HomeMy WebLinkAboutPRELIMINARY SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONi
SCANNED
BY
St. '> ude CQu��
UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING'SCIENCES
PRELIMINARY SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Proposed Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision
Oakland Lake Circle
Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida
Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
May 19, 2017
PREPARED FOR:
Ryan Homes
2005 Vista Parkway, Suite 102
West Palm Beach, Florida 33411
PREPARED By-:
Universal Engineering Sciences, Inc.
820 Brevard Avenue
Rockledge, Florida 32955
(321) 638=0808 .
Consultants in: Geotechnical Engineering • Environmental Sciences • Construction Materials Testing • Threshold Inspection
Offices in: Orlando • Daytona Beach • Fort Myers • Gainesville • Jacksonville- Ocala - Palm Coast • Rockledge P Sarasota
Miami'- Panama City • Pensacola • Fort Pierce • Tampa • West Palm Beach • Atlanta, GA • Tifton, GA
FILE COPY
L
'- LOCATIONS: '
Atlanta UNIVERSA:L, Daytona Beach
Fort Myers
j ENGI,N.EERING SC;IE.INCES i:.daineerce
COnsulta'nts,ln. GeotechnicaLEngineering 'Environmental Sciences r Gainesville
• Jacksonville
_ Geophysical' Services • Construction Materials Testing,- Threshold Inspection .. Miami
Building Inspection • Plan Review • Building Code Administration •~ Ocala
Orlando.(HeadquarterO
Palm Coast
*i Panama City
May' 19 2017 '.Pensacola
4,1 Rockledge
Ryan Homes Sarasota i
1450 Centrepark Boulevard, Suite 340 Tampa
• West Palm Beach
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
■ Atlanta, GA
• , Tifton, GA
Attention: Mr. Michael DeBock
Reference: Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
Proposed Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision
Oakland Lake Circle
Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida .
Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
Dear Mr. DeBock:
i
Universal Engineering Sciences, Inc. (Universal) , has completed a preliminary. subsurface
exploration at the above referenced site in Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida. Our,
exploration was authorized by you, and was -conducted as outlined in Universal's Proposal No.
0330.0417.00003. This exploration was, performed in accordance withgenerally, accepted soil
and foundation engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made.
The following report presents the results of our field exploration with a geotechnical engineering
inteepretation-of those results with respect to the project characteristics as provided to us. We
have included our estimates of the typical wet season high groundwater levels at the boring
locations and general comments concerning anticipated soil supportcharacteristics for typical
low-rise residential buildings:
1 �
We appreciate the opportunity to have. worked with you, on this project and look forward to a
continued association; Please do not hesitate to cor
if we may further assist you as your plans proceed.
Sincerely yours,
UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES;, INC.
Certificate &Adth&idfiot �No. 549
Jose R Benitez Jr., E,I',,.
Staff Engineer
2 — Addressee
UESDOCS #1450465
820 Brevard Avenue, Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321) 638-0808 Fax (321):638-0978
wwvv. UniversalEngineering:.com
0
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION.............................,.....,..,.........,.................:...:,:.:::.:::..::............... .......... .:1
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..............................;.::1
3.0 PURPOSE................:.:..::::...::.:.:::::....:::::..................
4.0 SITE DESCRIPTION ........... .:::::.:::::::::..:::::.:::.::::::.::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::c:::::s::.:::::::.... ................ 1
4.1 SOIL SURVEY ............ I .......... ...............................................................................2
4.2 TOPOGRAPHY ..................... e....�:. ... _.., .................................................................................2
5.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES ..........................................................................................................2
6.0 LIMITATIONS.........................:...:::...:.3.
7.0 FIELD METHODOLOGIES ..... :.......................... ............................ :...........
....:::::..:::.:::.:::.:.;:::.::.:::::::4
7.1 STANDARD PENETRATION TESTS ............... _ - 4
7.2 DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER TESTS ......::::::....... ..._..,,._,.,.,
7.3 PAVEMENT CORE SAMPLES ...........; 4
t ti _ ... _ .... ....
8.0 . LABORATORY METHODOLOGIES.:..........
8.1 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS .............. - - -:4
9.0 SOIL STRATIGRAPHY.................:::::..::::::::.:::::::.:::::::::::.e:::::.:..::::5
9.1 PAVEMENT CORE RESULTS........... ........:........5
10.0 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS ...............:............ - _ .6
10.1 EXISTING GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS .......... �:.::...::::::_ .,— .. :...........::::...:..........:.........
10.2 TYPICAL WET SEASON HIGH GROUNDWATER LEVEL::....:::::.......:..................:....:.:....:......... :6
11.0 ' LABORATORY RESULTS .......
11.1 -PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS...........
12.1, PROPOSED BUILDING AREAS...... ,. ......r................. :.. 7
13.0 CLOSURE ..................................... - - :8
a
LIST OF TABLES
Table I: Saint Lucie County Soil Survey Designated Soil Types . 2
Table II: Generalized Soil Profile ............................................. .. :... _. _ :..5
Table III:, Pavement Core Results .................... :..:.,:....g
i
820 Brevard Avenue, Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321) 638-0808 Fax (321) 638-0978.
www.Universa[Engineer*ing.com
FIGURES
Boring Location rigure No. -1
APPENDICES
Key to Boring Logs:.:. ,.,.:..... ................. Appendix A
Boring Logs . .... - - - , Appendix A
EXHIBITS
d �
GBADocument........ .:.:.:...:.... .....::,:.:. >;.:. ..........
Exhibit
1
i -
II
0
820 Brevard Avenue, Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321)638-0808 Fax (321) 638-0978
www.UniversalEnginee�ing.com
Oakland -Lake Estates Subdivision Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Universal Engineering Sciences, Inc. (Universal) has completed a preliminary subsurface
exploration for the proposed Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision in Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie
County, Florida. Our exploration was authorized by Mr. Michael DeBock of Ryan Homes and
was conducted as outlined in Universal's Proposal No. 0330.0417.00003. This exploration was
performed in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. No
other warranty, expressed or implied, is made.
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
It is Universal's understanding, based upon information provided by the client, that the proposed
project will consist of a. residential subdivision .in Fort Pierce, Florida; currently envisioned as
shown in Figure No. 1. The, proposed subdivision. is intended to have seventy-three (73)
residential lots.
We understand that the stormwater runoff from .impervious surfaces to be developed at this site
will be collected within an existing retention basin located in the central sections of the project
area.
Please note that our subsurface exploration was, brefiminacy, in. nature and conducted to acquire
general subsurface information only. Once specified- site configuration, building detail 'and
structural and traffic loading information are available a final subsurface exploration should be
performed.
.3.0 PURPOSE
The purposes of this exploration were:.
• to explore the subsurface conditions at general locations and depths as requested by the
client and
• to provide our estimates of the typical wet season high groundwater levels -at the boring .
locations and
to provide general comments. concerning the anticipated soil support characteristics for
typical low-rise residential construction.
4.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
The subject site is located within Section 11, Township 34 South, Range 39 East in Saint Lucie
County, Florida. More specifically, the site is located on the northwest quadrant of Palomar
Street Road and North Kings Highway, in Fort Pierce, Florida. At the time of drilling, the site
vegetation consisted of mostly grass, along with an existing paved circular road around the
proposed subdivision.
820 'Brevard Avenulei Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321) 638-0808 Fax (321)1638-0978
www.UniVersa[Engineering.com .
Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
4.1 SOIL SURVEY
Two (2) soil types are mapped within the general project area according to the Saint Lucie
County Soil Survey (SLCSS), dated 1980. A brief description of these soils is provided in the
following Table I.
TABLE
SLCSS DESIGNATED SOIL TYPES
Soil Type Brief Description
(Map Symbol)
Soil material that has been dug up from several areas with different
Arents, 0 to 5 percent slopes (4) kinds of soil. It is used to fill up areas such as low sloughs, marshes,
shallow depressions, and swamps,
Watiasso sand (48) Nearly level, poorly drained sandy soils in broad areas in the
flatwoods.
4.2 TOPOGRAPHY
According to information obtained from the United States Geologic Survey (USGS) Oslo, Florida
quadrangle map dated 1949, photo -revised 1970, ground surface elevation across the site area
(pre -developmental) is approximately +20 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD).
5.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES
The services conducted by Universal during our preliminary subsurface exploration program are
as follows:
• Drill seven (7) Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings within the project site. area to. a
depth of 10 feet below existing land surface (bls).
• Core through the existing pavement sections at four (4) locations with a diamond tipped core
drill to ascertain the approximate thickness of the asphaltic surfacing and base course.
.-6 Perform Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) testing within the upper portions of the
selected SPT boreholes to help further determine soil consistencies.
Secure samples of representative soils encountered in the soil borings for review, laboratory
analysis and classification by a Geotechnical Engineer.
• Measure the existing site groundwater levels and provide 'an estimate of the typical wet
season high.groundwater levels.
Conduct soil gradation tests on. selected soil samples obtained in the field to help determine
their engineering properties.
• Assess the existing soil conditions with respect to the proposed construction.
2
820 Brevard Avenue, Rockledge, Florida 32b55 (321) 638-0808 Fax (321) 638-0978
www.UniversalEngineering.com
Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
Preparing a geotechnical engineering report which documents the results of our preliminary
subsurface exploration and laboratory testing program with analysis and general comments.
6.0 LIMITATIONS
Please note that this report is based on a preliminary subsurface exploration program with the
scope of services, general boring locations and depths as developed in conjunction with the
client. The information submitted in this report is based on data obtained from the soil borings
performed at the locations indicated on the Boring Location Plan and from other information as
referenced. This report hasnot been prepared to meet the full needs of design professionals,
.contractors, .or any other parties, and any use of this report'by them without the guidance of the
soil and foundation' engineer who prepared it constitutes improper usage which could lead to
erroneous assumptions; faulty conclusions,and other problems.
This report does not reflect any variations which may occur across the site. The nature and
extent of such variations may not become evident until the course of future explorations or,
actual construction. If variations then become evident, it will be necessary for re -evaluation -of
the recommendations in this report after performing on -site observations during the construction
period and noting the characteristics of any variations. Deleterious soils were not encountered
at any of our boring locations; however, we,cahnot completely preclude their presence across
the entire property. Therefore, this report should not be used for: estimating such items as cut
and fill quantities.
Our field exploration did not find unsuitable or unexpected materials at the time of occurrence.
However, borings for a typical geotechnical report are widely spaced and generally not sufficient
for reliably detecting the presence of isolated, anomalous surface or subsurface conditions, or
reliably estimating unsuitable or suitable material quantities:- Accordingly, Universal does not
recommend relying on our boring information to negate presence of anomalous materials or, for
estimation of material quantities unless our contracted services specifically include sufficient
exploration for such - purpose(s) and within the report we so state that the level. of exploration
provided' should be sufficient to detect such anomalous conditions or estimate such quantities.
Therefore, Universal will. not be responsible for any extrapolation or use of our data by others.
beyond the purpose(s) for which it. is applicable or intended.
�AII users of this report. are cautioned that there was no requirement for Universal to attempt to
locate any man-made buried objects or identify any other potentially hazardous conditions that
may exist at the site, during the course of this exploration. Therefore no attempt was made by
Universal to .locate or identify such concerns. Universal cannot be responsible for any buried- `
man -.made objects or environmental hazards ,which may be subsequently encountered during
construction that are not.discussed within the text of this report. We can provide this service if
requested. r
For a further description of :the scope and limitations. of this report please review the(document
attached- within Exhibit 1 'Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report"
-prepared, by. GBA/The Geoprofessional Business Association. .
3
820 Brevard venue, Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321)-638-0808 Faz,-,!(321) 638-0978
J www.UniversalEngineering.com . .
Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision Universal Project'No. 0330.1-700052.6000
Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration]
7.0 FIELD METHODOLOGIES
7.1 STANDARD PENETRATION TESTS
The seven (7) SPT borings, designated 131 through B7 on the attached Figure No., 1, were
performed in. general, accoirdance with the .procedures of ASTM D ,1586 (Standard Method for
Penetration Test and Split -Barrel Sampling of Soils). The SPT.drilling technique involves driving
a standard split -barrel sampler into the soil by a 140 pound hammer, free falling 30 inches. The
number of blows` required to drive the sampler 1 foot, after an initial seating "of 6 inches, is
designated the penetration resistance, or. N-value, an index to soil, strength. and consistency.
The soil samples recovered from the split -barrel sampler were visually inspected and classified
in general accordance with the guidelines of ASTM D.2487 (Standard Classification of Soils for
Engineering Purposes [Unified Soil Classification System]).
The SPT soil borings were performed with a CME 45 ATV mounted' drilling ,rig. Universal located
the test borings in the field by using the provided site plan and by plotting in' the field with a
Garmin GPS receiver. No survey control was provided on -site, and our boring locations should
be considered only as accurate as implied by the 'methods of measurement used. The
approximate boring locations are shown on the attachedFigure No. 1:
7.2 DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER TESTS
Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) tests were performed within -the upper portions of the
selected SPT boreholes to help further determine soils consistencies. The DCP tests were
performed at 1 foot intervals in general accordance with the procedures developed by Professor
G. F. Sowers and Charles S. 'Hedges (ASCE, 1966). The basic procedure for the DCP .test is as
follows: A standard 1.5 inch diameter conical point is driven into the soil by a 15-pound steel
hammer falling 20 inches. Following the seating of the _point to a depth of 2 ,inches, the number
of blows required to drive the sampler an additional 1.75 inches is designated the penetration
resistance, providing an index to soil strength and density.
7.3 PAVEMENT CORE SAMPLES .
Samples of the existing asphaltic pavement sections were obtained at four `(4) core locations
(Cl through C4) with a 4 inch nominal diameter diamond bit core drill, advancing through the
asphaltic pavement into, the underlying base course materials. Afterwards the core holes were!
backfilled. and the surfacing patched with an asphaltic "cold ,patch" mixture and the core samples
returned to our laboratory for subsequent examination.
8.0 LABORATORY METHODOLOGIES
8.1 . PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS
We completed #200 . sieve particle size analyses on seven (7) representative soil .samples.
These samples were tested according to ;the'procedures listed ASTM D 1140 (Standard Test ,
Method for Amount of Material in Soils Finer than the No. 200 Sieve). In part, ASTM D 1140
requires a thorough mixing the sample with water and flushing it through a No. 200 sieve until all;
of the particles smaller than the sieve size leave the sample.
_i
I' 4
820 Brevard Avenue, Rockledge„FloriLla 32955 (321)-638-0808 Fax (321) 638-0978 .
www.UniversalEngineering.com
Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision Universal Project -No. 0330.1700052.0000
Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
The percentage of the material finer than the No. 200 sieve helps determines the textural nature
of the soil sample and aids in evaluating its engineering.' characteristics. The percentage of
materials passing the #200 sieve is shown on the attached boring logs.
9.0 SOIL STRATIGRAPHY
The results of our field exploration and laboratory analysis, together with pertinent information
obtained from the SPT borings, such as soil profiles, penetration resistance and stabilized
groundwater levels are shown on the boring, logs included in Appendix A. The Key to Boring
Logs, Soil Classification Chart is also included in Appendix A..The soil profiles were prepared
from field logs after the recovered soil samples.were examined by a Geotechnical Engineer.
The stratification lines shown on the boring logs represent the approximate boundaries between
soil types, and may not depict exact subsurface soil conditions. The actual soil boundaries may
be more transitional -than depicted. A generalized profile of the soils encountered at our boring
locations is presented in the following Table IL For more detailed soil profiles, please refer to the
attached boring logs. ,
TABLE II
GENERALIZED SOIL PROFILE
- Depth
Encountered '
(feet,�bls)
Approximate
Thickness
(feet)
Soil •Description
Fill soils consisting of fine sands with varying quantities of silt, day,,
Surface
2 to 9
'gravel, broken shell, and clay lumps [SP, SP-SM, 9C]; loose to,
medium dense. 1
Highly interlayered strata consisting of fine sands [SP], fine sands
with silt [SP-SM], and clayey fine sands' [SC], with varying
2 to 9
1+ to 8+
quantities of broken shell and occasional cemented rock layers;'
j
loose to dense. At boring location 62, the fine sand with silt [SP-
SM] strata is partially cemented with iron oxide & organic.salts and
which is locally known as hardpan.
NOTE: [ ] denotes Unified Soil Classification system designation.
+ indicates strata encountered at boring termination, total thickness undetermined:
9.1 PAVEMENT CORE RESULTS
The results of our examination and measurement of the core samples taken in the field from the
existing pavement sections are shown in the following Table III:
5
820 Brelvard Avenue, Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321) 638-080� Fax (321) 638-0978
www.UniversalEngineering.com
i.r
Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
Fort Pierce,, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
TABLE III
PAVEMENT CORE RESULTS
Boring/Core..
Approximate Thickness/Type
Approximate 'Thickness
Type of Base Course
Location,
of Asphaltic Surfacing
of Base Course
;Materials
_
_ ..-
(nchesy
(inches)
S3
C1
1.0 S3
84/Z
Coquina
0.898
C2
1.1 S3
8'/
Coquina
1.1 S3
C3. I
1.0 S3
1.6 S3
8
Coquina
0.8 S3
C4
1.0 S1
10,
Coquina
i. bee attacnea Hgure No. 1 for approximate core locations;
2. Classification of asphaltic layerings was performed visually and may not represent actual FDOT mix —
parameters.
3. Subgrade soils consist mostly of fine sands with traces of gravel & broken shell [SP] (i.e.. stabilized
subgrade):
10.0 -GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS
10.1 EXISTING GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS
We measured the water ,levels in the boreholes on May 8, 2017 after the groundwater was
allowed to stabilize. The groundwater levels are shown on the attached boring logs. The
groundwater level depths ranged from 4.3 feet bls at boring location B6 to 5.7 feet bls at boring
locations B2 and .B7. Fluctuations in groundwater levels should be anticipated throughout the
year, primarily due to seasonal variations, in rainfall, surface runoff, .and other factors that may
vary from the time the borings were conducted.
10.2 TYPICAL WET SEASON HIGH GROUNDWATER LEVEL
The typical wet season high groundwater level is defined as the highest groundwater level
sustained for a'period of 2 to 4 weeks during the "wet" season of,the year, for existing site
j conditions, in wyear with average normal rainfall amounts. Based on historical data, the rainy
j season in Saint Lucie County, 'Florida is between June and October of the year. In order to,
estimate the wet season water level at the boring locations, many, factors 'are examined,
including the following:
i
a, Measured groundwater level
b:. Drainage characteristics of existing soil types
C. Season of the year (wet/dry season)
d; Current & historical rainfall data (recent and year-to-date)
e, Natural relief points (such as lakes, rivers,,swamp areas, etc.)
f. Man-made drainage systems (ditches, canals, etc.)
g. Distances to relief points and man-made drainage systems
6
820 Brevard Avenue, Rockledgel, Florida 32955 (321) 638-0808 Fax (321) 638-0978
www.UniversalEngineering.com
Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision Universal Project No: 0330.1700052.0000
Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
h... On -site types of vegetation
i. Area topography (ground surface�elevations)
Groundwater level readings were taken on May 8, 2017. According to data from the Southeast
Regional Climate Center and the National Weather Service, the total rainfall in the previous
month of April for Central Saint Lucie County was 2.2 inches, approximately atahe•normal levels
for the month of April. Year-to-date rainfall for 2017 through May. 8th was .approximately 6Y2
inches, roughly 6 inches below the normal level for this time period.
Based on this: information and factors listed above, we estimate that the typical wet season high
groundwater levels at the boring locations will be approximately 2Y2 feet above the existing
measured levels. Please note, however, that peak stage elevations. immediately following
various intense storm events, may be somewhat higher than the estimated typical wet season
levels.
Due to the variable silt and clay content within the near surface soils at this site, we suspect that
there may be occasional isolated pockets of "perched" groundwater throughout the project area,
particularly, during periods of prolonged wet weather. These temporary perched water table
levels may be higher than the estimated wet season high groundwater levels indicated above.
11.0 LABORATORY RESULTS
11.1 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS
The soil -samples submitted for analysis were classified as fine sands [SP]. The percentage of
soil sizes passing the #200 sieve size are shown -on the boring logs at the approximate depth
sampled.
12.0 ANALYSIS AND GENERAL COMMENTS
12.1 PROPOSED BUILDING AREAS
The removal of site vegetation and roots, along with other construction activities, will further
loosen surficial soils to various depths. To provide a homogeneous, compacted, sandy soil
system underneath the proposed foundations and floor slabs for the proposed residences,
densification of at least the upper 2 feet of the existing surficial, loose soils and subsequent
additional fill soils will be necessary. This should create a'soil mat capable of dissipating the
building loads over any remaining loose strata at depth.
We believe that this can be effectively accomplished using conventional site preparation
procedures including a comprehensive- root raking and stripping procedure to remove
vegetation, root mats, debris and organic topsoils; and then an extensive proof -rolling and
densification program for the surficial soils and subsequent structural fill. Assuming that such
procedures are properly performed, we anticipate that conventional, shallow spread footing
foundations may be used to support conventional.one:to twostory:residential co"nstructiori.
7
8k Brevard Avenue, Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321) 631-0808- Fax (321) 638-0978
www.Universa]Engine.ering.com
Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
I
13.0 CLOSURE
j. We appreciate this opportunity to.be of service as your geotechnical consultant on this phase of
j the project and look forward to providing follow up explorations and geotechnical engineering
analyses as the project progresses through the design phase. If you have any questions
concerning this report or when we may be of any further service, please contact us.
I
820 Brevard Avenue, Ro4edge, Florida 32955 (321). 638-0808 Fax (321.) .638-096
www.Un,iversalEngineering.com
I
f
�
® Approximate SPT Boring Location
Note: Figure is based upon a Google Earth
aerial Photograph.
I OAKLAND ESTATES SUBDIVISION
HUMMINGBIRD WAY
FORT PIERCE, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BORING LOCATION PLAN
UNIVERSAL
ENGINEERING SCIENCES DRAWN BY: CB DATE May,16; ..2017 CHECKED BY: o)�F DATE: 16 2017
SCALE: REPORT No PAGE No
1" = 200' 0330.1700I)MD000
III
I
- I
� I
AP PE N DIX
A
I
'
i
l �
I
tl
RP
--
I�UNIVERSAL ENG,IIVEERIN.G SCIENCES
-- 0330 1700052.0000
- -- - - -
BORING LOG
'
REPORT NO,
--- -- -
APPENDIX: A
11
ROJECT:
Oakland Estates Subdivision
_
BORING DESIGNATION: B1
SHEET:
1 Of I
Hummingbird Way'
SECTION: TOWNSHIP: SOUTH RANGE:
EAST
Fort Pierce, Florida
LIENT.
G,S„ELEVATION (ft):
DATE STARTED:.
514117
OCATION:
SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN
I WATER TABLE (ft): 4.6
DATE FINISHED:'
6/4117
-
EMARKS:
I
-
DATE OF READING: 518/2017
DRILLED BY:
TM, RP`MC
EST. W.S•W.T. (ft):
TYPE OF SAMPLING:
Jtu
''
BLOWS—'�
m +
-
K
ORG.
w
a-
PER 6"
r
;
,
�,
4.
DESCRIPTION
200
I%)
MC
c (%)
(INl
CONT.,
N
i,INCREMENT
Z
y
0''
l_--
-fine SAND with traces of clay lumps (Fill), brown, [SP]
:fir'
4
4.1 Ii
7.4
I
' '
Ill
�i
.•;�+;'',
;
I.
'
�:•i:
is
-
I
I
{
I
_ 1
Tr
fine SAND with gravel, broken shell, and clay lumps (Fill),
brown, [SP]
2.7
10.6
s}
5-6-12
1S (
t
' __ _. —.- _ _ - - - - _ - --
i
clayey fine SAND with traces of broken Shelf (Fill),- brown; [SC]
i
74.4
11.
I
clayd"fi—d SAND'wlth traces of organics; -dark brown, ]SC] — -'
—
••.•.•.
- ..••..
'BORING TERMINATE T 10 ,— - _ --_
•B TERMINATED '
iI
I
I
j
I I '
UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES PROJECTNO.: 0330.1700052.0000
REPORT NO.:
BORING LOG - - -- _-
' APPENDIX: A
Oakland Estates Subdivision
Hummingbird Way
Fort Pierce, Florida
SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN
BORING DESIGNATION: B2 SHEET: I Of 1
SECTION: TOWNSHIP: SOUTH RANGE: EAST
G.S. ELEVATION (ft):
DATE STARTED:, 514117
WATER TABLE (ft): 6.7
DATE FINISHED: 514117
DATE OF READING: 51812017
DRILLED BY: TM, RP, MC
EST. W.S.W.T. (It):
TYPE OF SAMPLING:
BLOWS �
�
F?
� O
� �
zoo
K
ORG.
PER 6'• .I
-�
m
DESCRIPTION
Mc
(INJ
CONT.-
INCREMENT
Z
N
3 3
I%)
(�)
❑
HR.)
(%)
0
fine SAND with traces of clay'lumps-(Filq, brown,'[SP] — — -
3:0
5.0
5-6-16 I'
6"
«i
5 22-26
22'
:�'.•ty
i
fine SAND. gfey, [SPl — — — -
17-R
R`
•r• t
.L7
..:;
fine SAND with silt, dark brown, (hardpan) [SP-SM]
6-6-6
12
clayey fine SAND; brown, [SC]--
6-7-8
15
i
i
6-4-4
8
clayey fine SAND with occasional cemented rock layers, grey,
I
[SC] r
10
357
12
..
- - -_ - — -- -- ----
................
it
BORING TERMINATED AT.10'
" DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUES
R - DENOTES REFUSAL TO PENETRATION WITH DYNAMIC
�
s
f
CONE PENETROMETER.
r
i
I
I
15
�
I
i
J
. _
PROJECT NO;: 0330.1700052.0000
UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SOENCES
REPORT NO.:-
BORING LOG
APPENDIX: A.
Oakland Estates Subdivision
BORING DESIGNATION: B3
SHEET:'
I Of 1
1
Hummingbird Way
SECTION: TOWNSHIP:
SOUTH RANGE:
EAST
Fort Pierce, Florida
G.S.n ELEVATION (ft):
DATE STARTED:
6/4117
SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN
WATER TABLE (ft): 5.3
DATE FINISHED:
514117
DATE OF READING: 51812017
DRILLED BY:
TM, RP, MC
EST, W.SjW.T;;(ft):
TYPE OF SAMPLING:
Wj
SLOWS
0
2
-1 1
-200
MC
' K
ORG.
LU
CI
PER 6
I,
:r
M-
>-
Uj
3HR.)
DESCRIPTION
QNJ
CONT,,
y
INCREMENT
Z
(Y.)
0
fine SAND with silt and traces of clay lumps (Fill), brown,
[SP-SM]
9-23-28
23*
5-18-20 I
18*
•
-bra--h-'[SPI fineSAND, dark w
5-&7
11
4.5
183
fine SANDwithsilt, broWn, [SP-SM]
0
6-7-9
16
-fine SAND -gfrey, [SP]-
5-7-8
15
3.9
19.5
sr
10
7�-4
.......
BORING TERMINATED AT 10'
11 '1�
�
i
,1 1
• DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUES
I
..........
P
UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES- PROJECT NO.: 033°_"°°052.°000
-
p �± /± REPORT NO. __
BORING'LOG. ; APPENDIX: _ A
Oakland Estates Subdivision
Hummingbird Way
Fort Pierce, Florida
SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN
BORING DESIGNATION: B4 SHEET: I Of i
SECTION: TOWNSHIP: SOUTH RANGE: EAST
G.S.. ELEVATION (ft): DATE STARTED:, 514117
WATER TABLE (ft): 6.1 DATE FINISHED: 514117
DATE OF READING: 6/812017 :DRILLED BY: TM, RP, MC
EST. W.S.W.T. (ft): TYPE OF SAMPLING:
a',LL
,BLOWS I"
PERB"
I j '.
a
:.
'
O
m
J � '
w �
DESCRIPTION
•2ao
Mc
-K --
I ([NJ
: ORG. :r
CONT...
o—
.N
.INCREMENT i
', z
w
3 o
h)
(�)
HR.)
0
rt
fine SAND with silt, gravel, broken shelf and clay lumps-
atf
brown, [SP-SM]
3-18-29
18'
1
I,
�
'
-
f,LS
• t
fl
dd
I
F
••�
' _l
I
I' II
I'
111-21-25
21•
3-23-30:
23'
` }
" '
fine SAND with silt, dark brawn; [SP-SM]
.,
8-12-14
14-12-15
27
—::
fine SAND with silt and broken shell, brown, [SP-SM]
j
I
14-16-16 (
32
BORING TERMINATED AT 10'
�
" DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUES J
1
t I
,
ff,
UNIVERSAL'ENGINEERING SCIENCES PROJECT NO.: 0330001700062.0000
BREPORT NO.:
BORING LOG - `
APPENDIX: A
Oakland Estates Subdivision
Hummingbird Way
Fort Pierce, Florida
SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN
BORING DESIGNATION: B5 SHEET: 1 Of I
SECTION: TOWNSHIP: SOUTH RANGE: EAST
G.S. ELEVATION (ft): DATE STARTED:, 514117
WATER TABLE (ft): 4.B DATE FINISHED: 614/17
DATE OF READING: 51812017 DRILLED BY: TM, RP, MC
EST. W.S,W.T. (ft): TYPE OF SAMPLING:
PER s"
¢
~
M
M
DESCRIPTION
zoo
MC
(INJ
CO T.'
INCREMENT
z
}aM)
Go'p
(%)
HR.)
I%)
F71
fine SAND with traces of gravel, broken shell, and clay lumps
-
--
- "
•`." <
(Fill),, brown, [SP]
7i
3:4
2.4
2-R
R'
;t+tca
. i5;...
.
10-154
46,
<: •'
_ -
20-20-18
38
•'
find -SAND with silt and traces of broken shell, gray, [SP-SM]
F
10-9-6
15
BORING TERMINATED AT,TO'
"DYNAMICCONE PENETRQMETERi(DCP) VALUES
R=DENOTES.REFUSAL•TO PENETRATION WITH DYNAMIC
;
4
I
�CONE:PENETRpINETER.. -•
I
A
�I
,
I
'
I
ll
i
t
I
PROJECT NO.: 0330.1700052.0000-
UNIVERSAL- ENGINEERING SCIENCES 00 -
BORING LOG REPORT NO;;' — — --
\7 �
APPENDIX: A
"'PROJECT-. Oakland Estates Subdivision BORING DESIGNATION: B6 SHEET: I Of 1
Hummingbird Way SECTION: TOWNSHIP: SOUTH RANGE: EAST
Fort Pierce, Florida
l
LIENT: G:S. ELEVATION (it): DATE STARTED: 614117
LOCATION: SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN WATER TABLE (R): 4.3 DATE FINISHED: 514117
EMARKS: 'DATE OF READING -518/2017• DRILLED BY: TM, RP, MC
EST. W:S:W.T. ft : TYPE OF SAMPLING:
I�" a
L�
f
BLOWS
PER 6"
j
a
~
O
� ;
DESCRIPTION
.2°°
.Inc
K -
',
ORG.
a
>
3
2
Lu
3 a
(%)
VN
(INJ
CONT.w.
c
I
INCREMENT
z
}
w
-
HR.)
l%)
II.
71
fine SAND with slit and traces of cla -Iti s Fill brown,--
[SP-SM]
I
i
:tit
r
I
I1
R
R*
i
17-20-25
20*
:"••
X.
i
i
t-
•���;:
Y1
. _ .. - - ---- - -- -- --
'fine SAND-- re - SP — --
.s y.[ 1
I
5 19 21
19*
};
1
1
I
fi..
Ih
"
I
clayey fine SAND, grey, [SC]
II
�.
"-6
14
6-6-6
12
I
10 - —
BORING TERMINATED AT 10'
* DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUES
R - DENOTES REFUSAL TO PENETRATION WITH DYNAMIC
CONE PENETROMETER.
I
PROJECTNO.: _0330.1700052.00600
UNIVERSAL.ENGpIN'�E±ERING SCIENCES -- -
BORING LOG REPO RTNO.;
APPENDIX: A
Oakland Estates Subdivision
Hummingbird Way
Fort Pierce, Florida ,
SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN
BORING DESIGNATION: BST SHEET: I Of I
SECTION: TOWNSHIP: SOUTH RANGE: EAST
G.S. ELEVATION (it): DATE STARTED: 514117
WATER TABLE (ft): 5.7 DATE FINISHED: 514/17
DATE OF READING: . 5/812017 ' . DRILLED BY: TM, RP, MC
EST. W;S:W;T. (ft): TYPE OF SAMPLING:
~
w
zao ,I
MC
w!IL'
PER6"
a
3
i
3 a
DESCRIPTION
h)
(�}
(IN./
ONT,;
c
y
.INCREMENT
Z
h
a
HR.)
( A)
--fine SAND with siltand clay lumps (Fill), brown, [SP-SM]
••j
21-R
R'
fine SAND; grey, [SP] -------� - —
10-24-26
24" �
14-R
R"
,
{ •'
.7-7-7
14e
J
' clayey fine SAND, grey, [SC]
3-5-6
t
11
4
I
• ii
i
5-5-5
i
10
!
i
i
10
I
'
BORING TERMINATED AT 10'
i
"DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUES
{
R - DENOTES REFUSAL TO PENETRATION WITH DYNAMIC
I
r•
CONE PENETROMETER.
,
I
u
d
•
I
I
0
Lu
Lu
0
0
z
50
U)
70
100
KEY TOIBOIR NG (LOGS
SOIL CLASSIFICATION. CHART`
Sand or Gravel [SP,SW,GP,GW]
Sand or Gravel with Slit
orClay (SP-SM I S , P-SC]
Siq or CWW'SaInd
or ravel[qM,M,GC]
Sandy or Pidijbily 3iyy
[ML,CL-ML,'%W,CH,q
E-4, L
'Slit
or a [ML�qLF4'Vlr,'CL,MH,CH,OL,OH]
...........
so
50
40
30
20
IL
UN- I l . - tvtR
ENGINEERING
SCIENCES, INC.
uD
1,0--2'--- 0'----3,0 4-0 609-0-10-0
LIQUID LIMIT
PLASTICITY CHART
GROUP NAME AND SYMBOL
COARSE GRAINED SOILS
FINE GRAINED SOILS
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
WELL -GRADED
[SW]
•
WELL -GRADED
GRAVELS [GWI
INORGANIC SILTS
SLIGHTPLASTICITYSANDS
IML]
ORGANIC SILTSICLAYS
LOW PLASTICITY 101-1-
.R
POORLY -GRADED
SANDS ISPI
POORLY -GRADED
GRAVELS [GPI
INORGANIC SILTY CLAY
LOW PLASTICITY
�jn
ORGANIC SILTSICLAYS
MEDIUM TO HIGH
[CL-ML]
PLASTICITY IOHr-
POORLY-GRADED
SANDS WITH LT
POORLY -GRADED
GRAVELS WITH SILT
INORGANIC CLAYS
LOW TO MEDIUM
PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SO] I LS
WITH HIGH ORGANIC
ISP-SMI
p i
[GP GM]
PLASTICITY [CL]
CONTENTS [PT]**
jLrt
POORLY -GRADED
SANDS WITH CLAY
ESP-SCI
POORLY -GRADED
GRAVELS WITH CLAY
IGP-GC]
INORGANIC SILTS HIGH
PLASTICIrYjMHj
IV,
SILTY SANDS
ISM]
SILTYGF(AVELS
[GM]
f
INORGANIC CLAYS HIGH
PLASTICITY [CH]
RELATIVE DENSITY
(SAND AND GRAVEL)
VERY LOOSE - 0 to 4 Blows/ft.
CLAYEY SANDS
CLAYEY GRAVELS
LOOSE - 5 to 10 Blowsift.
MEDIUM DENSE - 11 to 30 Blowsift.
DENSE - 31 to 50 Blownift
[SC]
IGCI
VERY
DENSE - more than 50 Blows[ft.
IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 2487 - UNIFIED SOIL
SILTY CLAYEY SANDS CONSISTENCY
4. ! CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM.
[SC-SM] (SILT AND CLAY) 1.
LOCALLY MAYBE KNOWN AS MUCK.
VERY SOFT- 0 to 2 Blowalft.
SOFT - 3 to 4 Blowalft.
FIRM - 5 to 8 Blowsift.
NOTES: STIFF - 9 to IS Blowsift.1
3* - DENOTES DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUE VERY STIFF 17to30Blows1rL
R - DENOTES REFUSAL TO PENETRATION HARD - more than 3D Blowsift.
P - DENOTES PENETRATION WITH ONLY WEIGHT OF DRIVE HAMMER
NIE - DENOTES GROUNDWATER TABLE NOT ENCOUNTERED .
NOTE: -'DUAIL-�. LSzARE USEDJO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOILCLASSIFICATIONSAPPENDIXA.1
EXHIBIT 1
G�otcchnical-Fn�ioe�ring
The Geoprofessional Business Association:(GBA).
'assumedly
Typical changes that could erode the reliability of this report include
has prepared this advisory to help — elp you
those that affect*
a clienfrepresentative — interpret and apply this
the sites size or shape;
geotachnical-engineering report as"effectively
the function of the proposed structure, as when its
.Is possible. 16 that way; 'clients can benefit from
changed from a parking garage to an office building, or
a lowered -exposure to the " subsurface pr'o'6(6ms
from a light -industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse,
the elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or
that, for decades, have been ' a Or1ricipakicaiAe of
weight of the proposed structure;
construction.delays, cost overruns, claims, and:
the composition of the design team; or
disputes. If you have questions or want more
project ownership.
information about any. of the issues discussed below;
I
contact your GBA-member geotechnical engineer.
. .
I
As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project
Active,involv"ement In the Geoprofessional Business
changes - even minor ones - and request an assessment of their
Association exposes geotechnical engineers to; a
impact. The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot accept
wide array of risk -confrontation techniques I that can
responsibility or liability for problems that arise'because thegeotechnical
be of genuine benefit for everyone inVolved. With a
v
engineer was not informed about developments the -eng engineer otherwise
op
construction project
would have considered.
G t hnical-Enginearing Services.Are:'Performed for
This Report May Not Be Reliable
Do not rely on this report if your geotechnical engineer prepared it:
le 06ific Purposes, Persons, and Projects
Specific
. for a different client;
G60 technical engineers structure their services to meet the specific
. for a different project; - i
needs of their clients. A geotechnical-engineering study conducted
. for a different site (that may or may not include all or a
for given civil engineer will not likely meet the needs of a civil-
0
portion of the original site); or
w.1constructor or even a different civil engineer. Because each
. before important events occurred at the site or adjacent
geotechnical-engineering study is unique, each geotechnical-
to it; e.g., man-made events like construction or
engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. Those who
environmental remediation, or natural events like floods,
rely on a geotechhical-engineerfng report prepared for a different client
droughts, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations.
can be seriously misled. No one except authorized client representatives
i should rely on this geotechnical-engineering report without first
Note, too, that it could be unwise to rely on a geotechnical- I engineering
conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one
report whose reliability may have been affected by the passage of time,
7 not even you - should apply this report for any purpose or project except
the one originally 'contemplated.
because of factors like changed subsurface conditions; new or modified
codes, standards, or regulations; or'new techniques or tools. if your
geotechnical engineer has not indicated an apply -by" date on the report,
Read this Report In Full.
ask what it should be, and, in general, if you are the least bit uncertain
Costly problems have occurred' those relying on a-geotechnical-
about the continued reliability of this report, contact your geotechnical
-engineering report did not read it in its entirety. Do not rely an an
engineer before applying it. A minor• amount of additional testing or
executive summary. Do not read.selected- elements only. Read this report
analysis - if any is required at all - could prevent major problems.
M66t of the "Findings" Related in This Report'Are
You Need to Inform Your GeotechnIcal Engineer
Professional Opini'ons
Change
about'gin',
Before construction begins; - geotechnical engineers explore a s es
,
Your geotechnical engineer considered unique, project -specific factors
subsurface through various sampling and testing procedures.
when designing the study behind this report and developing the -
Geotechnical engineers can observe actual subsurface conditions only at
confirmation -dependent recommendations the report conveys. A few
those specific locations where sampling and testing were performed. The
typical factors include;
data derived from that sampling and testing were reviewed by your,
• the client's goals, objectives, budget, schedule, and
geotechnical engineer, who then applied professional judgment to
1 risk -management preferences;
'nature
form opinions about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual
• the general of the structure involved, its size,
sitcwide-subsurface conditions may differ - maybe significantly - from
configuration, and performance criteria;
those indicated in this report. Confront that risk by retaining your)
• the structures location and orientation on the site, and
geotechnical engineer to serve on the design team from project start to
• other planned or existing site improvements, such as
project finish, so the individual can provide informed guidance quickly,
retai fiffig"valls, access roads, parking lots, and j
"-"6und
whenevef needed.
un"' utilities.
I C.I. f9ro
Q_
0
This Report's Recommendations Are
Confirmation -Dependent
The recommendations included in this report — including any options
or alternatives — are confirmation -dependent. In other words, they are
not final, because the geotechnical engineer who developed them relied
heavily on judgment and opinion to do so, Your geotechnical engineer
can finalize the recommendations only after observing actual subsurface
conditions revealed during construction. If through observation your
geotechnical engineer confirms that the conditions assumed to exist
actually.do exist, the recommendations can be relied upon, assuming
no other changes have occurred, The geotechnical engineer who prepared
this report cannot assume responsibility or liability for confirmation -
dependent recommendations if you fail to retain that engineer to perform
construction observation.
This Report Could Be Misinterpreted
Other design professionals' misinterpretation of geotechnical-
engineering reports has resulted in costly problems. Confront that risk
by having your geotechnical engineer serve as a full-time member of the
design team, to:
• confer with other design -team members,
• help develop specifications,
• review pertinent elements of other design professionals
plans and specifications, and
• be on hand quickly whenever geotechnical-engineering
guidance is needed.
You should also confront the risk of constructors misinterpreting this
report. Do so by retaining your geotechnical engineer to participate in
prebid and preconstruction conferences and to perform construction
observation. -
Give Constructors _a Complete Report and Guidance
Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can shift
unanticipated -subsurface -conditions liability to constructors by limiting
the information they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent
the costly, contentious problems this practice has caused, include the
complete geotechnical-engineering report, along with any attachments
or appendices, with your contract documents, but be certain to note
conspicuously that you've included the material for informational
purposes only. To avoid misunderstanding, you may also want to note
that "informational purposes" means constructors have no right to rely
on the interpretations, opinions, conclusions, or recommendations in
the report, but they may rely on the factual data relative to the specific
times, locations, and depths/elevations referenced. Be certain that
constructors know they may learn about specific project requirements;
including options selected from the report, only from the design
drawings and specifications. Rcmind constructors that they may
perform their own studies if they want to, and be sure to allow enough
time to permit them to do so. Only then might you be in a position
to give constructors the information available to you, while requiring
them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming
from unanticipated conditions. Conducting prebid and preconstruction
conferences can also be valuable in this respect.
Read Responsibility Provisions Closely
Some client representatives, design professionals, and constructors do
not realize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other
engineering disciplines. That lack of understanding has nurtured
unrealistic expectations that have resulted in disappointments, delays,
cost overruns, claims, and disputes. To confront that risk; geotechnical
engineers commonly include explanatory provisions in their reports.
Sometimes labeled "limitations;' many of these provisions indicate
where geotechnical engineers' responsibilities begin and end, to help
others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Read these
provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should
respond fully and frankly.
Geoenvironiiiental Concerns Are Not Covered
The personnel, equipment, and techniques used to perform an
environmental study - e.g., a "phase -one' or "phase -two" environmental
site assessment — differ significantly from those used to perform
a geotechnical-engineering study. For that reason, a geotechnical-
engineering report does not usually relate any environmental findings,
conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of
encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants.
Unanticipated subsurface environmental problems have Jed to project
failures. If you have not yet obtained your own environmental
information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk -management
guidance. As a general rule, do not rely on an environmental report
prepared far a different client, site, or project, or that is more than six
months old.
Obtain Professional Assistance to Deal with Moisture
Infiltration and Mold
While your geotechnical engineer may have addressed groundwater,
water infiltration, or similar issues in this report, none of the engineer's
services were designed, conducted, or intended to prevent. uncontrolled
migration of moisture — including water vapor — from the soil through
building slabs and walls and into the building interior, where it can
cause mold growth and material -performance deficiencies. Accordingly,
proper implementation of the geotechnical engineer's recommendations
will not of itself be sufficient to prevent moisture infiltration. Confront
the risk of moisture infiltration by including building -envelope or mold
specialists on the design team. Geotechnical engineers are not building -
envelope or mold specialists.
GEOPROFESSIONAL
BUSINESS
� at -W ASSOCIATION
Telephone: 301 /565-273 3
e-mail: info@geoprofessional.org www.geoprofessional.org
Copyright 2016 by Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA). Duplication, reproduction, or copying of this document, in whole or in part, by any means whatsoever, is strictly
prohibited, except with GBAs specific written permission. Excerpting, quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission
of GBA, and only for purposes of scholarly research or book review. Only members of GBA may use this document or its wording as a complement to or as an element of a report of any
kind, Any other firm, individual, or other entity that so uses this document without being a GBA member could be committing negligent