geotechnical engineering report - d.n. higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/itb 008-16 geotechnical...

38
Geotechnical Engineering Report Entrance Road Southport Warehouse Site Gibsonton, Florida December 8, 2015 Terracon Project No. H4155066 Prepared for: Port of Tampa Bay Tampa, Florida Prepared by: Terracon Consultants, Inc. Tampa, Florida

Upload: halien

Post on 06-May-2019

245 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Geotechnical Engineering ReportEntrance Road

Southport Warehouse SiteGibsonton, Florida

December 8, 2015Terracon Project No. H4155066

Prepared for:Port of Tampa Bay

Tampa, Florida

Prepared by:Terracon Consultants, Inc.

Tampa, Florida

Page 2: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,
Page 3: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Terracon Consul tants, Inc. 504 E. Tyler Street Tampa, F lor ida 33602P (813) 221 0050 F (813) 221 0051 terracon.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................1

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION .............................................................................................1

2.1 Project Description ............................................................................................... 12.2 Site Location and Description............................................................................... 2

3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................................................................2

3.1 General Potential for Sinkhole Development ........................................................ 23.2 Soil Survey........................................................................................................... 33.3 Roadway Cores ................................................................................................... 33.4 Typical Subsurface Profile ................................................................................... 43.5 Groundwater ........................................................................................................ 4

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ......................................5

4.1 Geotechnical Considerations ............................................................................... 54.2 Earthwork............................................................................................................. 5

4.2.1 Site Preparation ........................................................................................54.2.2 Material Requirements..............................................................................64.2.3 Compaction Requirements-Mass Fill Areas ..............................................64.2.4 Utility Trench Backfill .................................................................................64.2.5 Earthwork Construction Considerations ....................................................6

4.3 Pavements ........................................................................................................... 74.3.1 Subgrade Preparation...............................................................................74.3.2 Design Considerations..............................................................................84.3.3 Estimates of Minimum Pavement Thickness...............................................84.3.4 Asphalt Concrete Design Recommendations ............................................84.3.5 Portland Cement Concrete Design Recommendations .............................94.3.6 Pavement Drainage ................................................................................104.3.7 Pavement Maintenance ..........................................................................10

5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS ...............................................................................................10

Page 4: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable ii

APPENDIX A – FIELD EXPLORATIONExhibit A-1 Site Location MapExhibit A-2 Soils MapExhibit A-3 Soil Survey DescriptionsExhibit A-4 Exploration PlanExhibit A-5 Field Exploration DescriptionExhibit A-6 to A-13 Boring Logs

APPENDIX B – SUPPORTING INFORMATIONExhibit B-1 Laboratory TestingExhibit B-2 Summary of Laboratory ResultsExhibit B-3 to B-4 Grain Size Analyses

APPENDIX C – SUPPORTING DOCUMENTSExhibit C-1 General NotesExhibit C-2 Unified Soil Classification System

Page 5: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Geotechnical Engineering ReportSouthport Warehouse Site ■ Gibsonton, FloridaDecember 8, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. H4155066

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Terracon has performed a geotechnical exploration for the proposed entrance road for theSouthport Warehouse Site located along the existing ROW of Kracker Avenue in Apollo Beach,Florida. Terracon’s geotechnical scope of work included advancing two Standard PenetrationTest (SPT) borings, designated as B-1 and B-2, and six hand auger borings, designated as HA-1 through HA-6, to the termination depths ranging from 5 to 15.5 feet below existing grade in theareas of the proposed infrastructure construction. In addition, two pavement cores wereconducted on Kracker Avenue

Based on the information obtained from our subsurface explorations, the site can be developedfor the proposed project. The following geotechnical considerations were identified:

< Soil conditions in the SPT and hand auger borings generally consisted of sandysoils with varying amounts of silt and clay between the ground surface and thetermination depths of 3.5 to 15.5 feet.

< Groundwater was typically encountered in our hand ager borings between depthsof 1.1 and 3 feet below the existing ground surface.

< Based on the encountered subsurface conditions, it appears traditional pavementsections may be utilized. However the roadway should be designed to have aminimum separation of 2 feet between the bottom of the base and the seasonalhigh water table if a limerock base is used or 1 foot if crushed concrete is utilized.

< Close monitoring of the construction operations discussed herein will be critical inachieving the design subgrade support. We therefore recommend that Terraconbe retained to monitor this portion of the work.

The geotechnical executive summary should be used in conjunction with the entire report fordesign and/or construction purposes. It should be recognized that specific details were notincluded or fully developed in this section, and the report must be read in its entirety for acomprehensive understanding of the items contained herein. The section titled GENERALCOMMENTS should be read for an understanding of the report limitations.

Page 6: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORTENTRANCE ROAD

SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITEGIBSONTON, FLORIDAProject No. H4155066

December 8, 2015

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering services performed for theproposed entrance road for the Southport Warehouse Site located east of US Highway 41 alongthe alignment of Kracker Avenue in Gibsonton, Florida. The purpose of our services is toprovide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations for roadway design andconstruction relative to the following:

■ subsurface soil conditions ■ groundwater conditions■ earthwork ■ pavement recommendations

Our geotechnical engineering scope of services included advancing two Standard PenetrationTest (SPT) borings, designated as B-1 and B-2, and six hand auger borings, designated as HA-1 through HA-6, to the termination depths ranging from 5 to 15.5 feet below the existing groundsurface. Two roadway cores were also conducted on Kracker Avenue. A Site Location Map andExploration Plan are included in Appendix A as Exhibits A-1 and A-4, respectively. Logs of thetest borings are also included in Appendix A.

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

2.1 Project Description

Item DescriptionBoring Layout See Appendix; Exhibit A-4.

ProposedConstruction

The development will include the construction of an access road from US 41 tothe interior of the site, a railroad spur on the east side of the site and a futurewarehouse.

Structural System Unknown at this time.Finished elevation(assumed)

Within 5 feet of the existing grade.

Stormwatermanagement

Not known at this time.

Page 7: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Geotechnical Engineering ReportSouthport Warehouse Site ■ Gibsonton, FloridaDecember 8, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. H4155066

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 2

2.2 Site Location and Description

ITEM DESCRIPTION

Location

Port Tampa Bay property on the east side of US 41 in the vicinity ofPort Redwing. According to the Hillsborough Property Appraiser’soffice it includes Parcel Nos. 0508650000, 0508640300, 0508630000and 0514360000Latitude 27.813570°, Longitude -82.378019°.

Existing improvements Kracker Avenue is a narrow, two lane asphalt paved roadway.

Current ground cover Beyond the existing Kracker Avenue right of way, the site is overgrownwith vegetative cover ranging from grassed areas to dense vegetation.

Existing topography While the site is generally flat, there are a number of what appears tohave been tropical fish ponds on the site.

3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

3.1 General Potential for Sinkhole Development

The USGS has prepared a map which identifies areas of sinkhole occurrence in Florida. TheSinkhole Type, Development, and Distribution in Florida map (prepared by the USGS, incooperation with state agencies, 1985), divides Florida into four areas based on the type andthickness of cover overlying soluble rock. These areas, designated I through IV, have varyingpotentials for sinkhole development as follows:

Area I – Sinkholes are few.Area II – Sinkholes are few.Area III – Sinkholes are numerous.Area IV – Sinkholes are very few.

Review of the map listed above indicates the site is located near the interface of Area III andArea IV. In Area III the cover over the limestone is 30 to 200 feet thick and consists of cohesiveclayey sediments of low permeability. Sinkholes are most numerous, of varying size, anddevelop abruptly. Cover-collapse sinkholes dominate in Area III. In Area IV the cover over thelimestone is more than 200 feet thick and consists of cohesive sediments interlayered withdiscontinuous carbonate beds. Sinkholes are very few, but several large diameter, deepsinkholes occur. Cover-collapse sinkholes dominate in Area IV.

Page 8: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Geotechnical Engineering ReportSouthport Warehouse Site ■ Gibsonton, FloridaDecember 8, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. H4155066

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 3

The borings were relatively shallow and no potential signs of sinkhole activity, such as voids orloss of drilling fluid circulation, were experienced in the borings. Based on the geology of thearea, this site has a low risk for development of sinkholes.

If the sinkhole potential of the site is to be estimated, additional site-specific data must beobtained. This might include using geophysical methods such as Ground Penetrating Radar(GPR), Electrical Resistivity tests and additional geotechnical tests such as Cone PenetrometerTest (CPT) soundings, dilatometer (DMT) soundings, and/or more/deeper Standard PenetrationTest borings. Interpretation of the test data should be done by a professional geologist/engineerfamiliar with the use of these tests under local conditions. If requested, Terracon can assist inassessing the sinkhole potential of the location of the proposed construction.

3.2 Soil Survey

The Soil Survey of Hillsborough County, Florida as prepared by the United States Department ofAgriculture (USDA), Soil Conservation Service (now renamed the Natural Resource ConservationService - NRCS), identifies that Arents, nearly level, Wabasso fine sand and Malabar fine sandcover the site.

Arents consists of nearly level, heterogeneous material. This material has been excavated,reworked, and reshaped by earthmoving equipment. Arents are near urban centers, phosphatemining operations, major highways, and sanitary landfills. Arents do not have an orderlysequence of soil layers. The depth to the seasonal high water table varies with the amount of fillmaterial and artificial drainage.

This Malabar soil consists of fine sand to a depth of at least 80 inches with a layer of sandyloam between depths of 50 and 66 inches. The seasonal high water table fluctuates from theground surface to a depth of about 10 inches for 2 to 6 months in most years.

This Wabasso soil type consists of fine sand to a depth of 32 inches underlain by sandy clayloam to a depth of 60 inches and loamy sand to a depth of at least 80 inches. The seasonal highwater table fluctuates from the soil surface to a depth of 10 inches for 2 months and recedes toa depth of 40 inches during prolonged dry periods.

It should be noted that the Soil Survey is not intended as a substitute for site-specific geotechnicalexploration; rather it is a useful tool in planning a project scope in that it provides information on soiltypes likely to be encountered. Boundaries between adjacent soil types on the Soil Survey mapsare approximate (included in Appendix as Exhibit A-2). Descriptions of the mapped soil units areincluded in Appendix A as Exhibit A-3.

3.3 Roadway Cores

The results of the asphalt core samples are presented in the following table:

Page 9: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Geotechnical Engineering ReportSouthport Warehouse Site ■ Gibsonton, FloridaDecember 8, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. H4155066

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 4

Core No. Core Thickness (inches)

C-1 7.5

C-2 5

3.4 Typical Subsurface Profile

Based on the results of the borings, subsurface conditions can be generalized as follows:

StratumApproximate Depth

to Bottom ofStratum

Material Description Consistency/Density

11.5 feet to

termination of theborings at 15.5 feet

Poorly graded fine sand (SP), fine sandwith silt (SP-SM) and silty sand (SM)

Loose to mediumdense

21Termination of the

borings at 3.5 feet to6 feet

Fine sand with clay (SP-SC) and clayeysand (SC) Loose

3Termination of theborings at 5 to 15.5

feet

Poorly graded fine sand (SP) and fine sandwith silt (SP-SM) Loose

1. Stratum not encountered in boring B-2

Conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs.Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent the approximate location of changes insoil types; in-situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. Details for each of theborings can be found on the boring logs in Appendix A of this report. Descriptions of our fieldexploration procedures are included as Exhibit A-5 in Appendix A.

3.5 Groundwater

The boreholes were observed during drilling for the presence and level of groundwater.Groundwater was observed at depths ranging from 1.1 to 3 feet in the hand auger borings. Thegroundwater level was not noted in the SPT borings.

It should be recognized that fluctuations of the groundwater table will occur due to seasonalvariations in the amount of rainfall, runoff and other factors not evident at the time the boringwas performed. In addition, perched water can develop within higher permeability soilsoverlying less permeable soils. Therefore, groundwater levels during construction or at othertimes in the future may be higher or lower than the levels indicated on the boring logs.

We estimate that the seasonal high groundwater level will be within 1 foot of the existing groundsurface. Our estimate of the seasonal groundwater conditions are based on the USDA Soil

Page 10: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Geotechnical Engineering ReportSouthport Warehouse Site ■ Gibsonton, FloridaDecember 8, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. H4155066

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 5

Survey, available survey data, the encountered soil types, recent weather conditions, and theencountered water levels.

These seasonal water table estimates do not represent the temporary rise in water table thatoccurs immediately during a significant storm event, including adjacent to other stormwatermanagement facilities. This is different from static groundwater levels in wet ponds and/ordrainage canals which can affect the design water levels of new, nearby ponds. The seasonalhigh water table may vary from normal when affected by extreme weather changes, localized orregional flooding, karst activity, future grading, drainage improvements, or other constructionthat may occur on our around the site following the date of this report.

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

4.1 Geotechnical Considerations

Borings encountered loose to medium dense natural sands with varying amounts of silt andclay. The sandy soils are generally suitable for construction of the proposed pavements followingthe recommended Earthwork portions of this report.

We recommend that the exposed subgrade be thoroughly evaluated after removal of the surficialorganics and prior to the start of structural fill operations (if any). We recommend that Terracon beretained to evaluate the satisfactory preparation of the bearing material for pavement construction.Due to the shallow groundwater conditions encountered in the borings, it is recommended thatconstruction take place during the drier winter and spring months. If construction is performedduring the rainy summer and fall months, it is likely that the site will be saturated and will notprovide a suitable surface on which to perform construction operations. The roadway should bedesigned to have a minimum separation of 2 feet between the bottom of the base and the seasonalhigh water table if a limerock base is used or 1 foot if crushed concrete is utilized.

Design and construction recommendations for foundation systems and other earth connectedphases of the project are outlined below.

4.2 Earthwork

4.2.1 Site PreparationConstruction should begin with the removal of asphalt pavement, concrete sidewalks and theclearing and grubbing of the vegetation down to finger sized roots within proposed constructionareas. Any underground utilities from previous construction that will not be used in the newconstruction should be removed and replaced with compacted backfill. Excessively wet or drymaterial should either be removed or moisture conditioned and re-compacted. After strippingand grubbing, the exposed surface of pavement alignment should be proof-rolled to aid inlocating loose or soft areas. Proof-rolling should be performed with a vibratory roller with a

Page 11: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Geotechnical Engineering ReportSouthport Warehouse Site ■ Gibsonton, FloridaDecember 8, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. H4155066

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 6

minimum static weight of 20,000 pounds. The roller should make the minimum requiredoverlapping passes over all areas of the site to achieve compaction requirements. The soilsshould be compacted sufficiently to obtain a minimum compaction as defined in Section 4.2.3.Unstable soil (pumping) should be removed or moisture conditioned and compacted in placeprior to placing fill.

4.2.2 Material RequirementsEngineered fill should meet the following material property requirements:

Fill Type USCS Classification Acceptable Location for Placement

General 1SP, SP-SM (fines content < 12 percent,

maximum particle size < 2 inches,organic content < 5 percent)

All locations and elevations

1. Strata 1 and 3 soils at this site appear to meet this criterion. Soils with fines content > 5 percent mayretain moisture and be difficult to compact and achieve specified density and stability. These soilsmay need to be maintained dry of optimum to properly compact.

4.2.3 Compaction Requirements-Mass Fill AreasITEM DESCRIPTION

Fill Lift Thickness

12 inches or less in loose thickness when heavy static compactionequipment is used. Maximum particle size should not exceed 2inches in a 12-inch lift.4 to 6 inches in loose thickness when hand-guided equipment (i.e.jumping jack or plate compactor) is used. Maximum particle sizeshould not exceed 1inch in a 4- to 6-inch lift.

Minimum CompactionRequirements

95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by theModified Proctor Test (ASTM D-1557).

Moisture Content 1 Within ±3 percent of optimum moisture content as determined bythe Modified Proctor test, at the time of placement and compaction

Minimum Testing Frequency One field density test per 5,000 square feet of pavement footprint(or fraction thereof) per lift.

1 We recommend that engineered fill be tested for moisture content and compaction duringplacement. Should the results of the in-place density tests indicate compaction limits have notbeen met, the area represented by the test should be reworked and retested as required untilthe compaction requirements are achieved.

4.2.4 Utility Trench BackfillAll trench excavations should be made with sufficient working space to permit constructionincluding backfill placement and compaction.

4.2.5 Earthwork Construction ConsiderationsAfter initial proof-rolling and compaction, unstable subgrade conditions could develop duringgeneral construction operations, particularly if the soils are wetted and/or subjected to repetitiveconstruction traffic. Upon completion of filling and grading, care should be taken to maintain the

Page 12: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Geotechnical Engineering ReportSouthport Warehouse Site ■ Gibsonton, FloridaDecember 8, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. H4155066

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 7

subgrade moisture content prior to construction of the pavement. Construction traffic over thecompleted subgrade should be avoided to the extent practical. The site should also be gradedto prevent ponding of surface water on the prepared subgrades or in excavations. If thesubgrade should become desiccated, saturated, or disturbed, the affected material should beremoved or these materials should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and re-compacted prior topavement construction.

As a minimum, all temporary excavations should be sloped or braced as required byOccupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) regulations to provide stability and safeworking conditions. Temporary excavations will probably be required during grading operations.The grading contractor, by his contract, is usually responsible for designing and constructingstable, temporary excavations and should shore, slope or bench the sides of the excavations asrequired, to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations shouldcomply with applicable local, state and federal safety regulations, including the current OSHAExcavation and Trench Safety Standards.

Terracon should be retained during the construction phase of the project to observe earthworkand to perform necessary tests and observations during subgrade preparation; proof-rolling;placement and compaction of controlled compacted fills; backfilling of excavations into thecompleted subgrade, and just prior to construction of pavements.

4.3 Pavements

4.3.1 Subgrade PreparationSite grading is typically accomplished relatively early in the construction phase. Fills are placedand compacted in a uniform manner. However, as construction proceeds, excavations are madeinto these areas, rainfall and surface water saturates some areas, heavy traffic from concretetrucks and other delivery vehicles disturbs the subgrade and many surface irregularities are filledin with loose soils to temporarily improve ride comfort. As a result, the pavement subgrades,initially prepared early in the project, should be carefully evaluated as the time for pavementconstruction approaches.

We recommend the moisture content and density of the top 12 inches of the subgrade beevaluated and the pavement subgrades be proof-rolled and tested within two days prior tocommencement of actual paving operations. Compaction tests should be performed at afrequency of 1 test per 10,000 square feet or fraction thereof. Areas not in compliance with therequired ranges of moisture or density should be moisture conditioned and recompacted.Particular attention should be paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed earlier andto areas where backfilled trenches are located. Areas where unsuitable conditions are foundshould be repaired by removing and replacing the materials with properly compacted fills.

After proof-rolling and repairing deep subgrade deficiencies, the entire subgrade should bescarified and prepared as recommended in Section 4.2 of the Earthwork section this report to

Page 13: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Geotechnical Engineering ReportSouthport Warehouse Site ■ Gibsonton, FloridaDecember 8, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. H4155066

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 8

provide a uniform subgrade for pavement construction. Areas that appear severely desiccatedfollowing site stripping may require further undercutting and moisture conditioning. If a significantprecipitation event occurs after the evaluation or if the surface becomes disturbed, the subgradeshould be reviewed by qualified personnel immediately prior to paving. The subgrade should bein its finished form at the time of the final review.

4.3.2 Design ConsiderationsTraffic patterns and anticipated loading conditions were not provided at the time that this reportwas prepared. However, we anticipate that traffic loads will be appropriate for serving adistribution facility. The thickness of pavements subjected to heavy truck traffic should bedetermined using expected traffic volumes, vehicle types, and vehicle loads and should be inaccordance with local or county ordinances.

Pavement thickness can be determined using AASHTO, Asphalt Institute, PCA, and/or othermethods if specific wheel loads, axle configurations, frequencies, and desired pavement life areprovided. Terracon can provide thickness recommendations for pavements subjected to loadsother than personal vehicle and occasional delivery and trash removal truck traffic if thisinformation is provided. However, absent that data, we recommend the following minimum typicalsections.

4.3.3 Estimates of Minimum Pavement ThicknessTypical Pavement Section (inches)

TrafficArea Alternative

AsphaltConcreteSurfaceCourse

Limerock, orCrushed

Concrete BaseCourse

StabilizedSubbaseCourse1

PortlandCement

Concrete

FreeDrainingSubgrade

Roadway AsphaltConcrete

2.5 8.0 12.0 -- --

1. Often referred to as Stabilized Subgrade.

4.3.4 Asphalt Concrete Design RecommendationsThe following items are applicable to asphalt concrete pavement sections.n Terracon recommends a minimum separation of 12 inches between the bottom of the

base course and the seasonal high water table if crushed concrete is used and 24inches if limerock is used as a base. Natural or fill subgrade soils to a depth of 18inches below the base should be clean, free draining sands. The soils of Strata 1 satisfythis requirement.

n Stabilized subgrade soils (also identified as stabilized subbase) should be stabilized to aminimum Limerock Bearing Ratio (LBR; Florida Method of Test Designation FM 5-515)value of 40 if they do not already meet this criterion, or modified/replaced with newcompacted fill that meets the minimum LBR value. Although LBR testing has not beenperformed, our experience with similar soils indicates that the near surficial sandsencountered in the soil borings are unlikely to meet this requirement.

Page 14: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Geotechnical Engineering ReportSouthport Warehouse Site ■ Gibsonton, FloridaDecember 8, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. H4155066

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 9

n The stabilized subgrade course should be compacted to at least 98 percent of theModified Proctor maximum dry density (AASHTO T-180 or ASTM D-1557). Anyunderlying, newly-placed subgrade fill need only be compacted to a minimum of 95percent of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density. Compaction tests should beperformed at a frequency of 1 test per 10,000 square feet or fraction thereof.

n Limerock base courses from an approved FDOT source should have a minimum LBRvalue of 100, and be compacted to a minimum of 98 percent of the maximum dry densityas determined by the Modified Proctor test. Limerock should be placed in uniform liftsnot to exceed 6 inches loose thickness. Recycled limerock is not a suitable substitutefor virgin limerock for base courses but may be used as a granular stabilizing admixture.

n Crushed (recycled) concrete base should meet the current FDOT specification 204 forrecycled materials.

n Asphalt should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the design mix density.Asphalt surface courses should be Type SP, Type S, or other suitable mix designaccording to FDOT and local requirements.

n To verify thicknesses, after placement and compaction of the pavement courses, corethe wearing surface to evaluate material thickness and composition at a minimumfrequency of 5,000 square feet or two locations per day’s production.

n All curbing should be full depth. Use of extruded curb sections which lie on top ofasphalt surface courses can allow migration of water between the surface and basecourses, leading to rippling and pavement deterioration.

4.3.5 Portland Cement Concrete Design RecommendationsThe following items are applicable to rigid concrete pavement sections.

n At least 18 inches of free-draining material should be included directly beneath rigidconcrete pavement. Fill meeting the requirements presented in Section 4.2 (Earthwork) ofthis report may be considered free-draining for this purpose. Limerock should not beconsidered free draining for this purpose.

n The PCC should attain a minimum compressive strength of 4,000 psi at 28 days. PCCpavements are recommended for trash container pads and in any other areas subjectedto heavy wheel loads and/or turning traffic.

n The upper 1 foot of rigid pavement subgrade soils should be compacted to at least 98percent of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density (AASHTO T-180 or ASTM D-1557). Compaction tests should be performed at a frequency of 1 test per 10,000square feet or fraction thereof.

n Rigid PCC pavements will perform better than ACC in areas where short-radii turningand braking are expected (i.e. entrance/exit aprons) due to better resistance to ruttingand shoving. In addition, PCC pavement will perform better in areas subject to large orsustained loads. An adequate number of longitudinal and transverse control jointsshould be placed in the rigid pavement in accordance with ACI and/or AASHTOrequirements. Expansion (isolation) joints must be full depth and should only be used toisolate fixed objects abutting or within the paved area.

Page 15: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Geotechnical Engineering ReportSouthport Warehouse Site ■ Gibsonton, FloridaDecember 8, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. H4155066

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 10

n Adequate separation should be provided between the bottom of the concrete and theseasonal high water table. Terracon recommends that in no case should less than 1foot of separation be provided.

n Sawcut patterns should generally be square or rectangular but nearly square, andextend to a depth equal to a quarter of the slab thickness. If the bottom of the concretepavement is separated from the seasonal high water table by at least 1 foot, filter fabricwill not be necessary beneath the expansion joints.

4.3.6 Pavement DrainagePavements should be sloped to provide rapid drainage of surface water. Water allowed to pondon or adjacent to the pavements could saturate the subgrade and contribute to prematurepavement deterioration. In addition, the pavement subgrade should be graded to provide positivedrainage within the granular base section. The subgrade and the pavement surface should havea minimum ¼ inch per foot slope to promote drainage. Appropriate sub-drainage or connection toa suitable daylight outlet should be provided to remove water from the base layer.

4.3.7 Pavement MaintenanceThe pavement sections provided in this report represent minimum recommended thicknessesand, as such, periodic maintenance should be anticipated. Therefore, preventive maintenanceshould be planned and provided for through an on-going pavement management program.Maintenance activities are intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration, and to preservethe pavement investment. Maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g., crack andjoint sealing and patching) and global maintenance (e.g., surface sealing). Preventivemaintenance is usually the first priority when implementing a pavement maintenance program.Additional engineering observation is recommended to determine the type and extent of a costeffective program. Even with periodic maintenance, some movements and related cracking maystill occur and repairs may be required.

5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS

Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications so commentscan be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendationsin the design and specifications. Terracon also should be retained to provide observation andtesting services during grading, excavation, pavement construction and other earth-relatedconstruction phases of the project.

The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtainedfrom the borings performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed inthis report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between borings, across thesite, or due to the modifying effects of construction or weather. The nature and extent of suchvariations may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations appear, we

Page 16: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Geotechnical Engineering ReportSouthport Warehouse Site ■ Gibsonton, FloridaDecember 8, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. H4155066

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 11

should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendationscan be provided.

The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication anyenvironmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification orprevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about thepotential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to theproject discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnicalengineering practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. Sitesafety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In theevent that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report areplanned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be consideredvalid unless Terracon reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of thisreport in writing.

Page 17: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

APPENDIX AFIELD EXPLORATION

Page 18: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

TOPOGRAPHIC MAP IMAGE COURTESY OFTHE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

QUADRANGLES INCLUDE: GIBSONTON, FL(1/1/1998) and RIVERVIEW, FL (1/1/1987).

SITE LOCATION

Southport WarehouseKracker AvenueGibsonton, FL

504 E. Tyler St.Tampa, FL 33602

H4155066

DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY,AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION

PURPOSES

Project Manager:

Drawn by:

Checked by:

Approved by:

CJH

SCK

SCK

SCK

CAD

12/7/2015

Project No.

File Name:

Date:

A-1

Exhibit

1”=24,000 SFScale:

Page 19: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

TOPOGRAPHIC MAP IMAGE COURTESY OFTHE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

QUADRANGLES INCLUDE: GIBSONTON, FL(1/1/1998) and RIVERVIEW, FL (1/1/1987).

SOILS MAP

Southport WarehouseKracker AvenueGibsonton, FL

504 E. Tyler St.Tampa, FL 33602

H4155066

DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY,AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION

PURPOSES

Project Manager:

Drawn by:

Checked by:

Approved by:

CJH

SCK

SCK

SCK

CAD

12/7/2015

Project No.

File Name:

Date:

A-2

Exhibit

1”=24,000 SFScale:

SOIL LEGEND

4 Arents, nearly level

27 Malabar fine sand57 Wabasso fine sand

U.S.D.A. SOIL SURVEY FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDAISSUED: NOVEMBER 2015

Approximate Project Limits

4

Page 20: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Geotechnical Engineering ReportSouthport Warehouse Site ■ Gibsonton, FloridaDecember 8, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. H4155066

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable Exhibit A-3

Soil Survey Descriptions

4 – Arents, nearly level. This soil type consists of nearly level, heterogeneous material. Thismaterial has been excavated, reworked, and reshaped by earthmoving equipment. Arents arenear urban centers, phosphate mining operations, major highways, and sanitary landfills. Arentsdo not have an orderly sequence of soil layers. Arents are variable and contain discontinuouslenses, pockets, or streaks of black, gray, grayish brown, brown, or yellowish brown sandy orloamy fill material. The thickness of the fill material ranges from 30 to 80 inches or more. Thedepth to the seasonal high water table varies with the amount of fill material and artificialdrainage.

27 – Malabar fine sand. This soil type is described as nearly level and poorly drained soil, inlow-lying sloughs and shallow depressions on the flatwoods. Slopes are 0 to 2 percent.Typically, the surface layer of the Malabar soil is dark gray fine sand about 4 inches thick. Thesubsurface layer, to a depth of about 12 inches, is light brownish gray fine sand. The upper partof the subsoil, to a depth of about 30 inches, is brownish yellow fine sand. The next layer, to adepth of about 50 inches, is pale brown fine sand. The lower part, to a depth of about 66 inches,is gray, mottled fine sandy loam. The substratum, to a depth of about 80 inches, is grayishbrown fine sand. Under natural conditions, the Malabar fine sand soils have a seasonal highwater table that fluctuates from the ground surface to a depth of about 10 inches for 2 to 6months in most years.

57 – Wabasso fine sand. This soil type is described as nearly level and poorly drained. It is onplains in the flatwoods. Typically, the soil has a surface layer, to a depth of about 29 inches, isgray fine sand. The upper part of the subsoil, to a depth of about 32 inches, is black fine sand.The next layer, to a depth of about 46 inches, is light gray sandy clay loam. The lower part, to adepth of about 60 inches, is light greenish-gray, mottled sandy clay loam. The substratum to adepth of about 80 inches is gray loamy sand. In most years, a seasonal high water tablefluctuates from the soil surface to a depth of 10 inches for 2 months and recedes to a depth of40 inches during prolonged dry periods.

Page 21: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

EXPLORATION PLAN

504 E. Tyler St.Tampa, FL 33602

H4155066AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PROVIDED BYMICROSOFT BING MAPS

Southport WarehouseKracker AvenueGibsonton, FL

DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY,AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION

PURPOSES

Project Manager:

Drawn by:

Checked by:

Approved by:

CJH

SCK

SCK

SCK

CAD

12/7/2015

Scale:

Project No.

File Name:

Date:

AS SHOWN

A-4

Exhibit

Page 22: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Geotechnical Engineering ReportSouthport Warehouse Site ■ Gibsonton, FloridaDecember 8, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. H4155066

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable Exhibit A-5

Field Exploration Description

The boring locations were laid out at the project site by Terracon personnel. The locationsindicated on the attached diagram are approximate and were measured by utilizing a hand-heldGPS. The locations of the borings should be considered accurate only to the degree implied bythe means and methods used to define them.

The SPT soil borings were drilled with a truck-mounted, rotary drilling rig equipped with anautomatic hammer. A significantly greater efficiency is achieved with the automatic hammercompared to the conventional safety hammer operated with a cathead and rope. This higherefficiency has an appreciable effect on the SPT-N value. The effect of the automatic hammer'sefficiency has been considered in the interpretation and analysis of the subsurface informationfor this report. The boreholes were advanced with a cutting head and stabilized with the use ofbentonite (drillers’ mud). Soil samples were obtained by the split spoon sampling procedure ingeneral accordance with the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) procedure. In the split spoonsampling procedure, the number of blows required to advance the sampling spoon the last 12inches of an 18-inch penetration or the middle 12 inches of a 24-inch penetration by means of a140-pound hammer with a free fall of 30 inches, is the standard penetration resistance value(N). This value is used to estimate the in-situ relative density of cohesionless soils and theconsistency of cohesive soils. The sampling depths and penetration distance, plus the standardpenetration resistance values, are shown on the boring logs.

Portions of the samples from the borings were sealed in jars to reduce moisture loss, and thenthe jars were taken to our laboratory for further observation and classification. Uponcompletion, the boreholes were backfilled with soil cuttings.

Field logs of each boring were prepared by the drill crew. These logs included visualclassifications of the materials encountered during drilling as well as the driller's interpretation ofthe subsurface conditions between samples. The boring logs included with this report representan interpretation of the field logs and include modifications based on laboratory observation ofthe samples.

Page 23: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

4

18

162-4-4-4N=8

1-2-3-2N=5

2-2-2-3N=4

3-3-2-2N=5

2-1-2-3N=3

2-1-2N=3

2.0

4.0

6.0

15.5

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine grained, gray, loose

SILTY SAND (SM), fine grained, grayish-brown, loose

CLAYEY SAND (SC), fine grained, light gray, loose, calcareous, with limestone

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), fine grained, light gray, loose, calcareous, withshell

light brown, loose, non-calcareous, shell absent

grayish-brown

Boring Terminated at 15.5 Feet

Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

GR

APH

ICLO

G

THIS

BOR

ING

LOG

ISN

OT

VALI

DIF

SEPA

RAT

EDFR

OM

OR

IGIN

ALR

EPO

RT.

GEO

SMAR

TLO

G-N

OW

ELL

H41

5506

6SO

UTH

POR

T.G

PJTE

RR

ACO

N20

15.G

DT

12/8

/15

Tampa, FloridaSITE:

Page 1 of 1

Advancement Method:Mud Rotary

Abandonment Method:Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: H4155066

Drill Rig: CME-45

Boring Started: 11/5/2015

BORING LOG NO. B-1Port of TampaCLIENT:Tampa, Florida

Driller: R. Swint, Jr.

Boring Completed: 11/5/2015

Exhibit: A-6

See Exhibit A-5 for description of field procedures

See Appendix B for description of laboratoryprocedures and additional data (if any).See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andabbreviations.0

PROJECT: Southport Warehouse

504 East Tyler StreetTampa, Florida

PER

CEN

TFI

NES

WAT

ERC

ON

TEN

T(%

)

SAM

PLE

TYPE

WAT

ERLE

VEL

OBS

ERVA

TIO

NS

DEP

TH(F

t.)

5

10

15

FIEL

DTE

STR

ESU

LTS

DEPTH

LOCATION

Latitude: 27.814506° Longitude: -82.382206°

See Exhibit A-4

Groundwater not measured.WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Page 24: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

6

9-5-7-7N=12

4-4-3-4N=7

3-2-1-4N=3

1-2-3-4N=5

2-3-4-3N=7

2-2-1N=3

4.0

8.0

13.0

15.5

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine grained, gray, medium dense

dark brown, loose

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), fine grained, light brown, loose

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine grained, gray, loose, with shell

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), fine grained, dark gray, loose

Boring Terminated at 15.5 Feet

Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

GR

APH

ICLO

G

THIS

BOR

ING

LOG

ISN

OT

VALI

DIF

SEPA

RAT

EDFR

OM

OR

IGIN

ALR

EPO

RT.

GEO

SMAR

TLO

G-N

OW

ELL

H41

5506

6SO

UTH

POR

T.G

PJTE

RR

ACO

N20

15.G

DT

12/8

/15

Tampa, FloridaSITE:

Page 1 of 1

Advancement Method:Mud Rotary

Abandonment Method:Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: H4155066

Drill Rig: CME-45

Boring Started: 11/5/2015

BORING LOG NO. B-2Port of TampaCLIENT:Tampa, Florida

Driller: R. Swint, Jr.

Boring Completed: 11/5/2015

Exhibit: A-7

See Exhibit A-5 for description of field procedures

See Appendix B for description of laboratoryprocedures and additional data (if any).See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andabbreviations.0

PROJECT: Southport Warehouse

504 East Tyler StreetTampa, Florida

PER

CEN

TFI

NES

WAT

ERC

ON

TEN

T(%

)

SAM

PLE

TYPE

WAT

ERLE

VEL

OBS

ERVA

TIO

NS

DEP

TH(F

t.)

5

10

15

FIEL

DTE

STR

ESU

LTS

DEPTH

LOCATION

Latitude: 27.814481° Longitude: -82.380157°

See Exhibit A-4

Groundwater not measured.WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Page 25: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

6

177

2.0

3.0

5.0

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), fine grained, gray

CLAYEY SAND (SC), fine grained, dark brown

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine grained, light brown, with shell

Boring Terminated at 5 Feet

Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

GR

APH

ICLO

G

THIS

BOR

ING

LOG

ISN

OT

VALI

DIF

SEPA

RAT

EDFR

OM

OR

IGIN

ALR

EPO

RT.

GEO

SMAR

TLO

G-N

OW

ELL

H41

5506

6SO

UTH

POR

T.G

PJTE

RR

ACO

N20

15.G

DT

12/8

/15

Tampa, FloridaSITE:

Page 1 of 1

Advancement Method:Hand Auger

Abandonment Method:Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: H4155066

Drill Rig: N/A

Boring Started: 10/28/2015

BORING LOG NO. HA-1Port of TampaCLIENT:Tampa, Florida

Driller: H. Peach

Boring Completed: 10/28/2015

Exhibit: A-8

See Exhibit A-5 for description of field procedures

See Appendix B for description of laboratoryprocedures and additional data (if any).See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andabbreviations.0

PROJECT: Southport Warehouse

504 East Tyler StreetTampa, Florida

PER

CEN

TFI

NES

WAT

ERC

ON

TEN

T(%

)

SAM

PLE

TYPE

WAT

ERLE

VEL

OBS

ERVA

TIO

NS

DEP

TH(F

t.)

5

FIEL

DTE

STR

ESU

LTS

DEPTH

LOCATION

Latitude: 27.814504° Longitude: -82.38355°

See Exhibit A-4

Groundwater initially observed at a depth of 2' 5".WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Page 26: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

7

21

14

17

2.0

4.0

5.0

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), fine grained, dark brown

dark grayCLAYEY SAND (SC), fine grained, light brown and gray, with limestone

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine grained, light gray, with shell

Boring Terminated at 5 Feet

Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

GR

APH

ICLO

G

THIS

BOR

ING

LOG

ISN

OT

VALI

DIF

SEPA

RAT

EDFR

OM

OR

IGIN

ALR

EPO

RT.

GEO

SMAR

TLO

G-N

OW

ELL

H41

5506

6SO

UTH

POR

T.G

PJTE

RR

ACO

N20

15.G

DT

12/8

/15

Tampa, FloridaSITE:

Page 1 of 1

Advancement Method:Hand Auger

Abandonment Method:Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: H4155066

Drill Rig: N/A

Boring Started: 10/28/2015

BORING LOG NO. HA-2Port of TampaCLIENT:Tampa, Florida

Driller: H. Peach

Boring Completed: 10/28/2015

Exhibit: A-9

See Exhibit A-5 for description of field procedures

See Appendix B for description of laboratoryprocedures and additional data (if any).See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andabbreviations.0

PROJECT: Southport Warehouse

504 East Tyler StreetTampa, Florida

PER

CEN

TFI

NES

WAT

ERC

ON

TEN

T(%

)

SAM

PLE

TYPE

WAT

ERLE

VEL

OBS

ERVA

TIO

NS

DEP

TH(F

t.)

5

FIEL

DTE

STR

ESU

LTS

DEPTH

LOCATION

Latitude: 27.814517° Longitude: -82.382901°

See Exhibit A-4

Groundwater initially observed at a depth of 2' 8".WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Page 27: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

4

920

2.0

3.0

3.5

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine grained, gray, with roots

light brown, roots absent

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), fine grained, grayish-brown

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH CLAY (SP-SC), fine grained, light orange-brown, withlimestoneAuger Refusal at 3.5 Feet

Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

GR

APH

ICLO

G

THIS

BOR

ING

LOG

ISN

OT

VALI

DIF

SEPA

RAT

EDFR

OM

OR

IGIN

ALR

EPO

RT.

GEO

SMAR

TLO

G-N

OW

ELL

H41

5506

6SO

UTH

POR

T.G

PJTE

RR

ACO

N20

15.G

DT

12/8

/15

Tampa, FloridaSITE:

Page 1 of 1

Advancement Method:Hand Auger

Abandonment Method:Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: H4155066

Drill Rig: N/A

Boring Started: 10/28/2015

BORING LOG NO. HA-3Port of TampaCLIENT:Tampa, Florida

Driller: H. Peach

Boring Completed: 10/28/2015

Exhibit: A-10

See Exhibit A-5 for description of field procedures

See Appendix B for description of laboratoryprocedures and additional data (if any).See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andabbreviations.0

PROJECT: Southport Warehouse

504 East Tyler StreetTampa, Florida

PER

CEN

TFI

NES

WAT

ERC

ON

TEN

T(%

)

SAM

PLE

TYPE

WAT

ERLE

VEL

OBS

ERVA

TIO

NS

DEP

TH(F

t.)

FIEL

DTE

STR

ESU

LTS

DEPTH

LOCATION

Latitude: 27.814511° Longitude: -82.38152°

See Exhibit A-4

Groundwater initially observed at a depth of 1' 1".WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Page 28: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

4

13

25

16

1.5

3.5

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine grained, dark brown, with roots

light brown, roots absentCLAYEY SAND (SC), light brown, with rock

Auger Refusal at 3.5 Feet

Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

GR

APH

ICLO

G

THIS

BOR

ING

LOG

ISN

OT

VALI

DIF

SEPA

RAT

EDFR

OM

OR

IGIN

ALR

EPO

RT.

GEO

SMAR

TLO

G-N

OW

ELL

H41

5506

6SO

UTH

POR

T.G

PJTE

RR

ACO

N20

15.G

DT

12/8

/15

Tampa, FloridaSITE:

Page 1 of 1

Advancement Method:Hand Auger

Abandonment Method:Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: H4155066

Drill Rig: N/A

Boring Started: 10/28/2015

BORING LOG NO. HA-4Port of TampaCLIENT:Tampa, Florida

Driller: H. Peach

Boring Completed: 10/28/2015

Exhibit: A-11

See Exhibit A-5 for description of field procedures

See Appendix B for description of laboratoryprocedures and additional data (if any).See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andabbreviations.0

PROJECT: Southport Warehouse

504 East Tyler StreetTampa, Florida

PER

CEN

TFI

NES

WAT

ERC

ON

TEN

T(%

)

SAM

PLE

TYPE

WAT

ERLE

VEL

OBS

ERVA

TIO

NS

DEP

TH(F

t.)

FIEL

DTE

STR

ESU

LTS

DEPTH

LOCATION

Latitude: 27.8145° Longitude: -82.380871°

See Exhibit A-4

Groundwater initially observed at a depth of 1' 4".WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Page 29: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

5

1821

2.5

3.5

5.0

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine grained, gray, with roots

brown

CLAYEY SAND (SC), fine grained, brown

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine grained, light gray, with shell

Boring Terminated at 5 Feet

Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

GR

APH

ICLO

G

THIS

BOR

ING

LOG

ISN

OT

VALI

DIF

SEPA

RAT

EDFR

OM

OR

IGIN

ALR

EPO

RT.

GEO

SMAR

TLO

G-N

OW

ELL

H41

5506

6SO

UTH

POR

T.G

PJTE

RR

ACO

N20

15.G

DT

12/8

/15

Tampa, FloridaSITE:

Page 1 of 1

Advancement Method:Hand Auger

Abandonment Method:Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: H4155066

Drill Rig: N/A

Boring Started: 10/28/2015

BORING LOG NO. HA-5Port of TampaCLIENT:Tampa, Florida

Driller: H. Peach

Boring Completed: 10/28/2015

Exhibit: A-12

See Exhibit A-5 for description of field procedures

See Appendix B for description of laboratoryprocedures and additional data (if any).See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andabbreviations.0

PROJECT: Southport Warehouse

504 East Tyler StreetTampa, Florida

PER

CEN

TFI

NES

WAT

ERC

ON

TEN

T(%

)

SAM

PLE

TYPE

WAT

ERLE

VEL

OBS

ERVA

TIO

NS

DEP

TH(F

t.)

5

FIEL

DTE

STR

ESU

LTS

DEPTH

LOCATION

Latitude: 27.814461° Longitude: -82.379535°

See Exhibit A-4

Groundwater initially observed at a depth of 3'.WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Page 30: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

4

1621

3.0

4.0

5.0

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine grained, gray

light brownbrown

CLAYEY SAND (SC), fine grained, brown

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine grained, light gray, with shell

Boring Terminated at 5 Feet

Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

GR

APH

ICLO

G

THIS

BOR

ING

LOG

ISN

OT

VALI

DIF

SEPA

RAT

EDFR

OM

OR

IGIN

ALR

EPO

RT.

GEO

SMAR

TLO

G-N

OW

ELL

H41

5506

6SO

UTH

POR

T.G

PJTE

RR

ACO

N20

15.G

DT

12/8

/15

Tampa, FloridaSITE:

Page 1 of 1

Advancement Method:Hand Auger

Abandonment Method:Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: H4155066

Drill Rig: N/A

Boring Started: 10/28/2015

BORING LOG NO. HA-6Port of TampaCLIENT:Tampa, Florida

Driller: H. Peach

Boring Completed: 10/28/2015

Exhibit: A-13

See Exhibit A-5 for description of field procedures

See Appendix B for description of laboratoryprocedures and additional data (if any).See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andabbreviations.0

PROJECT: Southport Warehouse

504 East Tyler StreetTampa, Florida

PER

CEN

TFI

NES

WAT

ERC

ON

TEN

T(%

)

SAM

PLE

TYPE

WAT

ERLE

VEL

OBS

ERVA

TIO

NS

DEP

TH(F

t.)

5

FIEL

DTE

STR

ESU

LTS

DEPTH

LOCATION

Latitude: 27.814459° Longitude: -82.378767°

See Exhibit A-4

Groundwater initially observed at a depth of 3'.WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Page 31: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

APPENDIX B – LABORATORY TESTING

Page 32: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Geotechnical Engineering ReportSouthport Warehouse Site ■ Gibsonton, FloridaDecember 8, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. H4155066

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable Exhibit B-1

Laboratory Testing

During the field exploration, a portion of each recovered sample was sealed in a jar andtransported to our laboratory for further visual observation and laboratory testing. The soilsamples were classified in general accordance with the appended General Notes and theUnified Soil Classification System based on the material's texture and plasticity. The estimatedgroup symbol for the Unified Soil Classification System is shown on the boring logs and a briefdescription of the Unified Soil Classification System is included in Appendix B.

Laboratory tests conducted for this project included moisture content, grain size analysis anddetermination of the amount passing a No. 200 sieve. The results are on the following table andon the boring logs in Appendix A. Grain size distributions are included following the laboratoryresults summary.

Page 33: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Geotechnical Engineering ReportSouthport Warehouse Site ■ Gibsonton, FloridaDecember 8, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. H4155066

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable Exhibit B-2

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY RESULTSSOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE

KRACKER AVENUEGIBSONTON, FLORIDA

Terracon Project No. H4155066December 8, 2015

BoringNumber

SampleDepth (ft)

Soil Description USCSID

StratumNo.

SieveAnalysisPercentPassing

#200

NaturalMoisture

(%)From To

B-1 0 - 2 Gray fine sand SP 1 4 16B-1 2 - 4 Grayish-brown silty sand SM 1 18 --

B-2 6 - 8 Light brown sand withsilt SP-SM 1 6 --

HA-1 0 - 2 Gray fine sand SP 1 6 --HA-1 2 - 4 Dark brown clayey sand SC 2 17 7

HA-2 0 - 1.5 Dark brown sand withsilt SP-SM 1 7 14

HA-2 2 - 4 Light brown and grayclayey sand SC 2 21 17

HA-3 1 - 2 Light brown fine sand SP 1 4 --

HA-3 3 - 3.5 Light orange-brown sandwith clay SP-SC 2 9 20

HA-4 0 - 1 Dark brown fine sand SP 1 4 25HA-4 1.5 - 3.5 Light brown clayey sand SC 2 13 16HA-5 1 - 2.5 Brown fine sand SP 1 5 --HA-5 2.5 - 3.5 Brown clayey sand SC 2 18 21HA-6 0 - 1 Gray fine sand SP 1 4 --HA-6 3 - 4 Brown clayey sand SC 2 16 21

Page 34: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100

0.079 0.079

GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS

PERCENT FINER

3/4 1/23/8

SIEVE(size)

D60

30 403 60

HYDROMETERU.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES

% FINES % CLAY USCSB-1B-2

HA-1

0.00.00.0

7.00.00.0

74.594.193.7

0.094 0.104 0.1040.18 0.161 0.161

0.85 0.85

DEPTH

GRAIN SIZE

16 20

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

REMARKS

SILT OR CLAYCOBBLESGRAVEL SAND

medium

18.55.96.3

U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS

44 10063 2

fine coarse

SOIL DESCRIPTION

CU 2.03 2.04

BORING ID

10 14 506 2001.5 81 140

coarse fine

COEFFICIENTS

% COBBLES % GRAVEL % SAND

D30

D10

CC

PER

CEN

TFI

NER

BYW

EIG

HT

PERC

ENT

CO

ARSER

BYW

EIGH

T

% SILT

100.096.5293.088.2384.6180.3970.6654.0118.46

100.099.9299.3295.6782.0256.485.93

100.099.7399.3595.2380.7356.626.32

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTIONASTM D422

1 1/2"1"

3/4"1/2"3/8"#4#10#20#40#60#100#200

2 - 46 - 80 - 2

504 East Tyler StreetTampa, Florida

PROJECT NUMBER: H4155066PROJECT: Southport Warehouse

SITE: Tampa, Florida CLIENT: Port of Tampa Tampa, Florida

EXHIBIT: B-1

LABO

RAT

OR

YTE

STS

ARE

NO

TVA

LID

IFSE

PAR

ATED

FRO

MO

RIG

INAL

REP

OR

T.G

RAI

NSI

ZE:U

SCS

1H

4155

066

SOU

THPO

RT.

GPJ

TER

RA

CO

N20

12.G

DT

12/8

/15

Page 35: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100

0.081 0.08 0.081

GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS

PERCENT FINER

3/4 1/23/8

SIEVE(size)

D60

30 403 60

HYDROMETERU.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES

% FINES % CLAY USCSHA-3HA-5HA-6

0.00.00.0

0.00.00.0

95.694.996.2

0.105 0.104 0.1060.161 0.156 0.163

0.85 0.87 0.85

DEPTH

GRAIN SIZE

POORLY GRADED SAND(SP)

POORLY GRADED SAND(SP)

16 20

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

REMARKS

SILT OR CLAYCOBBLESGRAVEL SAND

medium

4.45.13.8

U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS

44 10063 2

fine coarse

SOIL DESCRIPTION

CU 1.99 1.95 2.00

BORING ID

10 14 506 2001.5 81 140

coarse fine

COEFFICIENTS

% COBBLES % GRAVEL % SAND

D30

D10

CC

PER

CEN

TFI

NER

BYW

EIG

HT

PERC

ENT

CO

ARSER

BYW

EIGH

T

% SILT

100.099.9499.6295.3981.1456.634.36

100.099.7695.9182.5658.255.14

100.099.1595.3381.4755.833.8

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTIONASTM D422

SP

SP

1 1/2"1"

3/4"1/2"3/8"#4#10#20#40#60#100#200

1 - 21 - 2.50 - 1

504 East Tyler StreetTampa, Florida

PROJECT NUMBER: H4155066PROJECT: Southport Warehouse

SITE: Tampa, Florida CLIENT: Port of Tampa Tampa, Florida

EXHIBIT: B-2

LABO

RAT

OR

YTE

STS

ARE

NO

TVA

LID

IFSE

PAR

ATED

FRO

MO

RIG

INAL

REP

OR

T.G

RAI

NSI

ZE:U

SCS

1H

4155

066

SOU

THPO

RT.

GPJ

TER

RA

CO

N20

12.G

DT

12/8

/15

Page 36: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

APPENDIX CSUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

Page 37: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

Exhibit: C-1

Unconfined CompressiveStrength Qu, (psf)

500 to 1,000

1,000 to 2,000

2,000 to 4,000

4,000 to 8,000

> 8,000

less than 500

Non-plasticLowMediumHigh

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Hand Penetrometer

Torvane

Dynamic Cone Penetrometer

Photo-Ionization Detector

Organic Vapor AnalyzerSA

MP

LIN

G

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

FIE

LD

TE

ST

S

(HP)

(T)

(DCP)

(PID)

(OVA)

GENERAL NOTES

Over 12 in. (300 mm)12 in. to 3 in. (300mm to 75mm)3 in. to #4 sieve (75mm to 4.75 mm)#4 to #200 sieve (4.75mm to 0.075mmPassing #200 sieve (0.075mm)

Particle Size

< 55 - 12> 12

Percent ofDry Weight

Descriptive Term(s)of other constituents

RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES

01 - 1011 - 30

> 30

Plasticity Index

Soil classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dryweight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils haveless than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as clays if they are plastic, andsilts if they are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may beadded according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse-grained soils are definedon the basis of their in-place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency.

LOCATION AND ELEVATION NOTES

Percent ofDry Weight

Major Componentof Sample

TraceWithModifier

RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY

TraceWithModifier

DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION

BouldersCobblesGravelSandSilt or Clay

Descriptive Term(s)of other constituents

< 1515 - 29> 30

Term

PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION

Water levels indicated on the soil boringlogs are the levels measured in theborehole at the times indicated.Groundwater level variations will occurover time. In low permeability soils,accurate determination of groundwaterlevels is not possible with short termwater level observations.

Water Level Aftera Specified Period of Time

Water Level After aSpecified Period of Time

Water InitiallyEncountered

AugerCuttings Rock Core

GrabSample

NoRecovery

ShelbyTube

StandardPenetrationTest

Unless otherwise noted, Latitude and Longitude are approximately determined using a hand-held GPS device. The accuracyof such devices is variable. Surface elevation data annotated with +/- indicates that no actual topographical survey wasconducted to confirm the surface elevation. Instead, the surface elevation was approximately determined from topographicmaps of the area.

ST

RE

NG

TH

TE

RM

S

RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS

(More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve.)Density determined by Standard Penetration Resistance

CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS(50% or more passing the No. 200 sieve.)

Consistency determined by laboratory shear strength testing, fieldvisual-manual procedures or standard penetration resistance

Descriptive Term(Consistency)

Very Soft

Soft

0 - 1

Safety HammerSPT N-Value(Blows/Ft.)

2 - 4

4 - 8

8 - 15

15 - 30

Automatic HammerSPT N-Value(Blows/Ft.)

1 - 3

3 - 6

6 - 12

12 - 24

> 24

Medium-Stiff

Stiff

Very Stiff

Hard

Descriptive Term(Density)

Very Loose

Loose

Medium Dense

Dense

Very Dense

Safety HammerSPT N-Value(Blows/Ft.)

0 - 3

4 - 9

10 - 29

30 - 50

> 50

Automatic HammerSPT N-Value(Blows/Ft.)

< 3

3 - 8

8 - 24

24 - 40

> 40

> 30

< 1

Page 38: Geotechnical Engineering Report - D.N. Higginsdnhiggins.com/docs/ITB 008-16 Geotechnical Report.pdf · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ENTRANCE ROAD SOUTHPORT WAREHOUSE SITE GIBSONTON,

C-2

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests A

Soil Classification

Group

Symbol Group Name

B

Coarse Grained Soils:

More than 50% retained

on No. 200 sieve

Gravels:

More than 50% of

coarse fraction retained

on No. 4 sieve

Clean Gravels:

Less than 5% fines C

Cu 4 and 1 Cc 3 E

GW Well-graded gravel F

Cu 4 and/or 1 Cc 3 E

GP Poorly graded gravel F

Gravels with Fines:

More than 12% fines C

Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F,G,H

Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel F,G,H

Sands:

50% or more of coarse

fraction passes No. 4

sieve

Clean Sands:

Less than 5% fines D

Cu 6 and 1 Cc 3 E

SW Well-graded sand I

Cu 6 and/or 1 Cc 3 E

SP Poorly graded sand I

Sands with Fines:

More than 12% fines D

Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand G,H,I

Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G,H,I

Fine-Grained Soils:

50% or more passes the

No. 200 sieve

Silts and Clays:

Liquid limit less than 50

Inorganic: PI 7 and plots on or above “A” line

J CL Lean clay

K,L,M

PI 4 or plots below “A” line J ML Silt

K,L,M

Organic: Liquid limit - oven dried

0.75 OL Organic clay

K,L,M,N

Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K,L,M,O

Silts and Clays:

Liquid limit 50 or more

Inorganic: PI plots on or above “A” line CH Fat clay

K,L,M

PI plots below “A” line MH Elastic Silt K,L,M

Organic: Liquid limit - oven dried

0.75 OH Organic clay

K,L,M,P

Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K,L,M,Q

Highly organic soils: Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat

A Based on the material passing the 3-inch (75-mm) sieve

B If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add “with cobbles

or boulders, or both” to group name. C

Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded

gravel with silt, GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorly

graded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay. D

Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded

sand with silt, SW-SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded

sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay

E Cu = D60/D10 Cc =

6010

2

30

DxD

)(D

F If soil contains 15% sand, add “with sand” to group name.

G If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM.

H If fines are organic, add “with organic fines” to group name.

I If soil contains 15% gravel, add “with gravel” to group name.

J If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay.

K If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add “with sand” or “with gravel,”

whichever is predominant. L

If soil contains 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add “sandy” to

group name. M

If soil contains 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add

“gravelly” to group name. N

PI 4 and plots on or above “A” line. O

PI 4 or plots below “A” line. P

PI plots on or above “A” line. Q

PI plots below “A” line.