Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION• �� ` �3 SCANNED BY St Lude County RECEP-7D .10 13 1016 2"FA INTERNATIONAL FLORIDA'S LEADING ENGINEERING SOURCE Report of Geot6chnicaf Exploration .i-.fl �i?ae ao'v4e ._G+Bki _.S_L'T._- es _�.■ _ ..oe __. ... .. ..._ .. -... January 8, 2014 GFA Project No.: 13-2092.01 For: Phoenix Realty Homes eL.y i Environmental - Geotechnical • Construction'] Phoenix Realty Homes Attention: Mr. Alan Tarpell 1760 N. Jog Road, Suite 140 West Palm Beach, Florida 33411 Site: Proposed Tarpon Flats Subdivi Vicinity SW of Bonita Isle Dr. & St. Lucie County, Florida GFA Project # 13-2092.01 Dear Mr. Tarpell: GFA International, Inc. (GFA) has comple engineering evaluation for the above-refere and engineering service agreement for this accordance with our Geotechnical Engineed. conjunction with and authorized by you. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Florida's Source Testing • Threshold and Special Inspections - Plan Review & Code Compliance January 8, 2014 lion - Lots 1-38 Al A ad the subsurface exploration and geotechnical Iced project in accordance with the geotechnical Iroject. The scope of services was completed in g Proposal dated December 12, 2013, planned in The purpose of our subsurface exploration wads to classify the nature of the subsurface soils and general geomorphic conditions and evaluate heir 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 preparation and the design of the foundation system. Based on a site plan (author and date unknown) (reproduced in Appendix B - Test Location Plans) and conversations with the client, the I roject consists of constructing one or two-story residences with shallow foundations. We have not received any information regarding structural loads. For the foundation recommendations pr sented in this report we assumed the maximum column load will be 70 kips and the maximur. � wall loading will be 4 kips per linear foot. GFA estimates that 0 to 2 feet of fill will be required to bring the foundation pads to design grade. A total of thirty-eight (38) Cone Penetrometer Test (CPT)_soundings to depths of approximately eighteen (18) to twenty (20) feet, and fourteen (14) Auger Borings (AB) to approximately six (6) and ten (10) feet, below ground surface (BGS) were completed for this study. The subsurface soil conditions encountered at this site generally consist of sand (SP) to the auger boring termination depths of 6 and 10 feet. The CPT soundings generally indicated BGS the soils were medium dense to ' dense to 18 feet, and then very dense to the sounding termination depths of 18 to 20 feet. Most soundirl}gs were terminated due to cone refusal on very dense/hard soils at 18 to 20 feet. The except10 was at the boring AB @Lot 11, where sand with pieces of wood and roots was encountered at 3Y to 5 feet deep. Please refer to Appendix E - Record of Test Borings for a detailed account of each boring and sounding. 521 NW Enterprise Drive • Port St. Lucie, Florida 34986 OFFICES 924.3575 - (772) 924.3580 (fax) • www.teamgfa.com F FLORIDA Proposed Tarpon Flats Subdivision - Lots 1-38 St Lucie County, Florida GFA Project No: 13-2029.01 The subsurface soil conditions at the prc proposed structures on shallow foundatio .used for foundation design. Geotechni'cal Report January 8, 2014 Page 2 of 10 -t site are generally favorable for the support of the An allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 psf may be Potentially unsuitable soil (sand with pieces of wood and roots) was encountered at boring AB @ Lot 11 at depths of 3'/2 to 5 feet, and GFA recommends that test pits be performed in that area prior to, or during stripping and clearing. Unsuitable soils may be encountered that must be excavated andl removed to at least 5 feet outside the footprint of the building and then backfilled with compacted structural fill. After excavation and backfill operations (, should be improved with compaction from tt pads. The top 2 feet below stripped grade prior to placing fill to achieve final grade. 12-inch lifts and compacted to achieve a m the subgrade to a depth of 2 feet below be minimum 95% density. ere needed) are completed, the subgrade soils stripped grade prior to constructing the foundation )ould be compacted to a minimum of 95% density (including stemwall backfill) should be placed in mum 95% density. After excavation for footings, im of footings should be compacted to achieve a Analysis of the foundation performance under hurricane conditions or other storm events, including the effects of loss of soil support due to scour or other forces, is not within the scope of this report, and the recommendations are va�id only for normal conditions. Additional analysis and options for foundation systems with scou conditions or other scenarios can be. performed if requested. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project and look forward to a continued association. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any :questions or comments, or if we may.further assist you as y11our plans proceed. T Number V real l Miler, §-gMPGt c nical UgN_--ber istrSon J�fag 675 Nq G`�y L EN Copies: ,',,°AI?essee Proposed Tarpon Flats Subdivision - Lots 1-38 St. Lucia County, Florida GFA Project No. 13-2029.01 1.0 1 1.1 Scope of Services The objective of our geotechnical services summarize the test results, and, dlscl geotechnical significance for building cons within this report: Geotechnical Report January 8, 2014 Page 4 of 10 to collect subsurface data for the subject project, any apparent site conditions that may have ion. The following scope of services are provided 1. Prepare records of the soil boring logs d picting the subsurface soil conditions encountered 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. 4. Provide recommendations with respect allowable soil -bearing capacity, bearing e 5. Provide criteria and site preparation construction. 1.2 Project Description Based on a site plan (author and date unkn Plans) and conversations with the client, the residences with shallow foundations. We have loads. For the foundation recommendations p column load will be 70 kips and the maximur estimates. that 0 to 2 feet of fill will be required during our field exploration for classification during our exploration with respect to foundation foundation support of the structure, including itions, and foundation design parameters. res to prepare the site for the proposed wn) (reproduced in Appendix B - Test Location )roject consists of constructing one or two-story not received any information regarding structural ;sented in this report we assumed the maximum wall loading will be 4 kips per linear foot. GFA bring the foundation pads to design grade. The recommendations provided herein are based upon the above considerations. If the project description has been revised, please inform JGFA International so that we may review our recommendations with respect to any modifications. 2.0 OBSE11VATIONS 2.1 Site Inspection The project site was generally flat and grass) estimated to be even with the adjacent road at north of the property. The interior roadways f Atlantic Ocean was about.800 feet east. and th to 1 mile west, of the property. A few small re with a few trees. The grade at the site was he time of drilling. Residential structures were the subdivision had been constructed. The Indian River (Intracoastal Waterway) about %Z dential structures and a dirt parking area are Proposed Tarpon Flats Subdivision - Lots 1-38 St. Lucie County, Florida GFA Project No. 13-2029,01 shown at the site on aerial historical 1994 to 2007. 2.2 Field Exploration A total of thirty-eight (38) Cone Penetrome! eighteen (18) to twenty (20) feet, and fourt( and ten (10) feet, below ground surface (B the soundings and borings performed are Cone Penetrometer Test (CPT) methods w performed in substantial accordance with / and Friction Cone Penetration Tests of Sol with ASTM Procedure D-1452, "Practice for The soil samples recovered from the soil bo is illustrated in Appendix E: 'Record of Tes might vary between the strata interfaces, wh reflect information from a specific test locat locations was not provided for our field expli test was approximated based upon existing c, obvious landmarks. The boring and soundin be stressed by the proposed construction anc 2.3 Laboratory Analysis Soil samples recovered from our field explo were visually examined in general accordant obtain an accurate understanding of the soil thorough visual examination of the recover necessary. Bag samples of the soil encount laboratory for your inspection for 30 days and writing. The recovered samples' were not examin composition or environmental hazards. GFA additional fee, if required. 2.4 Geomorphic Conditions The South Florida region is a low probable activity.. There are no known fault lines locE Seismicity Map of the State of Florida prod activity occurred near Miami in 1945. This Intensity Scale of 1931. This intensity is similE heavily loaded trucks. The UBC Seismic Zor within a 0 Seismic Zone, and there are typ located within 0 Seismic Zone. Geotechnical Report January 8, 2014 Page 5 of 10 -aphs from the GoogleEarth website dating from Test (CPT) soundings to depths of approximately (14) Auger Borings (AB) to approximately six (6) were completed for this study. The locations of strated in Appendix B: "Test Location Plan". The used as the investigative tools. CPT tests were -M Procedure D-3441, "Deep Quasi -Static, Cone and the auger borings in substantial accordance it Investigation and Sampling by Auger Borings". ngs were visually classified and their stratification Borings". It should be noted that soil conditions ;h are shown. The soil boring and sounding data m only. Site specific survey staking for the test ration. The indicated depth 'and location of each 'ade and estimated distances and relationships to depths were confined to the zone of soil likely to knowledge of vicinity soils. . Lion were returned to our laboratory where they with ASTM D-2488. Samples were evaluated to operties and site geomorphic conditions. After a I site soils, no laboratory testing was deemed Bd during our field exploration will be held in our ien discarded unless we are notified otherwise in either visually or analytically, for chemical >uld be pleased to perform these services for an :a of sinkhole development or intense seismic d on or near the project site. Based on the :d by B.G. Reagor 1987, the closest seismic vent registered a III on the Modified Mercalli o vibrations like that due to passing of heavy or Map shows the state of Florida to be located illy no seismic analyses required for projects Proposed Tarpon Flats Subdivision - Lots 1-38 St Lucie County, Florida GFA Project No. 13-2029.Of The geology of the site as mapped on the l sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes (10), and Palm are sandy soils and organic soils are not generally extends to a maximum depth o surface.and is not indicative of deeper soil Map for a detailed report for the soil survey. Boring logs derived from our field explora Borings". The boring logs depict the obs indicate the penetration resistance value,, descriptions shown on the logs are gen recovered soil samples. All soil samples re accordance with the Unified Soil Classific typical Florida conditions. See Append! description of various soil groups. The subsurface soil conditions encounters auger boring termination depths of 6 and 1 the soils were medium dense to dense termination depths of 18 to 20 feet. Most so dense/hard soils at 18 to 20 feet. The exc with pieces of wood and roots was encouni E - Record of Test Borings for a detailed ac 2.5 Hydrogeological Conditions Geotechnical Report January 8, 2014 Page 6 of 10 SDA Soil Survey website consists of Canaveral fine Beach fine sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes (27). These indicated. It should be noted that the Soil Survey 80 inches (approximately 6% feet) below ground onditions. Please refer to Appendix C - Soil Survey m are presented in Appendix E: "Record of Test rved soils in graphic detail. The CPT soundings logged during the test. The _ classifications and -ally based upon visual characterizations of the ewed have been depicted and classified in general tion System, modified as necessary to describe F: "Discussion. of Soil Groups", for a detailed at this site generally consist of sand (SP) to the feet. The CPT soundings generally indicated BGS 18 feet, and then very dense to the sounding !dings were terminated due to cone refusal on very ition was at the boring AB @ Lot 11, where sand -ed at 3'/2 to 5 feet deep. Please refer to Appendix unt of each boring and sounding. On the dates of our field exploration, the groundwater table was encountered at depths ranging from approximately 4% to 5% feet below the existing ground surface. The groundwater table will fluctuate seasonally depending upon local rainfall and other site specific and/or local influences including the water levels in the nearby Intracoastal Waterway (Indian River) and Atlantic Ocean with tidal influences. Brief poriding of stormwater may occur across the site after heavy rains. No additional investigation 'was included in ur 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 A foundation system for any structure must bel designed to resist bearing capacity failures, have settlements that are tolerable, and resist the environmental forces that the foundation may be subjected to over the life of the structure. The (soil bearing capacity is the soil's ability to support loads without plunging into the soil profile, Bearing capacity failures are analogous to shear failures in structural design and are usually sudden and catastrophic. { Proposed Tarpon Flats Subdivision - Lots 1-38 St. Lucie County, Florida GFA Project No. 13-2029.01 Geotechnica/ Report January 8, 2014. Page 7 of 10 The amount of settlement that a structure may tolerate is dependent on several factors including: uniformity of settlement, time rate of settlement, structural dimensions and properties of the materials. Generally, total or uniform settlement does not damage a structure but may affect drainage and utility connections. These can generally tolerate movements of several inches for building construction. In contrast, differential settlement affects a structure's frame and is limited by the structural flexibility. The subsurface soil conditions at the project site are generally favorable for the support of the proposed structures on shallow foundations. An allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 psf may be used for foundation design. Expected settlement of the structure is 1 inch or less total and less than % inch differential. I 3.2 Site Preparation GFA recommends the following compaction requirements 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 abot a are based upon the maximum dry density as determined by a "modified proctor" test (ASTM D-1557). All density tests should be performed to a depth of 2 feet below existing grade and below bottom of footings. All density tests should be performed using .the nuclear method (ASTM D-2922), the sand cone method (ASTM D-1556), or Hand Cone Penetrometer (HCP) tests. Our recommendations for preparation of the site for use of shallow foundation systems are presented below. This approach to improvingi and Maintaining the site -soils has been found to be successful on projects with similar soil conditions. 1. Initial site preparation should consist of performing stripping and clearing operations. This should be done within, and to a distance of five (5) feet beyond, the perimeter of the proposed building footprint (including exterior isolated columns). Test Pits should be performed at Lot 11 and where unsuitIable soils are encountered, they should be removed. Foundations and any below grape remains of any structures that are within the footprint of the new construction should be removed, and utility lines should be removed or properly abandoned so as to not affect structures or pavements. . 2. Following site stripping (and excavation where needed) and prior the placement of any fill, areas of surficial sand (not exposed limestone) should be compacted ("proof rolled") and tested. We recommend using a steel drum vibratory roller with sufficient static weight and vibratory impact energy to achieve the required compaction. If the subgrade is too wet or the inflow of groundwater cannot be controlled so that the compaction is not achievable, then very clean granular fill may be placed up to 1 foot above the water table, intensively densified and compacted until no further settlement can be visually discerned at the fill surface, and 1 foot of soil both above and below the water table have achieved at least 95% density. Density tests should be performed on the proof rolled surface at a frequency of not less than one test per 2,500 square feet, or a minimum of three (3) tests, whichever is 1.1 Proposed Tarpon Flats Subdivision - Lots 1-38 St. Lucie County, Florida GFA Project No. 13-2029.01 greater. Areas of exposed intact geotechnical engineer prior to fill pla 3. Fill material may then be placed in the I inorganic (classified as SP, SW, GP, GI more than 5 percent (by weight) organ fines in excess of 12% should not be lift thickness not exceeding 12-inches. I placement of the next lift. Density tests not less than one test per 2,500 square three (3) tests per lift, whichever is great 4. For any footings bearing on a limestone be examined by the engineer / geologis the limestone. The limestone shall be, areas shall be cleaned to depth of 3 tirr with lean concrete. 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) to footings. Geotechnical Report January 8, 2014. Page 8 of 10 ie shall be visually confirmed by the project in lieu of proof rolling. uilding pad as required. The fill material should be SP-SM, SW-SM, GW-GP, GP -GM) containing not materials. Fill materials with silticlay-size soil ised. Fill should be placed in lifts with a maximum ach lift should be compacted and tested prior to the should be performed within the fill at a frequency of feet per lift in the building areas, or a minimum of r. ormation, the bottom of all footing excavation shall or his representative to determine the condition of robed for voids and loose pockets of sand. Such is the greatest horizontal dimension and backfilled npacted native granular soils, the bottom of all d examined by the engineer / geologist or his of organic and/or deleterious material. Density of not less than one (1) density test per each per each seventy five (75) lineal feet of wall 6. The contractor should take into account tl�e final contours and grades as established by the plan when executing his backfilling and compaction operations. Using vibratory compaction equipment at this site may disturb adjacent structures. We recommend that you monitor nearby structure before and during proof -compaction operations. A representative of GFA International can monitor the vibration disturbance of adjacent structures. A proposal for vibration monitoring during compaction operations can be supplied upon request. 3.3 Design of Footings Footings may be designed using an allowal foundations should be embedded a minimum shall be measured from the lowest adjacent c 24 inches in width and continuous strip foo regardless of contact pressure. Once. site preparation has been performed in in this report, the soil should readily suppoi foundation system. Settlements have been p differential. All footings and columns should they will be loaded differently and at differer designed. soil bearing pressure of 2,500 psf. Shallow 18 inches below final grade. This embedment le. Isolated column footings should be at least is should have a width of at least 18 inches -cordance with the recommendations described the proposed structure resting on a shallow )jected to be less than 1-inch total and %-inch e structurally separated from the floor slab, as times, unless a monolithic mat foundation is Proposed Tarpon Flats Subdivision - Lots 1-38 St Lucie County, Florida GFA Project No. 13-2029.01 3.4 Ground Floor Slabs Geotechnical Report January 8, 2014 Page 9 of 10 The ground floor slabs may be supported directly on the existing grade or on granular fill following the foundation site preparation a d fill placement procedures outlined in this report. For purposes of design, a coefficient of subgrade modulus 150 pounds per cubic inch may be used. The ground floor slab should be structurally separated from all walls and columns to allow for differential vertical movement. Excessive moisture vapor transmission through floor slabs -on -grade can result in damage to floor coverings as well as cause other deleterious affects. An appropriate moisture vapor retarder should be placed beneath the flood slab to reduce moisture vapor from entering the building through the slab. The retarder phould be installed in general accordance with applicable ASTM procedures including sealing around pipe penetrations and at the edges of foundations. 4.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS This consulting report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the current project owners and other members of the design team for thel Proposed Tarpon Flats Subdivision - Lots 1-38 located at St. Lucie County, Florida. Thio report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted local geotechnical engine ring practices; no other warranty is expressed or implied. The evaluation submitted in this report, is based in part upon the data collected during a field exploration, however, the nature and extent of variations throughout the subsurface profile may not become evident until the time of construction. If variations then appear evident, it may be necessary to reevaluate information and professional opinions as provided in this report. in the event changes are made in the nature, design, or locations of the proposed structure, the evaluation and opinions contained in this report shall not be considered valid, unless the changes are reviewed and conclusions modified or verified in writing by GFA International. Analysis of the foundation performance unc including the effects of loss of soil support due this report, and the recommendations are val and. options for foundation systems with scour requested. 5.0 BASIS FOR . hurricane conditions or other storm events, scour or other forces, is not within the scope of only for normal conditions. Additional analysis nditions or other scenarios can be performed if ENDATIONS The analysis and recommendations submitted in this report are based on the. data obtained from the tests performed at the locations indicated 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 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. 18 c Proposed Tarpon Flats Subdivision - Lots 1-38 St. Lucie County, Florida GFA Project No. 13-2029.01 Geotechnical Report January 8, 2014 Page 10 of 10 Any third party reliance of our geotechnica� 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 sou ding, and for determining penetration and cone resistance is specific to the sampling tools ding, and does not reflect the ease or difficulty to advance other tools or materials. V , . G-FAIN EkNTAT-IONAL 521 N.W. ENTERPRISE D Pon ST. LucIE, FLORIDA 34986 M.Nm: (772) 92 i3515 - FAX. (7.72) 924-M80 CONE PENETRATION SOUNDING. (ASMD 3441) Client: Phoenix Realty Homes Date: 1/2/2014 Project No.: 13=2092.01 Project: Proposed Tarpon Flats Subdivision - Lots I- 8 Lab No.: St. Lucie County, FL Field Cfew: PINURL Rig ID: OshKosh Location: CPT - Lot 23 Back N27.505900 W80.306400 Page: 104 1 Elevation: Existing Grade C ine.:Beoiup�- t, (tsf) Depth q Friction Ratio, FR 7 P FPTS-11 FR. (zneters), 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 0 ' 2 4 ' 6 8 0 9 is 7.3 0.2 70 T, _LL-L 80 140 0.9 0.4 90 100 180 1.5 0.6 30 150 260 1.0 0.8 150 170 .300 0.9 40 160 280 0.9 1.2 -, I I .. T .... J I 80 100 160 0.8 1.4 so 90 60 1.7 16 5 00 0.7 1: 120 2 100 8 100 110 200 1.3 2- 8 0 00 160 08 22 60 70 120 13 2.4 60 70 120 14 2.6 55 68 110 1.8 2.8 65 80 130 2.0 3.0 1 70 90 140 1.9 3.2 f: 80 100 160 1.7 3.4 -1- 70 90 140 0.9 3.6 60 70 120 1.1 3.8 I I I i j H7 70 80 140 1.9 4.0 70 90 140 0.9 4.2 so 60 100 2.0 4.4 40 55 80 2.0 4.6 15 68 80 136 1.9 4.8 J.-i 70 90 140 0.9 5.0 60 70 120 1.1 5.2 60 70 120 2.2 5.4 110 130 220 1.2 5.6 8 170 1 -1 --.' TI-TE1 JJ J.,J 90 340 : . J,. !-I , 0.8 5. t 10 380 0.7 6.0 190 2 130 150 260 6.2 = t: J.J -J T 25 h P.-Wrojects12013113-2092,01 Tarpon Flats, S,,. Lude Cotoily (Phoedr RealyHoa,es)lG WppendicesWpp Li". CPT(38) i 0 AUGER BORING1 LOGS (ASTM D-1452) Client: Phoenix Realty Homes Project No: 13-2092.01 Project: Proposed Tarpon Flats Subdivision - Lots 1-38 Lab No: St. Lucie County, FL Test Date: 12/31/2013 & 1 /2/20.14 Elevation: Existing Grade Technician: PM/RL TEST LOCATION: AB @ CPT— Lot 1 Depth feet Descri' tion color, texture, consistency, remarks 0-1 Brown fine sand SP 1 —1%2 Light brown fine sand, little shell SP 1 %2 — 3 Gray fine sand, little shell SP 3-4 Brown fine sand, trace roots SP 4-5 Light brown fine sand, little) shell SP 5-6 Gray fine sand, little shell SP I Water table at 5%2 feet below ground surface TEST LOCATION: AB @ CPT— Lot 4 Depth feet Description color, texture, consistency, remarks 0-2 Brown fine sand SP 2 — 3 Light brown fine sand, trace cla and shell SP 3 — 4%2 Light brown fine sand, trace! shell SP 4'/2 — 5%2 .. Light brown fine and, some shell (SP)- 5'/2 — 6 _ Light brown fine sand, tracel shell SP I I I I Water table at 5%2 feet below Ig round surface TEST LOCATION: AB @ CPT— Lot 7 Depth feet Description color, texture, consistency, remarks 0-2 Brown fine sand SP 2 — 2%2 Light brown fine sand, trace 'shell SP 2'/2 — 4 Gray fine sand, trace shell SP 4 — 4%2 Dark gray fine sand. trace shell SP 4% - 10 Gray fine sand, trace shell SP I I Water table at 5%4 feet below 6round surface ' RJVASt - ._ ._. _ .. _ «F: Fi.�C: ..> � �: L,'" aJ �T��.' s:p'R�.q'. sU»trv'•: �lt� n;;,�f.'F"; AUGER BORING LOGS (ASTM D-1452) Client: Phoenix Realty Homes Project: Proposed Tarpon Flats Subdivision - Lots St. Lucie County, FL Elevation: Existing Grade 1-38 Project No: Lab No: Test Date: Technician: 13-2092.01 12/31/2013 & 1/2/2014 PM/RL TEST LOCATION: AB Q CPT— Lot 10 Depth feet Description color, texture, consistency, remarks 0-1 Brown to gray fine sand SP 1 —1 % Reddish brown to gray fine sand SP 1%2 — 2 Light brown fine sand, trade shell SP 2-3 Gray fine sand, trace shells SP 3-4 Dark gray fine sand, trace shell SP 4-5 Gray fine sand, trace shells SP 5-6 Grayish brown fine sand, trace shell SP Water table at 5% feet below ground surface TEST LOCATION: AB CPT— Lot 11 1 Depth feet Descri o tion color, texture, consistency, remarks 0-1 Brown fine sand SP 1 —1%2 Light brown fine sand SP 1%2 — 3%2 Gray fine sand, trace shell ,SP 3'/2 — 5 Dark gray fine sand, some roots and pieces of wood (highly organic) SP,PT 5-6 Gray fine sand, trace shell ISP I I Water table at 5 feet below ground surface TEST LOCATION: AB CPT— Lot 14 Depth feet Description color, texture, consistency, remarks 0-2 Brown fine sand, trace shell SP 2-3 Gray fine sand, trace clay, little shelf SP 3 — 4%2 Dark grayish brown fine sand SP 4%2 — 5 Light brown fine sand, trace'shell SP 5-6 Light brown fine sand, little shell SP I I I I Water table at 5 feet below ground surface ter.... ..:....Sy .... ':'ssi'.. oi; �::�`'a?. 1C^i:��'E'�;-i^•' :'s :.�%:1"w'. a; AUGER BORING LOGS (ASTM D-1452) Client: Phoenix Realty Homes Project No: 13-2092.01 Project: Proposed Tarpon Flats Subdivision - Lots 1-38 Lab No: St. Lucie.County, FL Test Date: 12/31/2013 & 1/2/2014 Elevation: Existing Grade Technician: PM/RL TEST LOCATION: AS @ CPT— Lot 17 Depth feet Desch tion color, texture, consistency, remarks 0-1 Brown fine sand, trace shell SP 1 — 3% Light brown fine sand, trace shell SP 3% — 4Y Light brown fine sand SP 41/ — 6 Light brown fine sand, littl',e shell SP I I I Water table at 5 feet belo round surface TEST LOCATION: AB@ CPT— Lot 21 1 Depth feet Descri tion color, texture, consistency, remarks 0-2 Brownish gray fine sand, trace shell SP 2-3 Gray fine sand, trace shell SP 3 — 3% Brown fine sand, trace tre root debris SP 31/ — 6 Gray fine sand SP I I I I Water table at 5% feet below round surface TEST LOCATION: AS @ CPT— Lot 22 1 Depth feet Descri tion color, texture, consistency, remarks 0-3 Grayish brown fine sand SP 3 — 4 Light brown fine sand, trace shell SP 4-6 Light brown fine sand, little shell SP I I I I 1 I Water table at 4%2 feet -below ground surface AUGER BORING LOGS (ASTM D-1452) Client: Phoenix Realty Homes Project No: 13-2092.01 Project: Proposed Tarpon Flats Subdivision - Lots 1-38 Lab No: St. Lucie County, FL Test Date: 12/31/2013 & 1 /2/2014 Elevation: Existing Grade Technician: PM/RL TEST LOCATION: AB @ CPT— Lot 25 Depth feet Desch lion color, texture, consistency, remarks 0 — %Z Brown fine sand, trace shell SP %z — 1'/2 Gray fine sand, little shelf SP 1%Z — 3 Light brown fine sand, trace shell SP 3-6 Light brown fine sand, little shell SP I I Water table at 4'/4 feet below ground surface TEST LOCATION: AB CPT— Lot 27 1 Depth feet Description color, texture, consistency, remarks 0-1 Brown fine sand SP 1— 2 Light.gray fine sand, tracelshell SP 2-5 Light brown fine sand SP 5-6 Light brown fine sand, lithe shell SP I I I I Water table at 5 feet below' round surface TEST LOCATION: AB CPT— Lot 29 Depth feet Descrition color, texture, consistency, remarks 0-1/2 Dark brown fine sand SP — 4 Light brown fine sand (SP)f 4-5 Brown fine sand, trace shell SP 5-6 Brown fine sand, little shell SP I ' I Water table at 5%2 feet below ground surface AUGER BORINP LOGS (ASTM D-1452) Client: Phoenix Realty Homes Project No: 13-2092.01 Project: Proposed Tarpon Flats Subdivision - Lots 1-38 Lab No: St. Lucie County, FL Test Date: 12/31/2013 & 1/2/2014 Elevation: Existing Grade Technician: PM/RL TEST LOCATION: AB CPT— Lot 33 i Depth feet Desc�i tion color, texture, consistency, remarks 0-3 Brown fine sand SP 3-4 Light brown fine sand SP 4-6 Light brown fine sand, trace shell SP I I Water table at 5 feet below) round surface TEST LOCATION: AB 9 CPT— Lot 36 1 Depth feet Descri tion color, texture, consistency, remarks 0-2 Brown fine sand SP 2-5— Li ht brown fine sand SP I 5-6 Light brown fine sand, trace shell SP I I I Water table at 43/ feet below ground surface DISCUSSION OF SOIL GROUPS COARSE�GRAINED SOILS GW and SW GROUPS. These gro�ps 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 noticeably change the strength characteristics of the coarse -grained friction and I must not interface with it's free -draining characteristics. GP and SP GROUPS. Poorly grac plastic fines (less than 5 percent pa and SP groups. The materials may non -uniform mixtures of very co,, intermediate sizes lacking (sometim graded). This last group often result and sand layers are mixed. d gravels and sands containing little of no Sing the No. 200 sieve) are classed in GP e called uniform gravels, uniform sands or �e materials and very fine sand, with called skip -graded, gap graded or step - from borrow pit excavation in which gravel GM and SM. GROUPS. In general, tl�e GM and SM groups comprise gravels or sands with fines (more than 12 percent the No. 200 sieve) having low or no plasticity. The plasticity index and liquid limit of soils in the group should 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 with fines (more than 12 percent passing the No, 200 sieve) which have a fairly high plasticity. The liquid jimit and plasticity index should plat above the "A" line on the plasticity chart. FINE GRAINED SOILS ML and MH GROUPS. In these groups, the symbol M has been used to designate predominantly silty material. IThe symbols L and H represent low and high liquid limits, respectively, and an arbitrary dividing line between the two set at a liquid limit of 50. The soils in the ML and MH groups are sandy silts, clayey silts or inorganic silts .with relatively low plasticity. Also included are loose type soils and rock flours. CL and CFI GROUPS. In these groupsl1 H denoting low or high liquid limits, withi 50. The soils are primarily organic clay; CL and are usually lean clays, sandy cl� plasticity clays are classified as CH. Th and some volcanic clays. he symbol C stands for clay, with L and the dividing line again set at a liquid of Low plasticity clays are classified as ys or silty clays. The medium and high ese include the fat clays, gumbo clays OL and OH GROUPS. The soil in Ithe OL and OH groups are characterized by the presence of organic odor or color, hence the symbol O. . Organic silts and clays are classified in these groups. The materials have a plasticity range that corresponds with the ML and MH groups. 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 vegetable 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.