HomeMy WebLinkAboutGFA INTERNATIONAL REPORTsGANNED
GFA INTE NATIONAL
FLORIDA'S LEADING ENGINEERING SOURCE
Report of Geotechnical Exploration
Proposed Two -Story Residence
Acquavista Devi lopment BLIK A Lot 3
4422 AIA, St. Lucie County, Florida
Jun: 26, 2015
GFA Project No.: 15-0786.00
For: AJT Construction Consulting, LLC
ECHV—ED
M A 919grPerm
jj,
aw
IA7_1
Environmental - Geotechnical - Construction
AJT Constr ; uction Consulting, LLC
Attention: Mr '. Alan Tarpell
1760 N. Jog Road, Suite 140
West Palm Beach, Florida 33411
Site: Proposed Two -Story Residenc
Acquavista Development BLK
4422 AIA, St. Lucie County, F1
GFA Project # 15-0786.00
Dear Mr. Tarpbll:
GFA International, Inc. (GFA) has complE
engineering evaluation for the above referE
and engineering service agreement for this
accordance with our, Geotechnical Engine
planned in conjunction with and authorized t
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Florida's Leading Engineering Source
Testing - Threshold and Special Inspections - Plan Review & Code Compliance
June 26, 2015
Lot 3
ida
d the subsurface exploration and geotechnical
ced project in accordance with the geotechnical
roject. The scope of services was completed in
ing Proposal (15-0986.00) dated May 7, 2015,
your
The purpose of our subsurface exploration was to classify the nature of the subsurface soils and
general geomorphic conditions and evaluate their impact upon the proposed construction. This
report contains the results of our subsurface exploration at the ' site and our engineering
interpretations of these, with respect to the project characteristics described to us including
providing recommendations for site preparatipn and the design of the foundation, system.
Based on conversations with the client,
residence. The residential structure (or pi
Construction Control. Line (CCCL) and the ' i
was informed that the resi8ence will 'be elei
and ground floor slab of frangible breakawa
The recommendations provided herein are
description has been revised, please infi
recommendations with respect to any modi
A total of one (1) standard penetration test
feet below ground surface (BGS) were c
soundings were performed on the adjacent
report.
he project consists of constructing a two-story
tion thereof) will be located east of the Coastal
fore a pile supported foundation is required. GFA
ted above a lower level garage that will have walls
design,
ald upon the above considerations. If the project
GFA International so that we may review our
PT) boring to a depth of approximately forty 40)
ipleted for this study. Additional borings and
s and the information is used to supplement this
521 NW Enterprise Drive - Port St. Lucie, Florida 34986.
OFFICES
72) 924-3575 - (772) 924-3580
HOUT. FLORIDA
Proposed Two -Story Residence Geotechnical Report
Acqua vista Lot 3 (4422 A IA), St. Lucie County, F June 26, 2016
G . FA Project No. 16-0786.00 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 23% feet, and then medium dense to very dense sand
SP) with cemented sand seams and laye's the boring termination depths. PI , ease refer' to
Appendix D - Record of Test Borings for a, de tailed account of each boring.
GFA recommends"that the proposed residence be supported using a deep foundation system
consi ' stin ' g of augered cast -in -place (ACIP) piles. Based on our analysis, GFA has estimated
that a 14 or,16-inch-diameter ACIP-pile installed to a depth of 30 feet below grade existing
grade can provide a maximum allowable axial compressive capacity of 40 tons and a maximum
tension capacity of 12 tons.
For the ground' supported frangible walls, a allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 psf may be
used for shallow footing foundation design. '
The subgrade soils should be improved
constructing the foundation pads and footi
should be compacted to a minimum of 9r,
Fill (including sternwall backfill) should be
minimum 95% density. After excavation f
bottom of footings should be compacted to
ith compaction from the stripped grade prior to
excavations. the top 2 feet below stripped grade
density prior to plating. fill to achieve final grade.
aced in 12-inch lifts and compacted to achieve a
footings, the subgrade to a depth of 2 feet below
hieve a minimum 95% density.
Scour elevations used in pile calculations are those provided by the Florida DEP for coastal
construction, but may not be adequate for Ictual scour elevations in hur'dcane(s) event(s) that
exceed the DEP assumptions and cause I w6r scour elevations. Therefore, GFA analysis is
limited to that provided by the DEP scour devation, and scour analysis is not included in our
scope of work.
We appreciate'the opportunity to be of s
continued association. Please do not hi
comments, or if we may further assist you,
O%tits I Bill%
IN QuQ,RRe _*
GRA Adf6tZ&Iln.
F&Mar Certi I Of ation Number
LLIZ
ler E
S t cl1wical E I per
Flo trItjQP 675
7VNO'3
Copies: "1II'A1d&09's"`e%e,
ice.to, you on this
tate to contact us
your plans proceed.
project and look forward to a
if you have any questions or
M
Proposed Two -Story Residence Geotechnical Report
Acquavista Lot 3 (4422 A 1A), St. Lucie County, FL June 26, 2016
GFA Project No. 15-0786. 00 Page 3 of 11
I ABLE 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 - General 6
3.2 Pile Foundation ................................................................................................................ 7
3.3 Pile Installation ... ... - .... **"*""* ............ 8
3.4 Vibration Monitoring ......................................................................................................... 8
3.5 Design of Footings (Ground Level Frangible Walls) ......................................................... 9
3.6 Ground Floor Slab (Frangible) .......................................................................................... 9
3.7 Site Preparation .................................. 9
4.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS ...................................................................................................... 11
5.0 BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................. 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 Groups
6F
Proposed Two -Story Residence Geotechnical Report
Acquavista Lot 3 (4422 A 1A), St. Lucie County, A. June 26, 2016
GFA Project No. 15-0786. 00 Page 4 of 11
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 records of the soil boring logs
during our field exploration.
2. Conduct a review of each, soil sample
and additional testing if necessary.
3. , Analyze the existing soil conditions
support for the proposed structure.
the subsurface -soil conditions encountered
ned during'our field exploration for classification
during our exploration, with respect to foundation ,
4. Provide recommendations with respect Ito foundation support'of the structure, including
allowable soil -bearing capacity, bearing elevations, and foundation design parameters.
5. Provide criteria a,nd site preparation
construction.
12 Project Description
ures to prepare the site. for the proposed
Based on conversations with the client, 'he project consists of constructing a tw.o-story
residence. The residential structure (or poi lion thereof) will be located east of the Coastal
Construction Controlline (CCCL) and ther fore 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 breakaway1design.
Based on a site visit and elevations from topographic data from GoogleEarth website, the
current grade at the location of the propose residen , ce 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 feet NGVD, about 0 to 2 feet of fill will be required to
achieve final grade.
We assume the residence ' will have typi al 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 b6fore installing the pile foundations, and top of piles
bottom of pile caps) would be about +8 feet. GVD.
We have not received any information
recomme ' ndations presented in this report v
kips and the maximum wall loading will be 4
regarding structural' loads. For the foundation
e assumed the maximum column load will be 80
Jps per linear foot.
19
Proposed Two-Stoty Residence
Acquavista Lot 3 (4422 A 1A), St. Lucie County,
GFA Project No, 15-0786. 00
The recommendations provided herein are
description has been revised, please inf(
recommendations with respect to any modi
2.0
2.1 Site Inspection.
The project site was generally grassy'with
even with the adjacent -road on the west sidE
the east side of the lot the grade varied with i
the east side of the property on the east side
2.2 Field Exploration
A total of one (1) standard penetration test
feet below ground surface (BGS) were c
soundings were performed on the adjacent
report. The locations of the boring perforn
Location Plan". -The Standard Penetration
tools within the borings. SPT tests were
Procedure D-1586, "Penetration Test and
procedure consists of driving a 1.4-inch I.D.
pound hammer falling 30 inches. The numb
increment, is an indication of soil strength. -.
The soil.samples recovered from the soil b(
illustrated in Appendix D: "Record of Test E
vary between the strata interfaces, which
from a specific test location only. Site sp
provided for our field exploration. - The
approximated based upon existing grade a
landmarks. The boring depths were* confi
proposed construction and knowledge.of vi(
2.3 Laboratory Analysis
Soil samples recovered from our field explc
were visually examined in general accordani
obtain an accurate understanding ofthe soil
thorough visual examination of the recove
necessary. Bag samples of the soil encoun-
laboratory for your inspection for 30 days an(
writing.
Geotechnical Report
June 26, 2016
Page 5of11
Bd upon the above considerations. If the project
GFA International so that we may review our
ons.
ERVATIONS
ome palm trees and bushes. The site was about
and sloped upwards to the east, and at the end of
unes'and vegetation. The Atlantic -Ocean bordered
A the dunes.
3PT) boring to a depth of approximately forty (40)
mpleted for this study. Additional borings and
ts and the information is used to supplement this
Bd for this lot is illustrated in Appendix B: "Test
I
est (SPT) metho6 was used as'the investigative
performed in substantial accordance with ASTM
Splii-Barrel Sampling of Soils". The SPT test
5plit-tube sampler into the soil profile using a 140-
ir of blows per foot, for the second and'third 6-inch
ng were visually classified and their stratification is
ings". - It should be noted that soil conditions might
a shown. The soil boring data reflect information
ific survey staking for the test locations was not
ndicated depth and location, of each test was
I esti ' mated distances and relationships to obvious
d- to the zone of soil likely to be stressed by the
itV Soils.
ration were returned to our laboratory where they
re with ASTM D-2488. Samples were evaluated to
1properties and site geomorphic conditions. After a
red site soils, no laboratory testing was deemed
I
ered during our field exploration will be held in our
i then discarded unless we are notified otherwise in
Proposed Two -Story Residence
Acquavista Lot 3 (4422 A 1A), St. Lucie County,
GFA Project No. 15-0786.00
The recovered samples were not examin
composition or environmental hazards. GFA
additional fee, if required.
2.4 Geomorphic Conditions
The geology of the site as mapped on the
fine sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes (27). Thf
indicated. It should be noted that the Soil S
inches (approximately 6% feet) below gro
conditions.
Boring logs derived from our field exploratic
Borings", The boring logs depict the observe
Test borings indicate the penetration resist
sampling activities. The classifications and d
upon visual characterizations of the recover
been depicted and classified in general acco
modified as necessary to describe typical Fli
Soil Groups", for a detailed description of vari
The subsurface soil conditions encouht6h
soundings performed from adjacent lots), g
feet, medium dense sand (SP) from 4 to. 23
SP) with cemented sand seams and layi
Appendix D - Record of Test Borings for a d
2.5 Hydrogeological Conditions
On the dates of our field exploration, the
approximately 8 feet below the existing gro,
seasonally depending upon*local rainfall and
the water level in the nearby Atlantic Ocean
may occur across the site after heavy rains.
No additional investigation was included in
high groundwater table or any existing well
table levels and cause significant fluctuatior
necessary, please contact our office for add
3.0 ENGINEERING EVAL
3.1 Foundation Recommendations -
The residential structure will be located eas4
and therefore a pile supported foundation is
level walls may be pile supported or supl
regulations (to be determined by.others).
Geotechnical Report
June 26, 2016
Page 6 of I I
either visually or analytically, for chemical
uld be pleased to perform these services for an
DA Soil Survey website consists ofPalm Beach
are sandy soils and organic soils are not
ey generally extends to a maximum depth of 80
i surface and is not indicative of deeper soil
i are presented in Appendix D: "Record of Test
soils in graphic detail. The Standard Penetration
nce, or N-values logged during the drilling and
iscriptions shown on the logs are generally based
d soil samples. All soil samples reviewed have
Jance with the Unified Soil Classification System,
rida conditions. See Appendix E: "Discussion of
us soil groups.
at this site (with information from borings and
erally consist,of loose to medium sand (SP) to 4
feet, and then medium dense to very dense sand
the boring termination depths. Please refer to
iiIed account of each boring.
oundwater table was encountered at a depth of
nd surface. The groundwater table will fluctuate
ther site specific and/or local influences including
Nith tidal influences. Brief ponding of stormwater
scope of work in relation to the wet seasonal
Is -in the vicinity. Well fields may influence water
If a more comprehensive water table analysis is
al guidance.
ON AND RECOMMENDATIONS
of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL)
equired. Frangible ground floor slabs and ground
rted on footings in accordance with rules and
za
Proposed Two -Story Residence
Acquavista Lot 3 (4422 A 1A), St. Lucie County,
GFA Project No. 15-0786. 00
The following is design parameters GFA
For CCCL construction, the FDEP ha
lowest structural member) of +17.0
structures within St. Lucie County.
For CCCL construction, the FDEP h
design scour elevation) of +2.7 feet I
A loss of soil support between the bc
elevation (+2.7 feet NGVD) was ii
capacity analyses.
We assume the residence will have
terminating on pile caps slightly beloi
be placed to achieve final (or near fir
top of piles (bottom of pile caps) woul
At this time, GFA recommends the deep fc
ACIP). Additional lateral capacity may be a
the piles "will have a minimum of 1 % steel rE
procedures should be performed in accor(
edition of the Deep Foundations Institute's
capacity and pile top deflection were calct
software. A summary of pile capacities for
following table.
Geotechnical Report
June 26, 2016
Page 7 of 11
for pile recommendations:
established a 100-year storm elevation (bottom of
to +17.9 feet NGVD (depends on location) for
established a 100-year storm erosion elevation
VD for all of St. Lucie County.
rn of lowest structural member and design scour
uded in compressive, tensile, and lateral pile
fpical construction, and be supported on columns
the ground floor elevation. We assume that fill will
il) grade before installing the pile foundations, and
be about'+8 feet NGVD.
unclation to consist of augered cast -in -place piles
tained by utilizing inclined piles. We assumed that
inforcement for the'analyses. ACIP pile installation
ance with the guidelines presented in the latest
Augered Cast -In -Place Pile Manual. The lateral
lated using the commercially available L-pile 4.0
a 14-inch diameter ACIP piles is presented in the
w
Pile Recommendationsl For All Pile Supported Structures
Maximum
Nominal Pile Top Recommended Pile Pile Pile Pile Lateral
Pile Elevation Pile Tip Lengthr Compression Tension Capacity Recommended
Diameter NGVD)- Elevation ft)** Capacity Capacity Tons)' Grout Strength
0.5 Tons
Free Head)
14" or 1.25 Tons
16" Unknow n Unknown 30 40 Tons 12 Tons Fixed Head) 5000 psi
Pile top elevation assumed at, or more than, +6 et NGVD for analyses.
Frorn ground surface existing at time of drilling.
For calculated pile top deflection of % inches at top of pile elevation.
GFA assumed that the piles will have a mi
I
imum 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 capacities than I those mentioned in the table above are required,
GFA would be pleased to provide further recommendations upon request.
19
Proposed Two -Story Residence
Acquavista Lot 3 (4422 A 1A), St Lucie County,
GFA Project No. 15-0786.00
The following additional notes are applicable Jo the pile design:
Structural stresses in the
design capacity; therefore,
the selected pile section.
The pile reinforcement is 1
fixed end connection if req
Geotechnical Report
June 26, 2016
Page 8 of I I
pil6s may impose a more severe limitation on the
we recommend the allowable stresses be verified for
Pile design and installation shall be in accc
Building Code and other applicable federa
should be installed in accordance with the fol
embedded,in the pile cap so as to afford a
ance with the applicable sections of the Florida
state and local requirements. In addition, piles
Ning:
1. Pile Length: The proposed 14-inch-di meter. piles should be installed as determined by
the inspecting Geotechnical Engineer]
2. Spacing - Piles installed in groups shc uld 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 ali6nment of the piling should not deviate from the
plumb by more than 1/4 inch per foot of length.,
5. Reinforcing Ca. ge Positioninq - The -top of the reinforcing cages installed in the piling
should not be more than 6 inches ab
I
ve and no more than 3 inches below the positions
1_*
C- . ?
shown in the plans. The reinforcing cages should be positioned concentrically within the
grouted pile shaft. The grout cover o er longitudinal reinforcing bars should not be lessY
than. 3 inches. Reinforcing centralizers shall be placed at maximum spacing of 15 feet at
the lower portion of the pile and at 5 f et from the cage's top.
6. Adiacent Piles - A minimum time eriod of 12 hours should be specified for the
installation of piles located within 5 fe t, center -to -center, of each other.
7. Grout Factor - The minimum acceptle grout factor (i.e.,actual grout volume divided by
theoretical grout,volume) should be 111.
3.4 Vibration Monitoring
The proposed construction will be within cli
that maybe susceptible to damage from v
during all aspects of construction, the bord
to determine the extent of vibration abso
seismograph used to monitor at this site sh(
e proximity to residential structures and roadways
ration generated at the site. We recommend that
ing landmarks be monitored using a seismograph
ition that these features will be subject to. The
ild have the capability to measure.ground velocities
Proposed Two -Story Residence
Acquavista Lot 3 (4422 A 1A), St. Lucie County,
GFA Project No. 15-0 786. 00
Geotechnical Report
June 26, 2016
Page 9 of 11
along vertical,' transverse, and longitudinal axes. The project structural engineer should
establish allowable ground velocities that the bordering facilities can safely withstand without
any damage..
3.5 Design of Footings (Ground Level Frangible Walls)
Footings may be designed using an allow
foundations should be embedded a minimui
shall be measured from the lowest adjacent
24 inches in width and continuous strip fc
regardless of contact pressure.
Once site preparation has been performed ii
in this 'report, the soil should readily supr
foundation system. Settlements have been
differential. All footings and columng shoul,
they will be loaded differently and at diffei
designed.
3.6 Ground Floor Slab (Frangible)
The ground floor slabs -may be supported
following the foundation site preparation ar
For purposes of design, a coefficient of sub
used. The ground floor slab should be sti
allow for differential vertical movement.
Water vapor is likely to rise through the gn
slab. If moisture entry into the floor slab is
installed at the slab bottom - subgrade inte
3.7 Site Preparation
GFA recommends the following compaction
ble soil bearing pressure of 2,500 psf. Shallow
of 12 inches below final grade. This embedment
jrade. Isolated column footings should be at least
itinqs should have a width of at least 16 inches
accordance with the recommendations described
rt the proposed structure, resting on a shallow
projected to be less than 1-inch total and Y2-inch
be structurally separated from the floor slab, as
nt times, unless a monolithic mat foundation is
directly on the existing grade -or on granular fill
I fill placement procedures outlined in this report.
1rade modulus 150 pounds per cubic inch may be
icturally separated from all walls and columns to
ir fill and condense beneath the base of the floor
desirable, an impermeable membrane should be
uirements for this project:
Proof Roll ...................................................................... 95% of a Modified Proctor
Building Pad Fill ............................................................ 95% of a Modified Proctor
Footings .............................................. ......................... 95% of a Modified Proctor
The compaction percentages presented ab
determined by a "modified proctor" test
performed to a depth of 2 feet below
footings. All density tests should be perfon
sand cone method (ASTM D-1556), or Hand
Our recommendation's for preparation -of
improving and maintaining the site soils has
soil conditions.
are based upon the maximum dry density as
TM D-1557). All density tests should be
1pped surfaceand 2 feet below bottom of
I using -the nuclear method (ASTM D-2922), the
ne Penetrometer (HCP) tests.
site are presented below. This approach to
n found to be successful on projects with similar
Proposed Two -Story Residence
Acquavista Lot 3 (4422 A 1A), St. Lucie County,
GFA Project No. 15-0786. 00
1 . Initial site preparation should consist of
near surface roots, and other deleteriOL
done within, and to a distance of five (5)
footprint. (including exterior isolated colu
any structures that are within the footpr ' i
utility lines should be removed or propE
demolished residence had a pile founda
may change.
2. Following, site stripping and prior the
exposed limestone) should be compact(
a steel drum vibratory roller with suffli
achieve the required compaction. Der
surface at a frequency of not less than o
3) tests, whichever is greater. Areas of
by the project geotechnical engineer pric
3. Fill material may then be placed in the bi
inorganic (classified as SP, SW, GP, GW
more than 5 percent (by weight),organic
fines in excess of 12% should not be i
lift thickness not exceeding 12-inches. E;
placement of the next lift. Density tests
not less than one test per 2,500 square
three (3) tests per lift, whichever is greate
Geotechnical Report
June 26, 2016
Page 10 of I I
rforming stripping (removing surface vegetation,
matter) and clearing operations. This should be
et beyond, the perimeter of the proposed building
is). Foundations and any below grade remains of
of the new construction should be removed,.and
abandoned so as to not affect structures. If the
n, GFA must be notified as the recommendations
acement of any fill, areas of surficial sand (not
proof rolled") and tested. We recommend using
nt static,weight and vibratory impact energy to
ty tests should be performed on the proof rolled
a test per 2,500 square feet, or a minimum of three
Kposed intact limestone shall be visually confirmed
to fill placement, -in lieu of proof rolling.
ilding pad as required. The fill material should be
SP-SM, SW-SM, GW-GP, GP -GM) containing not
materials. Fill materials with silt/clay-size soil
sed. Fill should be placed in lifts with a maximum
ch lift should be compacted and tested prior to the
iould be performed within the fill at a frequency of
eet per lift in the building areas, or a minimum of
4. For any footings bearing on a limesto . rmation, the bottom of all footing excavation. shal I
be examined by the engineer / geologist or his representative to det rmlne the condition of
the limestone. The limestone shall be probed for voids and loose pockets of sand. Such
areas shall be cleaned to depth of 3 tim s the greatest horizontal dimension and backfilled
with lean cbncrete.
5. For footings placed on structural fill or
footings shall be tested for compaction
representative to determine if the soil is
tests should be performed at a frequer
isolated column footing and one (1) t(
footings.
ipacted, native granular soils,, the bottom of all
d examined by the engineer / geologist or his
of organic and/or deleterious material. Density
of hot less than one, (1) density test per each
per each.seventy five (75) lineal feet of wall
6. Upon completion of production pile ins allation and pile cap construction, the pile caps
should be backfilled in 6 to 8 inch thick lifts and compacted to at least 95% of the modified
Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 1 57).
7. The contractor should take into account the final contours and grades as established by the
I
plan when executing his backfilling and c9mpaction operations.
Using vibratory compaction equipment at
recommend that you monitor nearby structui
is site may disturb adjacent structures. We
before and during proof -compaction operations.
6F
Proposed Two -Story Residence
Acquavista Lot 3 (4422 A 1A), St. Lucie County, F
GFA Project No. 15-0786. 00
A representative of GFA International ca
structures. A proposal for vibration monitoi
upon request.
4.0'RE
This consulting report has been prepared for
other members of the design team for t ' he Pri
Lot 3, 4422 AIA, St. Lucie County, Florida..
generally accepted local geotechnical engini
implied. The evaluation submitted in this rel
a field exploration, however, the nature ar
profile may not become evident until the timiy
it may be necessary to reevaluate informa-
report. In the event changes are made ir
structure, the evaluation and opinions cont
unless the changes are reviewed and co
International.
Geotechnical Report
June 26, 2016
Page 11 of 11
monitor the vibration disturbance of adjacent
I during compaction operations can be supplied
LIMITATIONS
he exclusive use of the current project owners and
posed Two -Story Residence located at Acquavista
rhis report has been prepared in accordance with
aring practices; no other warranty is expressed or
rt, is based in part upon the data collected during
J extent of variations throughout the subsurface
of construction. , If variations then appear evident,
on and professional opinions as provided in this
the nature, design, or locations of the proposed
ined in this report shall dot be considered valid,
clusions modified or verified in writing by GFA
Scour elevations. used in pile calculations are those provided by the Florida DEP for coastal
construction, but may not be adequateforactual 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 scour el6vation, and scour analysis is not included in our
scope of work.
5.0 BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
The analysis and recommendations S'ubmifte-d in this report are based on the data obtained
from the tests performed at the locations, ind:c6ted on the attached figure,in Appendix B. This —
report does not reflect any 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 b . etween soil types shown on t he 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 geotechnical
the expressed written consent of GFA Inter
D-1586), CPT methodology (ASTIVI D-3441
used in performing our borings and soui
resistance is specific to the sampling tools i
advance other tools or materials.
port or parts thereof is strictly prohibited without
tional. The applicable SPT methodology (ASTIVI
a ' nd Auger Boring methodology (ASTM D-1452)
ng, and for determining penetration and cone
ized and does not reflect the ease or difficulty to
Appendix Vicinity Map
m
Vicir
Proposed Tw
Acquavista Devi
4422 AIA, St
GFA Proiec
Site
Note: Aerial Photograph from GoogleEarth
ity Map
Story Residence
lopment BLK A Lot 3
Lucie County, FL
t No. 15.-0786.00
Appendix B - I est Location Plan
Test Location Plan: Proposed Two -Story Residence,.Acquavista Development BLK A Lot 3, 4422 AlAj St. Lucie County, FL
VACANT
V 114; Inun
LWO M. CKM
I- I'd. . 'k To 1 Vi"SP-2
WRA BET ML
unAl,
U;
F'."Jra
0i
i".'
N' %,0,22
e. V
0
V-
V" \
A
G)
VACANT
MNINQ tur
1-MM31"IL It
Approximate Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Boring Location
LEGALL)"CRIMION: SITF. DATA
le —MI. -3tMl
Zf-
OU
X-_VrM
IMI:'11.1i
XW11M M x4frikbr, 1111U"l U*11
WF
7,
N/
Ck
SPT Lot 3
ARAMNCONIX)
U)CA110- UP
st 4V FO 1W
Colt&
U)
P
0,- OM
Cn t
SiteDerdopnient
M-,E
M
Appendix C - Not6s Related to Borings
ma
NOTE8 RELATED TO
RECORDS OF TEST BORING ANDGENERALIZEDSUBSURFACEPROFILE
I . Groundwater level was encountered and record (if shown) following the completion of the soil test boring on
the date indicated. Fluctuations in groundwater I v'els are common; consult report text for a discussion.
2. The boring location was identified in the field
I offsetting from existing reference marks and using a cloth tape
and survey wheel.
3. The borehole was backfilled to site grade folio ing boring completion, and patched with asphalt cold patch mix
when pavement was encountered.
4. The Record of Test Boring represents our inte retation of field conditions based on engineering examination of
the soil samples.
5 The Record of Test Boring is subject to the Ii itations, conclusions and recommendations presented in the Report
text.
6. "Field Test Data" shown on the Record of Tqst Boring indicated as 11/6 refers to the Standard Penetration Test
SPT) and means I I harnmer blows drove the ampler 6 inches. SPT uses a 140-pound hammer failing 30 inches.
7. The N-value from tile SPT is the sum of the I arnmer blows required to drive the sampler the second and third 6-
inch increments.
8. The soil/rock strata interfaces shown on the Records of Test Boring are approximate and may vary from thoseishown. The soillrock conditions shown on t e "ords of Test Boring refer to conditions at the specific location
tested; soillrock conditions may va betwee"t. locations.
9. Relative density for sands/gravels and consistLey for.silts/clays are described as follows:
SPT CPT SANDS/GRAVIELS SPT CPT SILTSICLAYS
BLOWSLFOOT KO&M' RELATLVE —DENSITY BLQWS/F00T GICW CONSISTENCY
0-4 0-16 Ver y loose 0-1 0-3 softVery
5-10 17-40 Loose 1 2-4 4-6 Soft
11-30 41-120 Medium Dcns 5-8 7-12 Firm
31-50 1 121-200 1 Dense 9-15 13-25 stiff
50+ ove LL ense 16-30 25-50 Very
J—>30 50 Hard
10. Grain size descriotions areas follows: I -
NAME SIZE LIMITS
Boulder 12 Inches or more
Cobbles 3 to 12 Inches
Coarse Gravel to 3 Inches
Fine Gravel No. 4 sieve to Y4 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 s0/rock descriptions:
PROPORTION ADJECTIVE" APPROXIMATE ROOT DIAMETER ADJECTIVE
5% Trace Less than 1132" Fine roots
5% to 12% Little 1/32" to VV Small roots
12% to 30% Some 44" to I.' Medium roots
30% to 50% And Greater than V Large roots
Organic Soils: Soils containing vegetable tiss e in various stages of decomposition that has a fibrous to amorphous texture,
usually a dark brown to black color, and an organ - ic odor.
Organic Content <25%: Slightly to Highl Or anic; 25% to 75%: Muck; >75% Peat
1 1
Appendix D - Record of Test Borings
6 FP
GFA INTERNATIONAL
521 N.W. ENTERPRISE DRiVE, PORT ST. LUCIE, FLORIDA 34986
PHONE: (772) 924-75 - 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 - Acquavista evelopment BLK A Lot 3 Page: I of 1
4422 AIA, St. Lucie County, FL Date: 6/2/2015
Elevation: Existing Grade Drill Rig: Simco-24
Water Level: 8 feet after 0 hours Drilling F uid commenced at depth of 10 feet Field Party: V*'N/JB
TEST LOCATION SPT @ Lot 3 N27-51522' W80.3078' Laboratory Tests I
Depth Blows/ IvaluelN Sample Layer:
USCS Rescription
Passing Moisture Organic
feet) 6in. No. From/to No. 200 Content Content
0
0-10' SP Brown fine and
4 1
2
3
3
4 ---
5 9 2
4 A ...
6
5
3 same, little s ell
6
7
7 5
4 same, trace sh 11
8
4
5
9
1 4 9 5
10
11
12
13
8 13Y2 - 15 SP Gray fine sand, trac6 silt, trace shell
14
12
16 28 6
16
17
18
18Y2 - 20 SP Brown fine sand, some! shell
19 i ..........
5
7 1 12 7
A
GFA IN]
521 N.W. ENTERPRISE DI
PHONE: (772) 924
STANDARD PENETRATI
RNATIONAL
E, PORT ST. LuCIE, FLOFUDA 34986
75 - FAX: (772) 924-3580
i TEST BORING (ASTM D-1
Client: AJT Construction Consulting, LLC Project No.: 15-0986.00
Lab No.:
Project: Proposed Two -Story Residence - Acquavista Development BLK A Lot 3 Page: 2 of 2
4422 AlA, St. Lucie County, FL Date: 6/2/2015
Elevation: Existing Grade Drill Rig: Simco-24
Water Level: 8 feet after 0 hours Drilling wid commenced at depth of 10 feet Field Party: WN/JB
TEST LOCATION SPT @ Lot 3 N27.51522' W80.307980 Laboratory Tests
Depth Blows/ N Sample Layer-
USCS Description
Passing Moisture Organic
feet) 6 in. Value No. From/to No. 200 Content Content
20
21
22
23
12 23V2 - 25 SP Light gray fi sand and cemented sand
24
20
25
33 53 8
26
27
28
13 28Y2 - 30 SP-SM Gray fine sand, ittle silt
29 i-i .........
9
30
31
32
33
16 331/2-35 SP Gray fine sand and cemented sand34
10
35
10
36
37
38
A 38Y2 - 40 Sm Gray fine sand, some silt, little shell, 39
11 trace cemented sand
I 3 24 11
Boring terminated at 40 feet
Appendix E - Discussion of Soil Groups
m
DISCUSSION OF SOIL GROUPS
COARSE GRAINED SOILS
GW and SW GROUPS. These groups omprise well -graded gravelly and sa , ndy
soils having little or no plastic fines (less than percent passing the No. 200 sieve).
The presence of the fines must not noii "ably change the strength characteristics
of the coarse -grained friction and mu t not interface with it's free -draining
characteristics.
GP and SP GROUPS. Poorly graded e91
plastic fines (less than 5 percent passing
and SP groups. The materials may be cal
non -uniform mixtures of very coarse n
intermediate sizes lacking (sometimes cal
graded). This last group often results from
and sand layers are mixed.
iels and sands containing little of no
ie No. 200 sieve) are classed in GP
ed uniform gravels, uniform sands or
aterials and very fine. sand, with
ad skip -graded, gap graded or step -
borrow pit excavation in which gravel
GM and SM GROUPS. In general, the GM and SM groups comprise gravels or
sands with fines (more than 12 percent th No. 200 sieve) having low or no
plasticity. The plasticity index and liquid Ii it of soils in the group should plotI
below the "A" line -on the plasticity chart. T e gradation of the material is noti, considered significant -,and both well and poorl, graded materials are included. Y
GC and SC GROUPS. In general, the GC and SC groups comprise gravelly or
sandy soils with fines (more than 12 percent passing the No, 200 sieve) which
have a fairly high plasticity. The liquid limit and lasticity index should plat above
the "A" line on the plasticity chart. :..
FINE GRAINED
ML and MH GROUPS. In these groups, the symbol M has been used to
designate predominantly silty material. The symbols L and H represent low and
high liquid limits, respectively, and. an arbitrary di' Wing line between the two set
at a liquid limit of 50. The soils in the ML and MH groups are sandy silts, clayeyi
silts or inorganic silts with relatively low plasticity Also included are loose type
soils and rock flours.
CL and CH GROUPS. In these groups the symbo
H denoting low or high liquid limits, with the dividii
50. The soils are primarily organic clays. Low pl;
CL and are usually lean clays, sandy clays or silty
plasticity clays are classified as CH. These inclui
and some volcanic clays.
C stands for clay, with L and
j line again set at a liquid of
Micity clays are classified as
lays. The medium and high
a the fat clays, gumbo clays.
6F ,
OL and OH GROUPS. The soil in th(
the presence of organic odor or color
clays are classified in these groups.
corresponds with the ML and MH groul
HIGHLY
OL and OH groups are characterized by
hence the symbol 0. Organic silts and
he materials have a plasticity range that
The highly organic soils are usually
undesirable construction characteristics
or other fibrous vegetable matter are cc
are not subdivided and are classified ir
humus and swamp soils with a highly
group.
SOILS
ary soft and compressible and have
Particles of leaves, grasses, branches,
imon components of these soils. They
i one group with the symbol PT. Peat
irganic texture are typical soils of the
6F