The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutEXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2W U March 31, 2016 Mr. Carlos Barrios, P.E. Stephens Barrios 605 Delaney Ave. Suite - C Orlando, FL. 32801 -�C BLUE MARLIN ENGINEERING A minority business enterprise BY St. Lucie County Re: Geotechnical Exploration Rg5gfkNIVtU Family Dollar Fort Pierce BY 3214 Avenue D ;t. Lucie County Fort Pierce, FL 34947 BME Project No. 16-020 Dear Mr. Barrios: INN [ECEOVe MAY - 8 RCO 7` /7o/-o324 Blue Marlin Engineering (BME) submits this Report in fulfillment of the scope of services described in our proposal dated March 1, 2016. You authorized us to proceed with our work on this project by returning our signed proposal. This Report describes our understanding of the project and presents our evaluations. We have provided geotechnical engineering recommendations for general site preparation, design of the building foundations, pavements and stormwater ponds. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY For this Report, the conditions at this site were explored using 11 standard penetration test (SPT) borings. Based on the furnished site survey the existing site grades where our borings were performed are on the order of +20 to +22 feet NAVD. Groundwater levels were encountered in the borings at an average depth of 7 feet below the existing ground surface (corresponding elevation on the order of+14 to +16 NAVD). The following generalized subsurface conditions were encountered: Laver 1: A 5 -foot layer of fine to slightly silty Sand (SP, SP-SMI Laver 2: A 10(+) - foot layer of slightly silty to silty Sand (SP-SM, SM) Following the recommendations provided in this Report, it appears that the proposed development is viable at:this site. The engineering evaluations performed for this project indicate the following: www.BlueMarlinEngincering.com Blue Marlin Engineering, LLC • 102 Drennen Road, Suite B-10 • Orlando, F132806 Phone: 407-2174464 " Fax: (321) 710-2483 U Mr. Carlos Barrios, P.E. Stephens Barrios March 31, 2016 Page 2 • Shallow foundations can be used to transfer (future) building loads. • Shallow foundations should be constructed to bear 18 inches below exterior finished grade. • Shallow foundations can utilize an allowable bearing pressure of 2.5 ksf. • Ground floor slabs can be constructed as slab -on -grade following site preparation. • Stabilizing material will be necessary for the construction of pavement subgrades. • Wet bottom stormwater ponds appear appropriate at the site. PROJECT INFORMATION We understand that you are planning a new Family Dollar Store located at 3214 Avenue D in Ft. Pierce, Florida. Appended drawing A-1 shows a Vicinity Map of the subject site. The new single -story Family Dollar building will have a square footage of 8,247. The new construction will also feature new pavement areas and a stormwater pond: We have assumed the maximum loads are assumed to be on the order of 100 kips for columns, 4 kips per lineal feet for walls, and 250 psf for floors. PURPOSE The purpose of our services on this project was to explore the shallow subsurface conditions at the site and to use the information obtained to provide geotechnical engineering recommendations for the site preparation and design of the building foundations, pavements, and stormwater ponds. NRCS SOIL SURVEY REVIEW The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey for St. Lucie County, Florida was reviewed to obtain near surface soils and groundwater information at the subject site. The Soil Survey indicates that this property is located in Section 8, Township 35 South, and Range 40 East. Where the project site falls, the site is predominantly covered with Tantile and Pomona sands (44) and Ankona and Farmton sands (2). A soil survey map is shown on appended drawing A-2 and summarized in Table 1 below. EBL` UE MAALiN NGINEERING 09 March 31, 2016 Page 3 Mr. Carlos Barrios, P.E. Stephens Barrios Table 1 NRCS Soil Survey Tantile and 0-26 Sand, find sand SP, SP-SM 44 Ponoma 26-49 Sand, fine sand, loamy sand SP-SM, SM 0 1.0 sands 49-80 _ Fine sandy loam, sandy clay loam SM, SM-SC 0-38 Sand SP, SP-SM Ankona and 38-48 Sand, fine sand, loamy sand SM, SP-SM 2 Farmton 48-57 Sandy loam, sandy clay loam - sM-SC, SC 0— 1.0 Sands 57-80 Sand, fine sand, loamy fine sand SP-SM, SM The soil units listed above are generally classified as sands with varying amounts of silt and some clay (SP, SP-SM, SM, SM-SC, SC). The soils are generally appropriate for support of the proposed construction. The, NRCS predicts seasonal high groundwater levels within the site limits to be within 0 to 1 foot below existing site grades. Our field exploration program revealed groundwater conditions similar to those predicted by the NRCS (discussion in the Subsurface Conditions section of this report). Please note information contained in the NRCS Soil Survey is very general. It may not, therefore, be reflective'of actual soil and groundwater conditions. The information obtained from the soil borings provides a better characterization of actual site subsurface conditions. FIELD TESTS The subsurface conditions were explored with a total of 11 soil borings. Borings were completed within the proposed development area. The approximate test locations are shown in the appended Drawing No. 3. The SPT borings were advanced to depths of 15 to 20 feet below existing site grades. The standard penetration test was used as the investigative tool within these borings. ' Penetration tests were performed in substantial accordance with ASTM Procedure D 1586, "Penetration Test and Split -Barrel Sampling of Soils." This test procedure drives a 1.4-inch I.D. split -tube sampler into the soil profile using a 140-pound hammer falling'30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the second and third 6-inch increments is the soil N-value, in blows per foot, and is an indication of soil strength. The soil samples recovered from the soil borings were classified and stratified by a geotechnical engineer. I B` LUE MARLIN ENGINEERING I 7W Mr. Carlos Barrios, P.E. Stephens Barrios March 31, 2016 Page 4 The results of the classification and stratification for each boring are shown in the appended Records of Test Boring. It should be noted that soil conditions may vary between the strata interfaces which are shown. The soil boring data reflects information from a specific test location only. SUBSURFACE CONDMONS Subsurface Profile - In general, the borings disclosed reasonably consistent subsurface conditions across the site. The borings performed at this site revealed a subsurface profile that consisted of a series of fine sands with varying amounts of silt through boring termination depths. Standard Penetration Testing (SPT) indicates that the relative density of the soils to be loose to medium dense with depth. Our soil classification is based on the material encountered in widely spaced borings. Soils encountered during the construction process may vary significant across the site and from what is shown in our soil borings. If different subsurface conditions are encountered at the time of construction, BME should be contacted immediately to evaluate the conditions encountered. Groundwater - The groundwater table depth was monitored during drilling operations. However, once the use of driller's mud was introduced, accurate readings can be difficult to obtain. Groundwater levels were encountered in the borings at an average depth of 7 feet below the existing ground surface (corresponding elevation on the order of +14 to +16 NAVD). We estimated seasonal high groundwater tables to be 3 to 4 feet higher than what we encountered in the soil borings (+17 to +20 ft NAVD). This is consistent to what the NRCS predicts seasonal high groundwater levels to be, 0 to 1 foot below the existing site grades. The seasonal high groundwater level is affected by a number of factors. Such as the drainage characteristics of the soils, the land surface elevations, relief points, and distance to relief points. Groundwater levels will vary as a result of seasonal and storm events and with changes in subsurface conditions between boring locations. It is possible for groundwater levels to be higher or lower than the levels being reported. In order to better define the groundwater conditions at this site, longer term monitoring in cased holes or piezometers would be required. EB` LUE h1ARLIN NGINEERING U Mr. Carlos Barrios, P.E. March 31, 2016 Stephens Barrios Page 5 LABORATORY TESTS In order to aid us in the soil classification process, selected samples retrieved from the borings were tested for moisture content and fines content. Additionally, bulk samples were collected in the field for the purpose of permeability testing. Permeability Testing:- The ability of water to flow through a soil is referred to as the soil's permeability. Constant head permeability tests were performed on selected bulk samples. The samples were chosen from the area where the stormwater pond is planned. In a constant head test, water is generally allowed to flow into the soil sample until the sample is apparently saturated. Once saturated, the water flow is measured. The samples were chosen from the area where the stormwater pond is planned. The hydraulic conductivity of the soil, or coefficient of permeability (K), was calculated for the corresponding test. Specifically, the vertical permeability (K) of the soil was calculated and reported herein. For design purposes, the coefficient of horizontal permeability (Kh) is usually taken as 1.5 to 2 times greater than the vertical rate (K ). The results of the permeability testing are summarized in Table 2. Table 2 Permeability Laboratory Data Results Within the depth of our exploration, we did not encounter a confining soil layer. I recommend you consider the depth of 15 feet as the confining layer for the stormwater system design. I also recommend you use a Tillable porosity (n) of 25 percent. Average Ground Surface: +21 ft., NAVD Average Depth to GroundawaterTable: +14 ft., NAVD Estimated Seasonal High GWT: +17 ft., NAVD ZBB NGINEERING LJ v Mr. Carlos Barrios, P.E. Stephens Barrios EVALUATION March 31, 2016 Page 6 Discussion - A foundation must meet three requirements for successful design and construction: bearing capacity, settlement, and environmental factors. Shallow foundations are initially considered because of their relative economy. If shallow foundations do not meet allowable design requirements for bearing capacity, settlement and environmental factors, then deep foundations (piles, shafts, etc.) or soil improvement are considered. The soil bearing capacity is the ability of a soil 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. Shallow foundations are designed so that columns do not plunge into the soil profile. Analytical techniques for soil bearing capacity estimation generally apply to sands, clays and silts. In a cemented deposit or rock formation, bearing capacity is evaluated using techniques such as factor of safety against punching shear failure, factor of safety against beam tension failure, and factor of safety against crushing. Foundation allowable bearing pressures and bearing elevations must be adjusted so as to provide margins of safety against bearing capacity failure. Another requirement of a shallow foundation is the ability of the structure to tolerate the predicted settlement. The following parameters are necessary in order to estimate settlement: footprint bearing pressure, stress reduction factor, thickness of each compressible underlying stratum, modulus of each stratum, and foundation dimensions. The allowable 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 structural 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 final requirement of a shallow foundation is to resist environmental factors such as soil freezing, soil swelling, hurricane scour, sinkholes, or long term degradation. Summary - It is our professional opinion that shallow foundations bearing on compacted insitu sands and/or compacted fill can be used to support the planned development for this site. If site preparation is properly performed as recommended in this Report, shallow foundations can be designed to use an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2.5 ksf. Shallow foundations 'supported on properly compacted insitu soils or engineered fill soils should result in total settlements of about 1 inch for column loads up to 300 kips and continuous footings loaded up to 8 kips per lineal foot.Differential settlements will be a result of changes in applied load and TBGINEERING v Mr. Carlos Barrios, P.E. Stephens Barrios March 31, 2016 Page 7 the variations in subsurface conditions. We estimate that differential settlement will be about one-half the total settlement and occur over a distance of 30 feet. Since the materials encountered in our study are granular in nature, we expect settlements to occur coincidental with the application of structural dead load. RECOMMENDATIONS The recommendations provided below are based on the project information described in this Report, field test data, our evaluation as stated in this Report, and our past experience with foundation engineering in Florida. If project information or design concepts change, we should be advised of these changes in writing, and should be provided with an opportunity to review our recommendations as presented in this Report. Geotedmical Site Preparation 1. Geotechnical site preparation should consist of stripping all surficial vegetation, stumps, debris, organic topsoil, and any other deleterious materials from beneath the proposed development extending a minimum lateral distance of 5 feet outside the limits. _ 2. After stripping, the site should be grubbed or root -raked such that roots with a diameter greater than Y2 inch, stumps, or small roots in a dense state, are completely removed. Based on current ground cover, significant root concentrations are not expected to occur throughout the majority of site. The actual depth(s) of stripping and grubbing must be determined by visual observation and judgment during the earthwork operation by engineering personnel. _ 3. Prior to the placement of any new fill soils, the exposed subgrade soils should be proofrolled. The purposes of the proofrolling will be to detect unstable soils that yield when subjected to compaction and to density the near surface sands. Fill compaction/proofrolling recommendations are given below. Fill soils should be placed with loose lift thicknesses of not more than 12 inches. Remove material that yield excessively during proofrolling and replace with fill selected and compacted as described in this Report. 4. Fill soils should consist of inorganic, non -plastic sand having less than 10% material by weight passing the no. 200 sieve. The moisture content of the fill soils should be within 2% of the optimum moisture content based on ASTM D 1557. All fill materials should be free of construction debris and organic materials such as roots and vegetation. 5. Fill compaction and proofrolling efforts should be implemented with a compactor with a minimum static at -drum weight of 10 tons. The areas of the site that will support proposed construction should be proofrolled with several overlapping coverages of a B�N ENGINEERING LJ March 31, 2016 Page 8 Mr. Carlos Barrios, P.E.. Stephens Barrios heavy compactor. We recommend a minimum of 10 overlapping passes in each of two perpendicular directions. Vibratory compaction is not recommended near existing structures. 6. Following the proofrolling of the exposed subgrade soils, a density equivalent of at least 95% of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557) should be achieved. Proofrolled areas should be compacted to a depth of at least 12 inches below the surface. Density tests should be performed on the compacted proofrolled soils. One in -place density test should be performed for each 2,500 square feet of proofrolled soils. Once the subgrade compaction efforts are verified by testing, fill may be needed to raise site grades. Representative samples of the fill soils should be collected for classification and compaction testing. The maximum dry density as indicated by ASTM D 1557, optimum moisture content, and percent by weight passing a no. 200 sieve should be determined. These tests are needed for quality control of the compacted soils 8. All structural fill should be placed in loose lift thicknesses of not more than 12 inches. Each lift should be compacted to at least 95% of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557). The filling and compaction operations should continue in 12 inch lifts until the desired elevation is achieved. Density tests should be performed on the compacted fill soils. One test should be performed for each 12 inch lift and 2,500 square feet of fill soils. 9. The Geotechnical Engineer should be involved during all earthwork activities to verify that procedures and results are as specified and as anticipated. Shallow Foundations 1. Shallow foundations can be used for support of the proposed building construction. Shallow foundation construction should start upon completion of all geotechnicaI site preparation and fill placement activities. 2. Shallow foundations should be designed using an average soil bearing pressure of 2.5 ksf. 3. Shallow foundations should be constructed as deep as possible. Shallow foundations should be designed with a minimum•depth of embedment (below adjacent finished grade) of 18 inches. 4. In order to prevent localized shear failure of the bearing soils, isolated and continuous footings should have minimum footing widths of 24 and 18 inches, respectively. EBL` UE MARLIN NGINEERING U Mr. Carlos Barrios, P.E. Stephens Barrios March 31, 2016 Page 9 5. Excavate the foundations to the proposed bottom of footing elevations and verify the in -place compaction for a depth of 2 feet below the footing bottoms. Loosened bearing soils should be re -compacted prior to placement of reinforcing steel. Compact the soils at the bottom of the excavations to at least 95% of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D-1557) for a depth of 2 feet below the bottom of the footings. Foundation excavation bottoms should be level or suitably benched, and free of any loose soils that have been disturbed by seepage or the construction process. 6. We recommend a test location at each isolated footing and for every 100 feet of continuous footing. Shallow foundation construction should occur in the dry. 7. Foundation excavations should be cut to final grade and footings constructed as soon as possible to minimize potential damage to bearing soils as result of exposure to the environment. 8. Compact fill placed in utility trenches to the specifications stated above, except that within paved areas, the compaction requirement should be 98% of a modified proctor. However, in restricted working areas, where use of a large roller is not feasible, compact fill with lightweight, hand -guided compaction equipment and limit lift thickness to a maximum of 6 inches. 9. The Geotechnical Engineer, who is familiar with the foundation design and construction assumptions as well as the intent of the geotechnical recommendations, should observe the excavations for all shallow foundations and be involved with the field geotechnical observations during construction. Pavement Subgrade Preparation 1. Prepare pavement areas in accordance with the specifications stated above. 2. Stabilizing material will likely be necessary for the construction of asphalt pavement subgrades. Stabilization of subgrade soils beneath concrete pavements (if any) is generally not required. 3. A minimum separation of 12 inches between the bottom of the pavement subgrade or concrete pavement and the anticipated seasonal high groundwater table should be maintained at all times. 4. Compact 12 inch subgrade beneath the base to a minimum of 98% of ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. A minimum frequency of one in -place density test for each 5,000 square feet of area should be used. B�N nNGINEERING U Mr. Carlos Barrios, P.E. March 31, 2016 Stephens Barrios Page 10 5. We recommend the following minimum pavement sections. Heavy -Duty Asphalt Section (Parking Areas / Entrance Drives / Through Lanes) • 2 inches Type S-1 Asphalt • 10 inches Limerock Base Course (LBR = 100) • 12 inches of well -draining stabilized subgrade (LBR = 40). • Stabilization to consist of coarse admixtures such as limerock screenings, recycled concrete or crushed shells. Heave -Duty Concrete Section (Loading Areas) • 6 inch concrete pavement (with a 28 day compressive strength of 4,000 psi) • Subgrade beneath concrete pavement should be well -draining fine sand/and or fine sand with silt. • Subgrade should be compacted to a minimum 98%of the soil's modified Proctor to a depth of at least 24 inches. • Expansion joints should be placed at normal spacing for the recommended thickness of concrete. Joints should be orientated to provide a square pattern. 6. The project Civil Engineer should provide pavement design based on the appropriate design criteria and the soil and groundwater conditions noted in this Report. Ground Floor Slab, 1. Slab -on -grade construction may be used for this project following the recommended geotechnical site preparation. Slab -on -grade construction should occur in the dry. 2. Construction joints should be provided at column and wall interfaces, and throughout the slab, to minimize the potential for cracking at these locations. 3. Compact the subgrade beneath the slab to a minimum of 95% of ASTIVI D-1557 maximum dry density for a depth of 12 inches. In -place density testing should be performed at an interval of one test per 2,500 square feet of slab as previously recommended in this Report. Temporary Excavations 1. Contractor should be aware that slope height, slope inclination, and excavations depths (including utility trench excavations) should not exceed those specified in local, state, or federal safety regulations (OSHA Health and Safety Standards for Excavations, 29 CRF --Part 1926). B�N ENGINEERING U Mr. Carlos Barrios, P.E. March 31, 2016 Stephens Barrios Page 11 2. If any excavation is extended to a depth of more than 20 feet, OSHA requires that the side slopes of such excavation be designed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Florida. REPORT LIMITATIONS - This consulting Report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the project design team and the owner(s) of this site for the specific application to this project. This Report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted local geotechnical engineering practices; no other warranty is expressed or implied. 01101-- �BEN NGINEEBING I � U Mr. Carlos Barrios, P.E. March 31, 2016 Stephens Barrios Page 12 CLOSURE If you have questions about information contained in this Report, please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, BLUE MARLIN ENGINEERING Certificate W911AW49ation Number 29218 Attachments: Drawing No. 1-Topographic Map (A-1) Drawing No. 2 - USDA Soil Survey (A-2) Drawing No. 3-Test Location Plan (A-3) Drawing No. 4—Generalized Subsurface Profile (A-4) Notes Related to Profile and Borings (A-5) Key to Symbols (A-6) Records of Test Boring (A-7 to A-17) Distribution: 3 Original Copies to Addressee via US Mail. Copy to BME Files BLB INGiNEERING �j U .N' r- ram1-7 :e",..,��,•.,._�� Section: 8 Township: 35 South Range: 40 East DWG TITLE: Vicinity Map DWNBY: A165 Geotechnical PROJ NAME: CKD BY: Engineering & Family Dollar Ft. Pierce 09 p tlEN MARLIN onstmcuon tens NEERIN Testing PROJ. NO: y6-020 DATE: 3/26/16 DWG NO: t APD BY Rom'. - -' , �' , Frxa•. " s , xT-•. F J v i v Yi D izti 5 6 . . . . . ij:it 7 . . . . . . 4 :Vv. INt v :M 6 w . . . . . w t% 5 14 16 13 w w 5 w 9 AV refit. XIIE w 10 w w 1xv 14 14 . . . : : ; w 14 12 I v w w w r w p p . .. : : w : : : lift. i it 14:p JxC 16 18 15 V. 14 w 0— U i IZU ix . . . . . w Eqf f . . . . . . . . . . EM C . . . . . It f, r p t 1 133 M iXff . . a 6K rZI, . . . flit 'sii --�E(M p p LNFJ. Iii17 UI Ff LAIC iici IM 9 w q iiet 13 a qff 12 t i 15 -N I C Strata symbols xn ixir Fine Sand (SP) Silty Sand (SM) rx(v : U , JJ 23 xtr 20— .iisiFine to Slightly Silty Sand (SP-SM) 0 ITLE'. Generalized Subsurface Profile 0 BLUE MARLIN ft i.eedne& Rnstnictio. PROJNAME: Family Dollar - Ft. Pierce CKD BY: (v1q 91 ,41 NEMN( Materials PROJ. NO: 16-020 DATE: 3127116 1 DWG NO: 4 APO BY Testing w w w Yilrre w w 6 w 4 13 6 w w w iiiii - mf imf 9 .... 2 1 1 2 ;:itii'rf 9 w w 6 f 17 ...... w w w - Rf (tityzxEf p U CC 1M 17 w . . . 10 w 17 16 .if. 9 16 S-2 li f 18 12 19 w . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 14 isn15 IM1Lli H -10 Strata symbols MR . . . . . A Cc V" Fine Sand (SP) 13 L 13 Silty Sand (SM) 5it ..... ..... 15- -15 Fine to Slightly Silty Sand (SP-SM) -20 20- 25- -25 - DWG TITLE: Generalized Subsurface Prortle DWD I 13Y:A,6,9 wEnlnnitN Engineering & B! PROJ NAME: Family Dollar- Ft. Pierce CKDry: n Materials PRoJ. NO: DATE: AVu y Testing16-020 3127116 1 r �1J W NOTES RELATED TO RECORDS OF TEST BORING AND -- GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE PROFILE BLUE MARLIN ENGINEERING 1. Groundwater level was encountered and recorded (if shown) following the completion of the soil test boring on the date indicated. Fluctuations in groundwater levels are common; consult report text for a discussion. 2. The boring location was identified in the field by offsetting from existing reference marks and using a cloth tape and survey wheel. 3. The borehole was backfilled to site grade following boring completion, and patched with asphalt cold patch mix when pavement was encountered. 4. The Record of Test Boring represents our interpretation of field conditions based on engineering examination of the soil samples. S. The Record of Test Boring is subject to the limitations, conclusions and recommendations presented in the report text. 6. "Field Test Data" shown on the Record of Test Boring indicated as 1116 refers to the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) and means 11 hammer blows drove the sampler 6 inches. SPT uses a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. 7. The N-value from the SPT is the sum of the hammer blows required to drive the sampler the second and third 6-inch increments. 8. The soil/rock strata interfaces shown on the Record of Test Boring are approximate and may vary from those shown. The soil/rock conditions shown on the Record of Test Boring refer to conditions at the specific location tested; soil/rock conditions may vary between test locations. 9. Relative density for sands/gravels and consistency for silts/clays and limestone are described as follows: SPT Blows/ Foot Sands/Gravels Relative Density SPT Blows/ Foot SilUClay Relative Consistency SPT Blows/ Foot Limestone Relative Consistent 0-4 Very loose 0-2 Very Soft 0-20 Very Soft 5-10 Loose 3-4 Soft 21-30 Soft 11-30 Medium Dense 5-8 Firm 31-45 Medium Hard 31-50 Dense 9-15 Stiff 46-60 Moderate/ Hard Over 50 Very Dense . 16-30 e Stiff Very 6150/2" Hard Over 301 Hard lover 5012-1 Very Hard 10. Grain size descriptions are as follows: NAME SIZE LIMITS Boulder 12 inches or more Cobbles 3 to 12 inches Coarse Gravel 314 to 3 inches Fine Gravel No. 4 sieve to 314 inch Coarse Sand No. 10 to No. 4 sieve Medium Sand No. 40 to No. 10 sieve Fine Sand No. 200 to No. 40 sieve Fines Smaller than No. 200 sieve 11. Definitions related to adjectives used in soil/rock descriptions: PROPORTION ADJECTIVE APPROXIMATE ROOT DIAMETER ADJECTIVE About 10% with a trace Less than 1/32" Fine roots About 25% with some 1/32" to 1/4" Small roots About 50% and 1/4" to 1" Medium roots Greater than 1" Large roots U qW Symbol Description Strata symbols Fine Sand (SP) Silty Sand (SM) Fine to Slightly Silty Sand (SP-SM) ruoa: Misc. Symbols Water table during drilling Soil Samplers Standard penetration test. 140 lb. hammer dropped 30" Notes: 1. Exploratory borings were drilled on 3-16-16 using a rotary drill with wash and mud. 2. The groundwater table was measured following drilling completion. 3. Boring locations were taped from existing features and elevations extrapolated from the furnished survey. 4. These logs are subject to the limitations, conclusions, and recommendations in this report.. 5. Results of tests conducted on samples recovered are reported on the logs. DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B-1 PROJECT: Family Dollar - Ft. Pierce PROJECT NO.: J16-020 CLIENT: Stephens Barrios DATE: 3-16-16 LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan ELEVATION: 22' NGVD DRILLER: RD LOGGED BY: BM DRILL RIG: BR 2500 DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL a 7 feet ELEVATION/ DEPTH WELL DETAIL SOIL SYMBOLS, SAMPLERS AND TEST DATA USCS Description NM DD STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DEPTH N CURVE 20 is to 5 0 -5 -10 This 0 .. ... s •rrn•r r to 'EL'iirajJA • �iacn rrrer :�Y i1A Iilrrl raz};}' i Qliy i.,LI 15 20 25 30 35 information pertains only to this ....... SP SM SPSM ................... ..................... Loose, fine, brown Loose Medium dense, gray Loose, silty, dark red -brown Medium dense, slightly silty, brown • Medium dense 5 E 14 10 14 17 10 30 50 boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Figure A-7 PAGE 1 of 1 BLUE MARLIN ENGINEERING DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B-2 PROJECT: Family Dollar- Ft. Pierce PROJECT NO.: J16-020 CLIENT: Stephens Barrios DATE: 3-16-16 LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan ELEVATION: 22' NGVD DRILLER: RD LOGGED BY: BM DRILL RIG: BR 2500 DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL a 8.5 feet ELEVATION/ DEPTH WELL DETAIL SOIL SYMBOLS, SAMPLERS AND TEST DATA USCS Description NM DD STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DEPTH N CURVE zo is to 5 0 -5 -10 This 0 s �i �E: i#Flk: '•rr.ret L%:tzt l — 'FJ.i. JJ:eirJ to f.iit YO:ttf i;FFFI: :ucn.t J.1iiifi rizii i' i fY[t't :tYtJ.i' J4Etf ti. is 20 25 30 35 information pertains only to this .. SP 5 .. ....... SP-SM .......................................... Loose, fine, dark gray ........................... -b-r-o .. Medium dense, silty, dark red -brown ........................................... Medium dense, light brown, slightly silty Medium dense Loose 6 5 11 14 18 9 10 30 50 boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitiw of the site. Figure A-8 PAGE 1 of 1 BLUE MARLIN ENGINEERING U U DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B-3 PROJECT: Family Dollar - Ft. Pierce CLIENT: Stephens Barrios LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan DRILLER: RD DRILL RIG: BR 2500 DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL 8.5 feet ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, SAMPLERS USCS Description DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA 0 ................................................... fL'zEi is SPSM Loose, slightly silty, gray -brown 20 MEW SM Medium dense, silty, dark red -brown Medium dense 5 151 ;i717,t; SPSM Medium dense, slightly silty, red- »ticri, brown 11�fft: Medium dense, light brown 10 10 Medium dense {- 15 s il- 20 a 30 -10 35 PROJECT NO.: J16-020 DATE: 3-16-16 ELEVATION: 21' NGVD LOGGED BY: BM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST NM DO DEPTH N CURVE 10 30 50 7 14 14 14 15 13 This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. U . � DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B-4 PROJECT: Family Dollar - Ft. Pierce CLIENT: Stephens Barrios LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan DRILLER: RD DRILL RIG: BR 2500 DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL 8.0 feet ELEVATIONI WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, SAMPLERS USCs Description DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA 0 .. ............................................ SP Loose, gray, fine 20 Medium dense 1XVJX SPSM Loose, red brown, slightly silty s »titct. ;1 aif 1: 15 Medium dense ':t'rei.i: �axtu �•`ir ii Medium dense to 10 SM Loose, silty, dark brown 15 s 20 0 2s 30 35 PROJECT NO.: J16-020 DATE: 3-16-16 ELEVATION: 2l' NGVD LOGGED BY: BM STANDARD PENETRATION NM DD C U F DEPTH N 10 31 B 16 10 14 14 This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicative of the site. DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B-5 PROJECT: Family Dollar -Ft. Pierce CLIENT: Stephens Barrios LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan DRILLER: RD DRILL RIG: BR 2500 DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL 12 5.0 feet ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, SAMPLERS uses Description DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA . u......... SP ..................................... Very loose, fine, gray 20 SM Medium dense, silty, dark brown, with trace organics s• :ri ; *[U ....... SP-SM ............................................ Loose, slightly silty s ixrr[ Medium dense • x. Medium dense 10 Very loose 15 s 0 Medium dense - � 25 5 30 35 PROJECT NO.: J16-020 DATE: 3-16-16 ELEVATION: 21' NGVD LOGGED BY: BM STANDARD PEN NM DO DEPTH N 4 13 9 12 16 2 23 I This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indiciti" of the site. U U DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B-6 PROJECT: Family Dollar - Ft. Pierce CLIENT: Stephens Barrios LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan DRILLER: RD DRILL RIG: BR 2500 DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL Q 9 feet ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, SAMPLERS USCS Description DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA 0 lirl .................................................... 20 SP Loose, fine, gray, with some organic Loose .......................................... SP SM Medium dense, slightly silty, red- s brown Medium dense Medium dense, light brown 10 Medium dense 20 0 PROJECT NO.: J16-020 DATE: 3-16-16 ELEVATION: 21' NGVD LOGGED BY: BM 13 35 This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. vw DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B-7 PROJECT: Family Dollar - Ft. Pierce CLIENT: Stephens Barrios LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan DRILLER: RD DRILL RIG: BR 2500 DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL a 6 feet ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, SAMPLERS ' USCS Description DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA 0 .. SP ............................................ Loose, fine, gray 20 Medium dense .. .... .. .. BM ............................................ Medium dense, red -brown, silty s 15 = Loose }icft'. SP-SM Medium dense, slightly silty Medium dense - } 25 5 il- 30 -10 35 PROJECT NO.: J16-020 DATE: 3-16-16 ELEVATION: 21' NGVD LOGGED BY: BM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST NM DO DEPTH N CURVE 10 30 50 6 21 17 10 12 13 This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Fiqure A-13 PAGE 1 of 1 BLUE MARLIN ENGINEERII U U DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B-8 PROJECT: Family Dollar - Ft. Pierce CLIENT: Stephens Barrios LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan DRILLER: RD DRILL RIG: BR 2500 DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL a 7.5 feet ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, SAMPLERS uses Description DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA 0 .. ................................................... SP Very loose, fine, dark brown 20 fii<li iSP-SM Medium dense, slightly silty, gay •rr.�rc SM Medium dense, silty, dark red brown 5 is Medium dense Medium dense 10 to 15 s z0 0 z5 -5 30 -10 35 PROJECT NO.: J16-020 DATE: 3-16-16 ELEVATION: 21' NGVD LOGGED BY: BM NM DD DEPTH N 4 12 14 17 19 This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. U v DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B-9 PROJECT: Family Dollar - Ft. Pierce CLIENT: Stephens Barrios LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan DRILLER: RD DRILL RIG: BR 2500 DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL 4 6.0 feet ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, SAMPLERS USCS Description DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA 0 .. SP ......................... Very loose, fine, gray 20 it Loose Medium dense 5 sM Medium dense, silty flo �NtEt is SP-SM Ivledium dense, slightly silty, light •rr.:rc brown 15 20 0 5 -t 25 30 -10 35 PROJECT NO.: J16-020 DATE: 3-16-16 ELEVATION: 21' NGVD LOGGED BY: BM NM I DID I DEPTH I N 4 9 14 16 14 I This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. U U DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B-10 PROJECT: Family Dollar - Ft. Pierce CLIENT: Stephens Barrios LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan DRILLER: RD DRILL RIG: BR 2500 DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL g 5.0 feet ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, SAMPLERS USCS Description DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA 20 0 .. SP .................................... Medium dense, fine, gray ....... SPSM Very loose, slightly silty, brown i i - yi: •+sirt �i•eiii Very loose n oaiat t a1t11 1•!«i,;� Loose nxr[t Y•iYCi t • ia! l; Medium dense •r'ri+:c 10 to :: s 15 0 20 -s 2s -10 30 -15 35 PROJECT NO.: J16-020 DATE: 3-16-16 ELEVATION: 20' NGVD LOGGED BY: BM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST NM DD CURVE DEPTH N 10 30 50 13 6 6 9 14 This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitiv of the site. U • DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B-11 PROJECT: Family Dollar -Ft. Pierce CLIENT: Stephens Barrios LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan DRILLER: RD DRILL RIG: BR 2500 DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL -U 5.0 feet ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, SAMPLERS USCS Description DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA 0 TY Y7:03 ....... SP-SM ............................................ Very loose, slightly silty, gray 20 1j:kttj. rixn i • Medium dense 4Y ti•r N.1 " •i:ktii •ilin Medium dense 5 _ 15 7:kt L1 rt o tl,t; Medium dense fatirr g{tlt, 110.3 Medium dense :L1JJ.i: vrcn '•• • 10 10 15 5 20 0 25 -5 30 -10 35 PROJECT NO.: J16-020 DATE: 3-16-16 ELEVATION: 21' NGVD LOGGED BY: BM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST NM DD CURVE DEPTH N 10 30 5i 6 17 17 16 15 This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitiv of the site. Fioure A-17 PAGE 1lof 1 BLUE MARLIN ENGINEERIP