foundation design.
The subgrade soils should be improv
constructing the foundation pads and fo
should be compacted to a minimum of
Fill (including stemwall backfill) should
minimum 95% density. After excavatio
bottom of footings should be compacted
i with compaction from the stripped grade prior to
;ing excavations. The top 2 feet below stripped grade
5% density prior to placing fill to achieve final grade.
placed in 12-inch lifts and compacted to achieve a
for footings, the subgrade to a depth of 2 feet below
achieve a minimum 95% density.
Scour elevations used in pile calculati�,ns are those provided by the Florida DEP for coastal
construction, but may not be adequate Ifor actual scour elevations in hurricane(s) event(s) that
exceed the DEP assumptions and ca Ise lower scour elevations. Therefore, GFA analysis is
limited to that provided by the DEP sc ur elevation, and scour analysis is not included in our
scope of work.
We appreciate the opportunity to be f service to you on this project and look forward to a
continued association. Please do n t hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or
comments, or if we may further assist ou as your plans proceed.
.11`4tttea,
Respecth�Iy%au7 Gj6d
GF�IiblaaYiq�iial� f.�`cr'fr
n Nurpber 4930
�, •, u J
4
Li
I
rai Id :M ole , P.
S(ev otecW�i-cal End r
Flo%! $i5tjition too. 6
51 %
Copies:, �,Qft
David Alker
Project Manager
19
R , .
Proposed Two -Story Residence Geotechnical Report
Acqua vista Lot 2 (4416 A1A), St. Lucie County, L June 26, 2016
GFA Project No. 15-0786.00 Page 3 of 11
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................4
1.1 Scope of Services ........................................................................................................4
1.2 Project Description..........................................................................................................4
2.0 OBSERVATIONS ................................ ............................................. ................................... 5
2.1 Site Inspection .............................................................................................................5
2.2 Field Exploration ..........................................................................................................5
2.3 Laboratory Analysis................................................................................ ..................5
2.4 Geomorphic Conditions .................. .............. ................................................................... 6
2.5 Hydrogeological Conditions.............................................................................................6
3.0 ENGINEERING EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS..............................................6
3.1 Foundation Recommendations - G neral.........................................................................6
3.2 Pile Foundation...............................................................................................................7
3.3 Pile Installation................................................................................................................8
3.4 Vibration Monitoring....................... ....................................... ............ ................................ 8
3.5 Design of Footings (Ground Level Tangible Walls).........................................................9
3.6 Ground Floor Slab (Frangible)...................................................................I.....................9
3.7 Site Preparation..............................................................................................................9
4.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS.....................................................................:..............................11
5.0 BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS1..................................................................................11
Appendix A - Vicinity Map
Appendix B - Test Location Plan
Appendix C - Notes Related to Borings
Appendix D - Record of Test Borings
Appendix E - Discussion of Soil Group;
19
Proposed Two -Story Residence I Geotechnical Report
Acquavista Lot 2 (4416 A1A), St. Lucie County, FL June 26, 2016
GFA Project No. 15-0786.00 I Page 4 of 11
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Scope of Services
The objective of our geotechnical services as to collect subsurface data for the subject project,
summarize the test results, and discu s any apparent site conditions that may have
geotechnical significance for building const uction. The following scope of services are provided
within this report:
1. Prepare records of the soil boring logs depicting the subsurface soil conditions encountered
during our field exploration.
2. Conduct a review of each soil sample obtained during our field exploration for classification
and additional testing if necessary.
3. Analyze the existing soil conditions found during our exploration with respect to foundation
support for the proposed structure.
4. Provide recommendations with resp 1.1ct to foundation support of the structure, including
allowable soil -bearing capacity, beang elevations, and foundation design parameters.
5. Provide criteria and site preparatio 1 procedures to prepare the site for the proposed
construction.
1.2 Project Description
Based on conversations with the client, the project consists of constructing a two-story
residence. The residential structure (o portion thereof) will be located east of the Coastal
Construction Control Line (CCCL) and herefore a pile supported foundation is required. GFA
was informed that the residence will be levated above a lower level garage that will have walls
and ground floor slab of frangible break ,way design.
Based on a site visit and elevations rom topographic data from GoogleEarth website, the
current grade at the location of the pro osed residence varies from about +8 on the west side
and slopes upwards to the east to +11 feet NGVD. Assuming the proposed house will have a
ground level garage grade about +9 eet NGVD, about 0 to 2 feet of fill will be required to
achieve final grade.
We assume the residence will havJ typical construction, and be supported on columns
terminating on pile caps slightly below the ground floor elevation. We assume that fill will be
placed to achieve final (or near final) grade before installing the pile foundations, and top of piles
(bottom of pile caps) would be about +§ feet NGVD.
We have not received any inforr
recommendations presented in this r
kips and the maximum wall loading wi
ition regarding structural loads. For the foundation
Sort we assumed the maximum column load will be 80
be 4 kips per linear foot.
3 I
Proposed Two -Story Residence Geotechnical Report
Acquavista Lot 2 (4416 A1A), St. Lucie County, FL June 26, 2016
GFA Project No. 15-0786.00 I Page 5 of 11
The recommendations provided herein are
description has been revised, please infc
recommendations with respect to any mod!
2.0
2.1 Site Inspection
:d upon the above considerations. If the project
GFA International so that we may review our
'ATIONS
The project site was generally grassy with some palm trees and bushes. The site was about
even with the adjacent road on the west side and sloped upwards to the east, and at the end of
the east side of the lot the grade varied witk dunes and vegetation. The Atlantic Ocean bordered
the east side of the property on the east si�e of the dunes.
2.2 Field Exploration
A- total of one (1) standard penetration 1
feet below ground surface (BGS) wei
soundings were performed on the adjac
report. The locations of the boring pei
Location Plan". The Standard Penetrat
tools within the borings. SPT tests v
Procedure D-1586, "Penetration Test
procedure consists of driving a 1.4-inch
pound hammer falling 30 inches. Then
increment, is an indication of soil strengt
The soil samples recovered from the s
illustrated in Appendix D: "Record of T
vary between the strata interfaces, wl
from a specific test location only. Si
provided for our field exploration.
approximated based upon existing grs
landmarks. The boring depths were
proposed construction and knowledge
2.3 Laboratory Analysis
Soil samples recovered from our field
were visually examined in general acc
obtain an accurate understanding of #
thorough visual examination of the r
necessary. Bag samples of the soil ei
laboratory for your inspection for 30 da
writing.
:fit (SPT) boring to a depth of approximately forty (40)
i completed for this study. Additional borings and
nt lots and the information is used to supplement this
rmed for this lot is illustrated in Appendix B: "Test
m Test (SPT) method was used as the investigative
;re performed` in substantial accordance with ASTM
ind Split -Barrel Sampling of Soils". The SPT test
.D. split -tube sampler into the soil profile using a 140-
mber of blows per foot, for the second and third 6-inch
j boring were visually classified and their stratification is
�t Borings". It should be noted that soil conditions might
Fh are shown. The soil boring data reflect information
specific survey staking for the test locations was not
-he indicated depth and location of each test was
e and estimated distances and relationships to obvious
mfined to the zone of soil likely to be stressed by the
f vicinity soils.
exploration were returned to our laboratory where they
irdance with ASTM D-2488. Samples were evaluated to
soil properties and site geomorphic conditions. After a
;covered site soils, no laboratory testing was deemed
countered during our field exploration will be held in our
fs and then discarded unless we are notified otherwise in
Gfi�
Proposed Two -Story Residence
Acquavista Lot 2 (4416 A1A), St. Lucie County,
GFA Project No. 15-0786.00
Geotechnical Report
June 26, 2016
Page 6 of 11
The recovered samples were not examined, either visually or analytically, for chemical
composition or environmental hazards. GF� 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 th USDA Soil Survey website consists ofPalm Beach
fine sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes (27). T ese 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 (approximately 63/ feet) below g ound surface and is not indicative of deeper soil
conditions.
Boring logs derived from our field explo
Borings". The boring logs depict the obst
Test borings indicate the penetration re
sampling activities. The classifications ai
upon visual characterizations of the reca
been depicted and classified in general
modified as necessary to describe typic,c
Soil Groups", for a detailed description of
ition are presented in Appendix D: 'Record of Test
ved soils in graphic detail. The Standard Penetration
istance, or N-values logged during the drilling and
I descriptions shown on the logs are generally based
,eyed soil samples. All soil samples reviewed have
cordance with the Unified Soil Classification System,
Florida conditions. See Appendix E: "Discussion of
arious soil groups.
The subsurface soil conditions encountered at this site (with information from borings and
soundings performed from adjacent lots), generally consist of loose to medium sand (SP) to 4
feet, medium dense sand (SP) from 4 to 23'/z feet, and then medium dense to very dense sand
(SP) with cemented sand seams and ayers the boring termination depths. Please refer to
Appendix D - Record of Test Borings for detailed account of each boring.
2.5 Hydrogeological Conditions
On the dates of our field exploration, fhe groundwater table was encountered at a depth of
approximately 8 feet below the existing ground surface. The groundwater table will fluctuate
seasonally depending upon local rainfal� 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 4ns.
No additional investigation was includ d in our scope of work in relation to the wet seasonal
high groundwater table or any existing II Well fields in the vicinity. Well fields may influence water
table levels and cause significant fluctdations. If a more comprehensive water table analysis is
necessary, please contact our office forj additional guidance.
3.0 ENGINEERING EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1 Foundation Recommendations ;General
The residential structure will be locat6d east of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL)
and therefore a pile supported foundation is required. Frangible ground floor slabs and ground
level walls may be pile supported or supported on footings in accordance with rules and
regulations (to be determined by othe�js).
Proposed Two -Story Residence
Acquavista Lot 2 (4416 A1A), St. Lucie County,
GFA Project No. 15-0786.00
3.2 Pile Foundation
The following is design parameters GFA
for pile recommendations:
Geotechnical Report
June 26, 2016
Page 7 of 11
➢ For CCCL construction, the FDEP has established a 100-year storm elevation (bottom of
lowest structural member) of +1710 to +17.9 feet NGVD (depends on location) for
structures within St. Lucie County.
➢ 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.
➢ A loss of soil support between the ottom of lowest structural member and design scour
elevation (+2.7 feet NGVD) was included in compressive, tensile, and lateral pile
capacity analyses.
➢ We assume the residence will ha a typical construction, and be supported on columns
terminating on pile caps slightly be ow the ground floor elevation. We assume that fill will
be placed to achieve final (or near final) grade before installing the pile foundations, and
top of piles (bottom of pile caps) would be about +8 feet NGVD.
At this time, GFA recommends the dee o foundation to consist of augered cast -in -place piles
(ACIP). Additional lateral capacity may bo attained by utilizing inclined piles. We assumed that
the piles will have a minimum of 1% steel reinforcement for the analyses. ACIP pile installation
procedures should be performed in ac , ordance with the guidelines presented in the latest
edition of the Deep Foundations Institu e's Augered Cast -In -Place Pile Manual. The lateral
capacity and pile top deflection were c Iculated using the commercially available L-pile 4.0
software. A summary of pile capacities for a 14-inch diameter ACIP piles is presented in the
following table.
Pile Recommendati ns For All Pile Supported Structures
Maximum
Nominal
Pile Top
Recommended
Pile
Pile
Pile
Pile Lateral
Pile
Elevation
Pile Tip
L ngths
Compression
Tension
Capacity
Recommended
Diameter
NGVD)*
Elevation
1 ft —
Capacity
Capacity
(Tons)***
Grout Strength
0.5 Tons
(Free Head)
14" or
1.25 Tons
16"
Unknown
Unknown
30
40 Tons
12 Tons
Fixed Head
5000 psi
*Pile top elevation assumed at, or more tha6, +6 feet NGVD for analyses.
**From ground surface existing at time of.drIilling.
***For calculated pile top deflection of/z inghes at top of pile elevation.
GFA assumed that the piles will have la minimum of 1 % steel reinforcement for the analyses.
Augercast piles should be reinforced over their entire length for tension capacity. The
reinforcement shall be as'designed by the Structural Engineer.
If piles of lesser or greater capaciti
GFA would be pleased to provide fut
than those mentioned in the table above are required,
!r recommendations upon request.
0�
Proposed Two -Story Residence
Acquavista Lot 2 (4416 A1A), St, Lucie County,
GFA Project No. 15-0786.00
The following additional notes are appli
Structural stresses in the
design capacity; therefore,
the selected pile section.
The pile reinforcement is sL
fixed end connection if requi
3.3 Pile Installation
Geotechnica! Report
June 26, 2016
Page 8 of 11
to the pile design:
es may impose a more severe limitation on the
recommend the allowable stresses be verified for
embedded in the pile cap so as to afford a
Pile design and installation shall be in a 'cordance 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:
1. Pile Length: The proposed 14-inc I diameter piles should be installed as determined by
the inspecting Geotechnical Engjn er.
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 theltop 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 pines installed in groups.
4. Vertical Alignment - The vertica alignment of the piling should not deviate from the
plumb by more than 1/4 inch per oot of length.
5. Reinforcing- Cage Positioning -The top of the reinforcing cages installed in the piling
should not be more than 6 inches above and no more than 3 inches below the positions
shown in the plans. The reinfor�er
ing cages should be positioned concentrically within the
grouted pile shaft. The grout co over longitudinal reinforcing bars should not be less
than 3 inches. Reinforcing centrlizers shall be placed at maximum spacing of 15 feet at
the lower portion of the pile and fat 5 feet from the cage's top.
6. Adjacent Piles - A minimum rime period of 12 hours should be specified for the
installation of piles located withir! 5 feet, center -to -center, of each other.
7. Grout Factor - The minimum acceptable grout factor (i.e. actual grout volume divided by
theoretical grout volume) should be 1.1.
3.4 Vibration Monitoring
The proposed construction will be witl
that maybe susceptible to damage fr
during all aspects of construction, the
to determine the extent of vibration
seismograph used to monitor at this si
11lin close proximity to residential structures and roadways
�m vibration generated at the site. We recommend that
bordering landmarks be monitored using a seismograph
absorption that these features will be subject to. The
e should have the capability to measure ground velocities
GF
Proposed Two -Story Residence
Acquavista Lot 2 (4416 A1A), St. Lucie County,
GFA Project No. 15-0786.00
Geotechnica! Report
June 26, 2016
Page 9 of 11
along vertical, transverse, and longitudinal axes. The project structural engineer should
establish allowable ground velocities that t�e bordering facilities can safely withstand without
any damage.
3.5 Design of Footings (Ground Level Frangible Walls)
Footings may be designed using an allo able soil bearing pressure of 2,500 psf. Shallow
foundations should be embedded a minimtim of 12 inches below final grade. This embedment
shall be measured from the lowest adjace t grade. Isolated column footings should be at least
24 inches in width and continuous strip ootings should have a width of at least 16 inches
regardless of contact pressure.
Once site preparation has been performe
in this report, the soil should readily s
foundation system. Settlements have bi
differential. All footings and columns sl-
they will be loaded differently and at d
designed.
3.6 Ground Floor Slab (Frangible)
in accordance with the recommendations described
pport the proposed structure resting on a shallow
m projected to be less than 1-inch total and 'h-inch
uld be structurally separated from the floor slab, as
Brent times, unless a monolithic mat foundation is
The ground floor slabs may be suppo ed directly on the existing grade or on granular fill
following the foundation site preparation and fill placement procedures outlined in this report.
For purposes of design, a coefficient of ubgrade modulus 150 pounds per cubic inch may be
used. The ground floor slab should bel structurally separated from all walls and columns to
allow for differential vertical movement.
Water vapor is likely to rise through the g granular fill and condense beneath the base of the floor
slab. If moisture entry into the floor slas not desirable, an impermeable membrane should be
installed at the slab bottom - subgrade interface.
3.7 Site Preparation
GFA recommends the following compaction requirements for this project:
➢ Proof Roll .................................. I........ .... ....................... 95% of a Modified Proctor
➢ Building Pad Fill ........................ ................................ ...95% of a Modified Proctor
➢ Footings .................................. 95% of a Modified Proctor
The compaction percentages presented above are based upon the maximum dry density as
determined by a "modified proctor" �est (ASTM D-1557). All density tests should be
performed to a depth of 2 feet below stripped surface and 2 feet below bottom of
footings. All density tests should be p�e�rformed using the nuclear method (ASTM D-2922), the
sand cone method (ASTM D-1556), or,-Iand Cone Penetrometer (HCP) tests.
Our recommendations for preparatio6 of the site are presented below. This approach to
improving and maintaining the site soils has been found to be successful on projects with similar
soil conditions.
GFi�
Proposed Two -Story Residence
Acquavista Lot 2 (4416 A1A), St. Lucie County,
GFA Project No. 15-0786.00
Initial site preparation should consist c
near surface roots, and other deleteric
done within, and to a distance of five (�
footprint (including exterior isolated col
any structures that are within the footp
utility lines should be removed or pror
demolished residence had a pile found
may change.
2. Following site stripping and prior the
exposed limestone) should be compac
a steel drum vibratory roller with suf
achieve the required compaction. De
surface at a frequency of not less than
(3) tests, whichever is greater. Areas
by the project geotechnical engineer p�
3. Fill material may then be placed in th
inorganic (classified as SP, SW, GP,
more than 5 percent (by weight) org
fines in excess of 12% should not
lift thickness not exceeding 12-inches
placement of the next lift. Density te.,
not less than one test per 2,500 squ
three (3) tests per lift, whichever is gn
Geotechnical Report
June 26, 2016
Page 10 of 11
performing stripping (removing surface vegetation,
s matter) and clearing operations. This should be
feet beyond, the perimeter of the proposed building
nns). Foundations and any below grade remains of
nt of the new construction should be removed, and
rly abandoned so as to not affect structures. If the
Jon. GFA must be notified as the recommendations
placement of any fill, areas' of surficial sand (not
:d ("proof rolled") and tested. We recommend using
-ient static weight and vibratory impact energy to
isity tests should be performed on the proof rolled
ne test per 2,500 square feet, or a minimum of three
exposed intact limestone shall be visually confirmed
)r to fill placement, in lieu of proof rolling.
building pad as required. The fill material should be
N, SP-SM, SW-SM, GW-GP, GP -GM) containing not
iic materials. Fill materials with -silt/clay-size soil
used. Fill should be placed in lifts with a maximum
Each lift should be compacted and tested prior to the
, should be performed within the fill at a frequency of
e feet per lift in the building areas, or a minimum of
ter.
4. For any footings bearing on a limestone formation, the bottom of all footing excavation shall
be examined by the engineer / geolo, gist or his representative to determine the condition of
the limestone. The limestone shall a probed for voids and loose pockets of sand. Such
areas shall be cleaned to depth of 3 times the greatest horizontal dimension and backfilled
with lean concrete.
5. For footings placed on structural
footings shall be tested for comp
representative to determine if the
tests should be performed at a f
isolated column footing and one
footings.
filll or compacted native granular soils, the bottom of all
a tion and examined by the engineer / geologist or his
, wl
I is free of organic and/or deleterious material. Density
-e uency of not less than one (1) density test per each
() test per each seventy five (75) lineal feet of wall
6. Upon completion of production pile installation and pile cap construction, the pile caps
should be backfilled in 6 to 8 inch tick lifts and compacted to at least 95% of the modified
Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557).
7. The contractor should take into account the final contours and grades as established by the
plan when executing his backfilling and compaction operations.
Using vibratory compaction equipme t at this site may disturb adjacent structures. We
recommend that you monitor nearby structures before and during proof -compaction operations.
Gfi�
Proposed Two -Story Residence
Acquavista Lot 2 (4416 A1A), St. Lucie County,
GFA Project No. 15-0786.00
Geotechnical Report
June 26, 2016
'Page 11 of 11
A representative of GFA International can monitor the vibration disturbance of adjacent
structures. A proposal for vibration monitolring during compaction operations can be supplied
upon request.
4.0 R
This consulting report has been prepared 1
other members of the design team for the
Lot 2, 4416 A1A, St. Lucie County, Florid
generally accepted local geotechnical enc
implied. The evaluation submitted in this
a field exploration, however, the nature
profile may not become evident until the ti
it may be necessary to reevaluate inforr
report. In the event changes are made
structure, the evaluation and opinions cc
unless the changes are reviewed and
International.
RT LIMITATIONS
?r the exclusive use of the current project owners and
�roposed Two -Story Residence located at Acquavista
�. This report has been prepared in accordance with
neering practices, no other warranty is expressed or
eport, is based in part upon the data collected during
and extent of variations throughout the subsurface
ne of construction. If variations then appear evident,
Eation and professional opinions as provided in this
in the nature, design, or locations of the proposed
ntained in this report shall not be considered valid,
:onclusions modified or verified in writing by GFA
Scour elevations used in pile calculation's are those provided by the Florida DEP for coastal
construction, but may not be adequate + actual scour elevations in hurricane(s) event(s) that
exceed the DEP assumptions and cause lower scour elevations. Therefore, GFA analysis is
limited to that provided by the DEP sco i r elevation, and scour analysis is not included in our
scope of work. I
5.0 BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
The analysis and recommendations su' mitted in this report are based on the data obtained
from the tests performed at the location indicated on the attached figure in Appendix B. This
report does not reflect any variations, _w ich may occur between borings. While the borings are
representative of the subsurface condi ions at their respective locations and for their vertical
reaches, local variations characteristic f the subsurface soils of the region are anticipated and
may be encountered. The delineation between soil types shown on the soil logs is approximate
and the description represents our interpretation of the subsurface conditions at the designated
boring locations on the particular date drilled.
Any third party reliance of our geotechhical report or parts thereof is strictly prohibited without
the expressed written consent of GFA (International. The applicable SPT methodology (ASTM
D-1586), CPT methodology (ASTM D-3441), and Auger Boring methodology (ASTM D-1452)
used in performing our borings and sounding, and for determining penetration and cone
resistance is specific to the sampling tl ols utilized and does not reflect the ease or difficulty to
advance other tools or materials.
GF
Appendik A - Vicinity Map
1
¢a ry
N
F�`S JFS7tNG •C`'�4`
•
Vici ,ity Map
.Proposed T o-Story Residence
Acquavista De elopment BLK A Lot 2
4416 A1A, t. Lucie County, FL
GFA Proi ct No.15-0786.00
Site
Note: Aerial Photograph from
Appendix B I- Test Location Plan
Test Location Plan: Proposed Two -Story Residence, Acquavista Development BLK A Lot 2, 4416 Al A, St. Lucie County, FL
1 ` ro •, 4 + ak O(a 1\ PSI is 1 Ci:1'I'Is LL•(U IASCIUM ON Sri IS DATA
I >1 T WaaM...wlv,s
\:tG\\T tr ` r ,...-,1 tn..:.: � " un.v.3:musan'.t• ,atrr.sr!mu.vr
QIIU
lA\t3i;Slv (.7M1lN ` fan3 Arn \ `r y7•- 15ni. , Y E ) N-I,a h)IJY;•„)';1t114 ) �.11t51'.�l).+Yf
t i' �_sw+.®e 7 ,+-a asp-� - \ ., ,l �, '1 Q L -s,! a �'Yl.l) •t, f)'1: tl: I.lCn:.:L. 1V, RLtiOL IS.L T'1 L1�
'f- •his~.- '•' � � "� � 1 .1 4 t�• LLV )1N.Sr_U.�[: li'Rn �11'i1:10. Si\Y YLJL�.1
11.mR V4Nn'+'t7)F•. , ' ♦ ItIs.IN.\'11,,.1T.5TLf,T
% (!!((( - �' s t µ �la`•.,�J`'` •R ,y 4, a LINn+vla nz+•vrr uuanrtr t�or..),n., ..
't 4 `s�}t I{j , t''; `,..�'•• :a_s rc x_a,ca.vl .•)Yrc r ��
vat:
or
•3, l i *\ . � •, b l r t....r ` \ t, J . a ) 1i:,.wnt nii
fjSr � 1 (�1'� 5 t t ~fit '��t.' r •"t.+udr.rtll+ewsi\ Y 't � nn „" 5: ,. it tr t S }id7�DWd�'
1rw. a�x�euJs,�a.n tt a. 3 j _.� �`au..l.w„• ,
�. t .Ay .. ...... �3'r--- t y x.. :ulr, r.n)• iu.,ra: p.�'r s,r..,. '
'ro k•F"viOncNMm.hu!CRirm , ` i Ti` t� O
S )t..N:aLUF)itl y .. t�'1:),:l .0 rt. •...".w.w�'„®
vu.evrs;,c4. �taYf, n.[>e nssA �`., t t 3.3i;.>... � _
�am.,.:ar, tllrem ae,•RL To ec \ .-^ ''': � i{, ` rF4' �. t ^5 ♦ t 7 y.,l t.fr t tvR u3.rnu, -, 1.�,�. v,<),.
R,af.ec+,o-llnrfr 311)t. mins,9 ~' 1\ 1� T tR j d- f' S. dT'J t u). N`wirr:n in6 •••lr Ja.a.,uu
ri7R,R ptiTAt[. i L, hrnt '1S ] .k•r-n a"tl t311 {Ya �.
i' 't•,t)Y
., i Y ,.H..1� 1Y zxx lnaa.rr
,,i'`J '`\v s z�A t, 't r�? i t1 v Btl !\. ,`,•. U.11lXt): A43.l7RlY.li73'�. A':4#nl::C�'.P.lV:I trxY)73L) A \ utlWtl')z, ai✓
� � _ a 1 t ti rc+'r �qtt a cn.tan.:n,f ,,,• n..w_t nw�aN `, a twr1 mr: r 3�
111 ♦ 4 j ,J
tTDI� QY � t` f ` ., - e<:u.�s vt<f,llu VL: ;Yti:.fArt\?1� n Vh"'4•
Yj, t 7 t - t t �; vL rn,cT.via.lvn ua u
1 t , l il\ rn.�+n•a{tiLce,w,o.,w>;.
v./�. I r : ua'n f.a ,el'. p•z vi `: •fr,.
curratsr�. t 3.F'_.aeaa.4:: m:; h"
>J trl'I l! • 3,e. n:?r K:..4: ;�,) r� 4 ,\Ij{'"J,3\_1ry % Y 1 1 ` A i'x nl�2nV�W 4r �b`.na3 :fxt sti rw•,ar n'�u �nK r„r \Lp {�"�
! t
»cf t.f:rt.•.wY),,..� r ^��r 11`: `t.4� t \ �t rt t.. PJ \�J raxhn<� �,gniu Lw_M3r .�,
Y"jY".- n ,`.t-S, 1 �1 `:t �' •.:c 1 " �i �,..� tt �-3e»alr..a..a, �.h� �' 1...�
t.. r
'1 1 t .•'. , A t r tt z '\t ("""', l-1'F,:1JA1) •1:,-s,r. u�; t.r.:. -. �,���[�S->3-.
" T'�t t"J '`'k� t (J}-,.PtikitdR\'t: `,. au"(✓
rSt e tt •\ t n,.ne
_ ..,�, I ; •� `t � r 1 � t `- i 3R,S...a c•Ir..-,r t'n.....nx, !
�t h }'^ t t 1 r4,a{.,n.,Rrur,•ryars G j.R.�{ , ..
-� —•� \ \ �, 1
;'l:�'�rPt=�.).`D. �.._ t11'`/ � r\\\,i t .l :x,:. ,''— � _.Y —�'- � -- —. — .. .... .,• r,. n�twy r.rnrx l..�a,n.. � A-41 VnCl)(
-
' L J u� ,;sn<n VW_i-1 O
swMr.n�rA.vl.t•�,,:r1�rp.zf3a. �, 7I `�• t 1 C �L�///���" i! a"',v:�r:' ' �%tn
7
1 i1N1'M, �� T `t �t `\•E'� '� z � � s \t tt I `<, 34�! j..
1l7-ft I -Ds i
.
�.,
t sz•uI.YAIFw'.oa tuz{u \, 'f ry �
1Jl
t S;{ ,,.y sic•' � `.,•: ,,it ..ti �s t� 'x t vwu,..Gp.._. ). \
ll ! o• / .E < - ..v V.:�,c
s..... � �• � ✓,• •q \s<% ��i 1 t\ ` i�,. ``+ \ �, f\
� /_,�.qt; t- 1� ,i'.t _ .-?{ } �.� .Y •_ (�, (XAX'%1`i.t\)Pi:!:(:t:PRQ(:R,11ty� >M<�.. __.......:..��,
r Yry.••—. A-, ✓ ! 1 :, tJ k i , N J l srx� ' t'.
�/C....-.:: .. _. �. :?
�.�®� — �' " �^t ' K � i
, S
' fWl.rq{in�..m,.Yrp.✓may `�d �t( l 3t. a it t, ._.. .. _�we._Y,Ra
SPT @ Lot 2 i
T'w 3M Sabtwd 8Yh j ,, 3' t 0r. _
c r,..atanma 14-`' \�.\ti j { - } � � !_ .', :a .... \cam F -• x
- i� \--•+5'_ ^r ± � a� i. , �l
VACANT' t -F; s3'il:. t . i.' t is ,t 'G M• k nw .rr..
u,vt:c tov) • .� r t °_ — — t — — if J t
1-s.1t, VW -flu •� � t, �,.-3- :.,rv. a.m. �'--t`^-"""'� 1•'^'\l ', i;, q- rs-v' -'i ,., .r..rn-.
•' t'{: �i; tt._ 1:rx,.uL)»K,sr.,,•: 9. `t Site
;�a S ` Development
k pe t
t'
:(IIATI
r Nr Ikr .[.ur t5cx7e:1�:.,Irrl-
t
MET
1111111111111t
SP-1
M� NEW
+Approximate Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Boring Location
m
RECORDS
GENERALIZI
I. Groundwater level was encountered and recon
the date indicated. Fluctuations in groundwater
2. The boring location was identified in the field
and survey wheel.
3. The borehole was backfilled to site grade follo
when pavement was encountered.
4. The Record of Test Boring represents our inter
the soil samples.
5. The Record of Test Boring is subject to the lim
text.
6. "Field Test Data" shown on the Record of Te
(SPT) and means I 1 hammer blows drove the s
7. The N-value from the SPT is the sum of the h;
inch increments.
8. The soiltrock strata interfaces shown on the 6
shown, The soil/rock conditions shown on the
tested; soil1rock conditions may vary between t
9. Relative density for sandslgravels and consistei
RELATED TO
? TEST BORING AND
SUBSURFACE PROFILE
(if shown) following the completion of the soil test boring on
els are common; consult report text for a discussion.
offsetting from existing reference marks and using a cloth tape
boring completion, and patched with asphalt cold patch mix
of field conditions based on engineering examination of
conclusions and recommendations presented in the Report
Boring indicated as l 1/6 refers to the Standard Penetration Test
tpler 6 inches. SPT uses a 140-pound hammer failing 30 inches.
inter blows required to drive the sampler the second and third 6-
)rds of Test Boring are approximate and may vary from those
cords of Test Boring refer to conditions at the specific location
locations.
for silts/clays are described as follows:
SPT
CPT
SANDSIGRAVE
S
SPT
CPT
SILTS/CLAYS
BLOWS/FOOT
KG%CM-
RELATIVE DENSITY
BLOWS/FOOT
KG/CM-
CONSISTENCY
04
0-16
Very loose
0-1
0-3
Very soft
5-10
17-40
Loose j
2-4
4-6
Soft
11-30
41-120
Medium Dense
5-8
7-12
Firm
31-50
121-200
Dense '
9-15
1 13-25
Stiff
50+
over 200
Very Dense
16-30
25-50
Verystiff
>30
>50
Hard
10. Grain size descriptions areas follows:
NAME
SIZE LIMITS
Boulder
12 Inches or more
Cobbles
3 to 12 Inches
Coarse Gravel
N to 3 Inches
Fine Gravel
No. 4 sieve to Y 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
Smaller than No. 200 sieve
11. Definitions related to adjectives used in soil/rock descriptions:
PROPORTION
ADJECTIVE
I
APPROXIMATE ROOT DIAMETER
ADJECTIVE
<5%
Trace I
Less than 1/32"
Fine roots
5%to 12%
Little
1/32" to'/"
Small roots
12% to 30%
Some
'/<" to 1"
Medium roots
30% to 50%
And
Greater than I"
Large roots
Organic Soils: Soils containing vegetable tissue inl
usually a dark brown to black color, and an organic
Organic Content <25%: Slightly to High y Organic;
various stages of decomposition that has a fibrous to amorphous texture,
odor.
25% to 75%: Muck; >75%: Peat
19�
GFA IN ERNATIONAL
521 N.W. ENTERPRISE D E, PORT ST. LUCIE, FLORIDA 34986
PHONE: (772) 924 3575 - FAX: (772) 924-3580
STANDARD PENETRATION TEST BORING (ASTM D-1586)
Client: AJT Construction Consulting, LLC Project No.:15-0986.00
Lab No.:
Project: Proposed Two -Story Residence - Acquavis ta Development BLK A Lot 2 Page: l'of 1
4416 AlA, St. Lucie County, FL Date: 6/2/2015
Elevation: Existing Grade Drill Rig: Simco-24
Water Level: 8 feet after 0 hours Drilli g Fluid commenced at depth of 10 feet Field Party: WN/JB
TEST LOCATION SPT @ Lot 2 N27.51491° W80.
07950
Laboratory Tests
Depth
Blows/
N
Sample
Layer:
USCS
Description
Passing
Moisture
Organic
(feet)
6 in.
value
No.
From/to
No. 200
Content
Content
1 -
0-2
SP
Brown
fine sand, little roots
t
2
4
1
... =..........
5
2-1.0
SP
Browr
fine sand
--- 3
7
- --
7
14
2
--- 4
. S
�-
...
5
---- 5
---6 ----
------
_
7
13
3
... sam
, trace shell
6
-- 7
. - 7
6.........
13
4
5-
6
--6--�
-12
5
...sam
,little shell
---
8-
10
.
...
11
12
----
..............
----
13
-----
----
----
6
13%2 - 15
SP
Gray fne
sand, some shell
14
..$...
.--.-
---
15
5
....
10
......
6
16
..............
17
..............
18
..............
4
18% - 20
SP
Brown
fine sand, some shell
19
-5
.-_--
---
4
9
7
,.
GFA If EI NATIONAL
521 N.W. ENTERPRISE DRIVE, PORT ST. LUCIE, FLORIDA 34986
PHONE: (772) 92 -3575 - FAX: (772) 924-3580
STANDARD PENETRATION TEST BORING (ASTM D-1586)
Client: AJT Construction Consulting, LLC Project No.:15-0986.00
Lab No.:
Project: Proposed Two -Story Residence - Acquavii to Development BLK A Lot 2 Page: 2 of 2
4416 Al A, St. Lucie County, FL Date: 6/2/2015
Elevation: Existing Grade Drill Rig: Simco-24 .
Water Level: 8 feet after 0 hours Drilli g Fluid commenced at depth of 10 feet Field Party: WN/JB
TEST LOCATION SPT @ Lot 2 N27.51491 ° W80.
07950
Laboratory Tests
Depth
(feet)
Blows/
6 in.
N
Value
Sample
No.
Layer:
From/to
USCS
Description
Passing
No. 200
Moisture
Content
Organic
Content
20
------
----
21
..............
22
..............
23
..............
�4
. 22 _
36
-
23%2 - 25
SP
Light
ray fine sand, little shell
---- 25
_21._
57
8
26
..............
27
..............
28
..............
---- 29
34 .........
5015"
28'/z - 30
SP
Gray f
ne sand, little shell
---- 30
........
5015"
9
31
---•
---
32
..............
33
..............
34
__13
15
_ _
33'/2 - 35
SP
Light
dray fine sand, some cemented sand
---- 3S
,_21 ___
.
...
10
36
..............
37
..............
38
..............
39
6
..8..
---.-
38'/2 - 40
SP
Gray fi
sand
a sand, little shell, some cemented
9
17
11
BonnJ terminated at 4U teet
Appendix E - Discussion of Soil Groups
GF�
k I
.l
DISCUSSION OF SOIL GROUPS'
COARSE GRAINED SOILS
GW and SW GROUPS. These group'S comprise well -graded gravelly and sandy
soils having little or no plastic fines (less than percent passing the No. 200 sieve).
The presence of the fines must not not ceably change the strength characteristics
of the coarse=grained friction and not
not interface with it's free -draining
characteristics.
GP and SP GROUPS. Poorly graded gravels and sands containing little of no
plastic fines (less than 5 percent passi g the No. 200 sieve) are classed in GP
and SP groups. The materials may be called uniform gravels, uniform sands or
non -uniform mixtures of very coarse materials and very fine sand, with
intermediate sizes lacking (sometimes IFalled skip -graded, gap graded or step -
graded). This last group often results from borrow pit excavation in which gravel
and sand layers are mixed. I
GM and SM GROUPS. In general,, the
sands with fines (more than 12 percei
plasticity. The plasticity index and ligL
below the "A" line on the plasticity the
considered significant and both well and
GC and SC GROUPS.. In general, the
sandy soils with fines (more than 12 p
have a fairly high plasticity. The liquid I'
the "A" line on the plasticity chart.
FINE GRAIN
ML and MH GROUPS. .In these grou
designate predominantly silty material. TI
high liquid limits, respectively, and an arb
at a liquid limit of 50. The soils in the ML
silts or inorganic silts with relatively low f
soils and rock flours.
M and SM groups comprise gravels or
the No. 200 sieve) having low or no
limit of soils in the group should plot
The gradation of the material is not
)orly graded materials are included.
and SC groups comprise gravelly or
mt passing the No, 200 sieve).which
and plasticity index should plat above
SOILS
the symbol M has been used to
symbols L and H represent low and
iry dividing line between the two set
d MH groups are sandy silts, clayey
,ticity. Also included are loose type
CL and CH GROUPS. In these groups the
H denoting low or high liquid limits, with the
50. The soils are primarily organic clays. L
CL and are usually lean clays, sandy clays c
plasticity clays are classified as CH. These
and some volcanic clays.
mbol C stands for clay, with L and
ividing line again set at a liquid of
N plasticity clays are classified as
silty clays. The medium and high
,iclude the fat clays, gumbo clays
GF�
OL and OH GROUPS. The soil in t
the presence of organic odor or col(
clays are classified in these groups.
corresponds with the ML and MH gro
e OL and OH groups are characterized by
hence the symbol O. Organic silts and
The materials have a plasticity range that
ps•
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
The highly organic soils are usually very soft and compressible and have
undesirable construction characterist cs.. Particles of leaves, grasses, branches,
or other fibrous vegetable matter are common components of these soils. They
are not subdivided and are classifie into one group with the symbol PT. Peat
humus and swamp soils with a hig I ly organic texture are typical soils of the
group.