Geotechnical Exploration and Evaluation Report Revision No PDF Free Download

Geotechnical Exploration and Evaluation Report Revision No. UNF Transportation Projects Eco Road Extension Jacksonville, Florida CSI Geo Project No.: --- Arcadis Project No.: JK. Prepared by CSI Geo, Inc. St. Johns Bluff Road S., Suite Jacksonville, FL Tel: () - Fax: () - Prepared for Arcadis U.S., Inc. June,

TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE NO.. Project Information......................................... General Project Information. Site Conditions............................................. Existing Site Conditions and Project Description. Geotechnical Exploration.................................... Field Exploration.. Roadway.. Pond. Laboratory Testing. Environmental Classification Testing. Subsurface Conditions....................................... General. Soil Conditions. Groundwater Conditions. Limerock Bearing Ratio Test Results. Environmental Corrosion Test Results. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation and Recommendations....... Basis for Evaluation & Recommendations. Roadway Subgrade Evaluation. Suitability of Pond Borrow Materials for Construction. Pavement Subgrade Design Parameters. General Site Preparation and Construction Recommendations....... Surface Water Control. Groundwater Control. Standard Clearing, Grubbing, and Surface Stripping. Removal of Unsuitable Materials & Excavation Backfilling for Subgrades. Cross Drains and Utility Lines Subgrade Preparation. Roadway Subgrade Stabilization and Compaction. Construction Monitoring & Testing Guidelines....................... Report Limitations.......................................... APPENDIX Site Location Map Summary of Laboratory Test Results Field Exploration Plan Environmental Corrosion Test Results Roadway and Pond Soil Survey Limerock Bearing Ratio Test Results General Subsurface Profiles Key to Soil Classification SPT Borings Logs Field and Laboratory Test Procedures i

. PROJECT INFORMATION. General Project Information This Geotechnical Exploration and Evaluation Report has been prepared for the proposed Eco Road Extension project. The project site is located at the University of North Florida (UNF) campus in Jacksonville, Florida. The proposed roadway construction consists of a new two-lane roadway and multi-use path alignment. The new Eco Road extension will connect between the roundabout on Eco Road and traverse generally north and west to intersect with Central Parkway. Other features of the project consist of the construction of a new stormwater management pond. Our last geotechnical exploration and evaluation report was submitted on May,. Since that submittal, we have performed additional site visits to verify groundwater levels near the proposed pond and outfall structure. This report (Revision No. ) discusses the project background information, the geotechnical investigation program, geotechnical-related findings, engineering evaluation and recommendations. Our study required the collection of surface and subsurface data, the performance of laboratory testing, and evaluation of the data. The following presents an outline of the scope of our services: Performed site visits to observe existing conditions and equipment access issues Prepared boring layout Performed underground utility clearance through Sunshine State One-Call and by coordinating with UNF staff Mobilized drilling equipment to the site Visually classified soil samples using AASHTO Soil Classification System Performed laboratory testing on selected soil samples Prepared this geotechnical report, which includes: o Discussion of the project background information o Discussion and presentation of the geotechnical investigation program o Presentation of field exploratory borings drilled for the roadway construction and new pond o Summary of laboratory index tests and environmental corrosion tests data UNF Transportation Projects Eco Road Extension Page of

o Evaluation of the subsurface soils and recommendations concerning the suitability of the subsurface soils for support of the planned roadway construction o Evaluation of the suitability of pond soils for borrow material for use in construction o Recommendations for the required site preparation and earthwork construction. Information about this project has been provided to us by Mr. Erik van Zanden, P.E. of Arcadis, U.S., Inc. (Arcadis). The following related documents have been furnished to us electronically: Overall Concept Roll Plot Prepared by: Arcadis Received: -- Electronic Design Files Prepared by: Arcadis Received: -- Outfall Location Exhibit in PDF format Prepared by: Arcadis Received: -- UNF Transportation Projects Eco Road Extension Page of

. SITE CONDITIONS. Existing Site Conditions and Project Description The existing project site conditions generally consist of undeveloped wooded land with signs of sporadic trail roads throughout the site. The alignment traverses through low lying wetland areas that appear to act as a floodplain during the wet seasons and during periods of high rainfall. During this geotechnical exploration an approximately, linear feet section of the proposed roadway alignment was observed to have ponded water at the ground surface or standing water above the existing grades. The existing pond east of the proposed roadway alignment was observed to have a weir in the southwest corner which appears to drain towards the roadway alignment when overtopped. Based on the information provided to us, we understand that the project consists of the construction of a new two-lane roadway with travel lanes, curb and gutter, grass shoulders, and a multi-use path. The project limits extend from the roundabout on Eco Road and traverse generally north and west to intersect with Central Parkway for a total distance of approximately, feet. Other features of the project consist of the construction of a new stormwater management pond. UNF Transportation Projects Eco Road Extension Page of

. GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION. Field Exploration.. Roadway The geotechnical exploration for the roadway extension consisted of a total of Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings (B-WE- through B-WE-, B-WE-A, and B-WE-B) drilled to depths ranging from to feet below the existing grades. Additionally, two () bulk soil samples (LBR-WE- and LBR-WE-) were collected from within the limits of the proposed roadway construction for laboratory Limerock Bearing Ratio (LBR) testing... Pond A total of two () SPT borings (PB-WE- and PB-WE-) were performed for the proposed new pond and were each drilled to a depth of feet below the existing grades. The test boring locations were field located by CSI Geo, Inc. (CSI Geo) using handheld GPS. The approximate locations of the SPT borings and the LBR test samples are shown on the Field Exploration Plan sheets included in the Appendix. A brief description of the exploratory drilling and sampling techniques used is presented in the Field and Laboratory Test Procedures section presented in the Appendix. Soil samples obtained during the field exploration program were visually classified in the field and then reviewed and reclassified by a geotechnical engineer in the laboratory based on the AASHTO Soil Classification System for each soil type encountered. The General Subsurface Profile sheets included in the Appendix indicates the penetration resistance, the groundwater level measured at the time of drilling, and presents the soil strata encountered. In this presentation, soil strata encountered by the borings are identified by numbers as shown on the General Subsurface Profile sheets. The numbers used to identify the soil strata refer to the soil descriptions as outlined on the Roadway and Pond Soil Survey sheet included in the Appendix. The SPT Boring Logs included in the Appendix present detailed descriptions of the subsurface soils, the groundwater levels encountered at the time of drilling, and the estimated seasonal high water levels at each boring location. The stratification lines and depth designations on the boring UNF Transportation Projects Eco Road Extension Page of

logs represent the approximate boundary between the various soils encountered, and the transition from one stratum to the next should be considered approximate.. Laboratory Testing Quantitative laboratory testing was performed on representative soil samples recovered from the field exploration. These tests were performed to better define the physical properties of the soils encountered. The laboratory tests were performed to determine percent organics, natural moisture content and percent fines content of the soil samples. Sieve analyses were performed on selected samples to determine their full grain size distribution. Results of laboratory tests are presented in the Summary of Laboratory Test Results and summarized in the Roadway and Pond Soil Survey Sheet in the Appendix. Additionally, two bulk soil samples (LBR-WE- and LBR-WE-) of the roadway subgrade were collected and tested in the laboratory for determination of the Limerock Bearing Ratio (LBR), maximum dry density, and optimum moisture content. Results of the LBR testing are presented in the Appendix.. Environmental Classification Testing Environmental classification tests were performed on selected soil samples obtained from the geotechnical exploration. A total of one soil sample from the roadway exploration and one soil sample from the pond was selected for environmental classification testing. The tests were conducted in order to define the electrical resistivity, chlorides content, sulfates content, and ph of the samples. The laboratory test data was used to determine the substructure environmental classification in accordance with the FDOT Structures Manual, Structures Design Guidelines. The Environmental Corrosion Test Results for roadway and pond are included in the Appendix. UNF Transportation Projects Eco Road Extension Page of

. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS. General The subsurface conditions outlined below and presented in this report highlight the major subsurface stratifications encountered during our geotechnical exploration program at the site. When reviewing the subsurface conditions outlined in this report, it should be understood that the subsurface conditions will vary across the proposed construction area and between the boring locations, and that the transition between soil strata may be gradual.. Soil Conditions Soils encountered during our subsurface investigation program were classified based on the AASHTO Soil Classification System and were found to consist of the following strata: Stratum Number Soil Description AASHTO Classification Gray and Brown Fine SAND; Slightly Silty Fine SAND A- Brown and Gray Silty Fine SAND A-- Topsoil; Dark Gray Organic Silty Fine SAND; Dark Gray Organic Slightly Silty Fine SAND A- Unsuitable organic soils (A-) were encountered in certain areas of the proposed roadway. Test borings performed between station + to station +, specifically in test borings B-WE- through B-WE-, encountered unsuitable organic soils (A-) in the upper to feet of depth below the existing grades. Test borings B-WE- through B-WE-B performed within the area of station + to station +, encountered unsuitable organic soils (A-) in the upper. to feet of depth. Generally, the unsuitable organic soils (A-) mixed with roots and wood pieces appear to be highly erratic in nature. It is emphasized that due to the erratic nature of these soils, the thickness and depth of the unsuitable material may vary from those noted herein, and that in some locations the unsuitable material may be deeper.. Groundwater Conditions The groundwater level was measured and recorded as encountered at the time of drilling. The depth of groundwater level was measured to range from about. feet above the existing grades UNF Transportation Projects Eco Road Extension Page of

to. feet below the existing grades (Elevations. to. feet). The alignment traverses through low lying wetland areas that appear to act as a floodplain during the wet seasons and during periods of high rainfall. During this geotechnical exploration an approximately, linear feet section (Stations + to +) of the proposed roadway alignment was observed to have either ponded water at the existing ground surface or very near surface groundwater levels. The depths of the groundwater levels at the boring locations are marked on the General Subsurface Profiles sheets in the Appendix. The estimated seasonal high water levels () were measured and recorded at the time of drilling. The depth of the was measured to range from about. to. feet below the existing grades where encountered. The is estimated to be above the existing grades and approximately. to. feet above the encountered groundwater levels in the low lying wetland areas between stations + to +. Subsequently, CSI Geo was requested to provide an estimate of the at an outfall structure location to be constructed southwest of the roadway at station +. During a site visit on June, the at the proposed outfall location was estimated to be at the existing ground surface (Elevation. feet). At the time of this site visit CSI Geo also reevaluated the at the pond boring locations. The at the two pond borings (PB- WE-, and PB-WE-) were found to be between a depth of to inches below the existing grades (Elevation. to. feet). Determination of the estimated seasonal high groundwater level was made using the methodology described by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS). In sandy soils the method involves examining soil cuttings from the borings for subtle changes in root content and soil coloration. These subtle changes are indicators of the highest level the groundwater level has been for a prolonged period. Fluctuations of the groundwater levels should be anticipated as a result of topographic changes, seasonal climatic variations, surface water runoff patterns, fluctuations of adjacent water bodies, and other factors. During seasonal high precipitation, groundwater levels can be expected to rise above the levels recorded during this exploration. Therefore, the design should account for the UNF Transportation Projects Eco Road Extension Page of

possibility of groundwater level variations and should be based on the assumption that such variations will occur. The bottom of the roadway base course should achieve the minimum clearance above the according to the FDOT Specifications. Therefore, where the is in conflict with the base, the grades must either be raised, or black-base should be used in place of limerock base.. Limerock Bearing Ratio Test Results Two Limerock Bearing Ratio (LBR) and Modified Proctor compaction tests (LBR-WE- and LBR-WE-) were performed on bulk samples obtained from the proposed roadway subgrade soils. The locations of the LBR soil samples are shown on the Field Exploration Plan sheets in the Appendix. The LBR test results indicate maximum LBR values ranging from and. The LBR values are based on assumed subsoil compaction criteria equal to percent of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density. The LBR and Modified Proctor compaction test data are presented in the Appendix.. Environmental Corrosion Test Results Results of the environmental corrosion tests for roadway and pond are summarized in the Environmental Corrosion Test Results sheet in the Appendix. The laboratory test data was used to determine the substructure environmental classification in accordance with the FDOT Structures Design Guidelines Manual. Based on the test results, the subsurface soils for roadway and pond can generally be environmentally classified as Extremely Aggressive for both concrete and steel. UNF Transportation Projects Eco Road Extension Page of

. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Basis for Evaluation & Recommendations Geotechnical evaluation and recommendations as presented in this report are based on our site observations, field and laboratory test data obtained, and our understanding of the project information as previously described in this report. The discovery of site and/or subsurface conditions during construction that deviate from the data obtained in this exploration should be reported to CSI Geo for re-evaluation.. Roadway Subgrade Evaluation For the subsurface conditions at the site to be considered favorable for support of a flexible pavement roadway, a certain degree of site preparation consisting of the removal of unsuitable organic soils, trees, root systems, vegetation and surficial topsoils will be necessary. This should be followed by placement of the select backfill or structural fill as needed to achieve the design finished pavement grades. Some portions of the proposed roadway are underlain by unsuitable deposits of organic soils (A- ) classified as muck (Stratum No. ). The unsuitable organic soils (Stratum No. ) were encountered primarily in the areas of station + to station +, generally in the upper. to feet of depth. Unsuitable soils were also encountered in the areas of station + to station + in the upper to feet below the existing grades. The A- soils (Stratum No. ) are considered as select material and suitable for construction. The occasional deposits of A-- soils (Stratum No. ) can also be treated as select material; however, this stratum may retain excess moisture and may be difficult to dry and to compact and should be used in the embankment above the groundwater level at the time of construction. The A-- soils may not be used in the subgrade portion of the roadbed due to its organic content. The A- (Stratum No. ) soils should be considered unsuitable and should be removed in accordance with FDOT Standard Plans Index -, unless otherwise shown on the plans. UNF Transportation Projects Eco Road Extension Page of

. Suitability of Pond Borrow Materials for Construction Based on our findings, the proposed pond is generally underlain by loose to dense sands (A-), until the boring termination depth of feet below existing grades. It is cautioned that a layer of very dense silty sands (A--) considered to be hardpan was encountered at a depth of to feet below the existing grades and difficult excavation may be expected in this area. Fine sands and slightly silty sands (Stratum No. ) are considered as select material. Silty sands (Stratum No. ) can be treated as select material; however, this stratum may contain excess moisture and may be difficult to dry and to compact. The A-- soils may not be used in the subgrade portion of the roadbed due to its organic content. If encountered, organic material (A- ) should be considered as muck and unsuitable for construction. An extensive dewatering system may be required in order to lower the groundwater level in the ponds prior to the pond excavation. This practice should allow the select (A-) soils to drain adequately prior to being excavated and stockpiled. Without an adequate dewatering system, the stockpiled material will stay saturated, thus being difficult to dry and to compact for backfilling purposes.. Pavement Subgrade Design Parameters We recommend that a design LBR of be used for determination of the Soil Support Value (SSV). UNF Transportation Projects Eco Road Extension Page of

. GENERAL SITE PREPARATION AND CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES. Surface Water Control Any surface water runoff that is encountered should be controlled during the initial site preparations. Depending on the climatic conditions at the time of construction, surface water control is likely to be required during subgrade preparation. In order to control the water, interceptor perimeter drainage ditches should be excavated immediately adjacent to the construction areas for temporary collection of surface water runoff. Construction areas should be graded to assure drainage of stormwater away from immediate areas of preparation.. Groundwater Control The lowering of groundwater levels by to feet can be achieved by pumping from barrel sumps situated in perimeter ditches or pits. Groundwater should be maintained at least foot below the bottom of any excavations made during construction and feet below the surface of any compaction operations. Where deeper or more positive groundwater control is desired for prolonged periods, a well point system may be required.. Standard Clearing, Grubbing, and Surface Stripping Vegetation, topsoils, roots and organic zones, obstructions, as well as existing pavement sections should be stripped and removed from the construction area. Most areas of the project will require standard clearing and grubbing. Areas within the project that require standard clearing and grubbing should be performed in accordance with the FDOT Specifications.. Removal of Unsuitable Materials & Excavation Backfilling For Subgrades Where organic (A-) soils, plastic soils, or other material considered unsuitable exists within the limits of the proposed roadway, they should be excavated and backfilled with suitable material. Removal of unsuitable materials should be performed in accordance with FDOT Standard Plans Index - standards. Due to the wooded nature of the site, extensive root zones should be expected through the roadway corridor. If left in place the root zones may contribute to some long-term decay related settlements. Palmetto underbrush vegetation was observed in large areas of the site. This type of vegetation has large tubular roots with finger-sized roots oriented horizontally and below the UNF Transportation Projects Eco Road Extension Page of

normal level of standard stripping. While uneconomical to strip to a level to remove this zone, depending on design finished grades it may be desirable to remove this zone. This can likely best be accomplished by using a root rake on track-mounted equipment to uproot and remove large root mat sections. It is recommended that the upper to inches of surficial soils be root raked. Insufficient removal in the surficial soils can result in low density results due to higher concentrations of low density material and high moisture contents. Imported fill should be select soil. The backfill material gradation and compaction requirements should conform to the FDOT Standard Specifications.. Cross Drains and Utility Line Subgrade Preparation Based on the field exploration program and the data collected, we anticipate that the proposed cross drain and utility line bearing levels will consist, generally of suitable sands (A-) with occassional silty sands (A--). Silty sands (A--) can be considered suitable, however, they may contain excess moisture and may be difficult to dry and compact. If plastic soils are encountered along the alignment of the cross drains, utility lines or other proposed structures, they should be excavated to a minimum depth of one foot below the design invert elevations and replaced with suitable A- fill material. Organic soils (A-) where encountered should be removed in their entirety. Excavation of unsuitable material should be performed in accordance with FDOT Standard Plans Index -.. Roadway Subgrade Stabilization and Compaction The upper one foot of the subgrade soil should be stabilized to achieve an LBR Value of with a maximum plasticity index of. The stabilization procedures and the stabilizing materials should be as presented in the Standard Specifications. The pavement subgrade should be compacted to meet the required densities as presented in the FDOT Standard Specifications. UNF Transportation Projects Eco Road Extension Page of

. CONSTRUCTION MONITORING & TESTING GUIDELINES Fill placement and compaction operations should be observed and documented by a qualified engineering technician working under the direction of the Engineer. Significant deviations, either from the applicable specifications or from good practice, should be brought to the attention of the Geotechnical Engineer for evaluation and appropriate recommendations. Prior to initiating any of the compaction operations, we recommend that representative samples of the backfill or structural fill material to be used and acceptable exposed in-place soils to be collected and tested to determine their compaction and classification characteristics. The maximum dry density, optimum moisture content, gradation and plasticity characteristics should be determined. These tests are needed for compaction quality control of the backfill or structural fill and existing soils and to determine if the fill material is acceptable. A representative number of in-place field density tests should be performed on each lift for the compacted backfill materials. Also, where no additional fill is needed, in-place field density tests should be performed on existing soils to confirm that the required degree of compaction has been obtained. UNF Transportation Projects Eco Road Extension Page of

. REPORT LIMITATIONS The subsurface exploration program including our evaluation and recommendations was performed in general accordance of accepted geotechnical engineering principles and standard practices. CSI Geo is not responsible for any independent conclusions, opinions, or interpretations made by others based on the data presented in this report. This report does not reflect any variations that may occur adjacent or between soil borings. The discovery of any site or subsurface condition during construction that deviates from the findings and data as presented in this report should be reported to CSI Geo for evaluation. If the locations of the proposed project features are changed, our office should be contacted so our recommendations can be re-evaluated. We recommend that CSI Geo be given the opportunity to review the final design drawings and specifications to ensure that our recommendations are properly included and implemented. UNF Transportation Projects Eco Road Extension Page of

APPENDIX

CURB INLET FLOW LINE=.' INVERT=.' INVERT=.' OPEN HOLE APPROX. ' DIAM ETER BY ' DEEP DOUBLE YELLOW " RCP ' CLF W/BARB " PINE CONC. DW Y S.E.W. IE=. OUTFALL STRUCTURE TOP=.' IE=.' " RCP TOP=.' N Feet POT STA. +. CENTRAL PKW Y BEGIN PROJECT STATION: + B-WE-A B-WE- LBR-WE- B-WE-B PC STA. +. ECO ROAD EXTENSION B-WE- B-WE- B-WE- B-WE- B-WE- B-WE- STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT) BORING LOCATION LIMEROCK BEARING RATIO (LBR) TEST LOCATION GEOTECHNICAL CMT CEI ST. JOHNS BLUFF ROAD, S. SUITE JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA.. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL TESTING CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING INSPECTION FIELD EXPLORATION PLAN UNF TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS ECO ROAD EXTENSION JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA

DATE OF SURVEY: SURVEY MADE BY: SUBMITTED BY: JANUARY TO MARCH CSI GEO, INC. BRUCE KHOSROZADEH P.E. UNIVERSITY OF NORTH FLORIDA REGISTERED ENGINEER PROJECT NAME: UNF TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS - ECO ROAD EXTENSION CROSS SECTION SOIL SURVEY FOR THE DESIGN OF ROADWAY AND POND SURVEY BEGINS STA. : + SURVEY ENDS STA. : + REFERENCE: CENTERLINE OF CONSTRUCTION OF ECO ROAD EXTENSION R E V I S I O N S BY NO. DATE DESCRIPTION ORGANIC MOISTURE CONTENT CONTENT STRATUM NO. OF % NO. OF MOISTURE NO. TESTS ORGANIC TESTS CONTENT NO. OF TESTS MESH MESH MESH MESH MESH NO. OF TESTS ATTERBERG LIMITS (%) LIQUID PLASTIC AASHTO LIMIT INDEX GROUP DESCRIPTION LIMEROCK BEARING RATIO LBR TEST RESULTS ENVIRONMENTAL CLASSIFICATION STEEL CONCRETE NO. OF TESTS CORROSION TEST RESULTS RESISTIVITY CHLORIDE SULFATES ohm-cm ppm ppm ph SCALE: As Noted DESIGNED BY: B. SHEFFIELD DRAWN BY: T. QIAN CHECKED BY: J. IYA GRAY AND BROWN FINE EXTREMELY EXTREMELY - - - - - - - A- -,-, - U-.-. SAND; SLIGHTLY SILTY AGGRESSIVE AGGRESSIVE FINE SAND - - - - - - - - - - A-- BROWN AND GRAY - - - - - - - SILTY FINE SAND TOPSOIL; - - - - - - - - - - A- - - - - - - - DARK GRAY ORGANIC SILTY FINE SAND; DARK GRAY ORGANIC SLIGHTLY SILTY FINE SAND EMBANKMENT AND SUBGRADE MATERIAL STRATA BOUNDARIES ARE APPROXIMATE. MAKE FINAL CHECK AFTER GRADING. - GROUNDWATER TABLE ENCOUNTERED - ESTIMATED SEASONAL HIGH GROUNDWATER LEVEL B.T. - SPT BORING TERMINATION N - STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (BLOWS/FT) U - COMPOUND TESTED FOR BUT NOT DETECTED ROADWAY AND POND SOIL SURVEY UNF TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS ECO ROAD EXTENSION DO NOT SCALE THIS DRAWING - DIMENSIONS AND NOTES TAKE PREFERENCE DRAWING HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR "x" PLANS - ADJUST SCALE ACCORDINGLY IF OTHERWISE WOH- WEIGHT OF HAMMER /X" - OF BLOWS TO DRIVE THE SAMPLER X INCHES $TIME$ $DATE$ $FILE$ NOTES:. THIS SOIL SURVEY APPLIES TO ROADWAY AND POND SOILS ONLY.. STRATA BOUNDARIES ARE APPROXIMATE AND REPRESENT SOIL STRATA AT EACH TEST HOLE LOCATION. ANY STRATUM CONNECTING LINES SHOWN ARE FOR DESIGN PURPOSES ONLY AND DO NOT INDICATE ACTUAL STRATUM LIMITS. SUBSURFACE VARIANCE BETWEEN BORINGS MAY OCCUR AND SHOULD BE ANTICIPATED.. THE MATERIAL FROM STRATUM NO. IS SELECT MATERIAL AND APPEARS SATISFACTORY FOR USE WHEN UTILIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH FDOT STANDARD PLANS INDEX -.. THE MATERIAL FROM STRATUM NO. IS SELECT MATERIAL AND APPEARS SATISFACTORY FOR USE WHEN UTILIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH FDOT STANDARD PLANS INDEX -. HOWEVER, THIS MATERIAL MAY RETAIN EXCESS MOISTURE AND MAY BE DIFFICULT TO DRY AND COMPACT. IT SHOULD BE PLACED ABOVE THE EXISTING WATER TABLE AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION. THIS MATERIAL MAY NOT BE USED IN THE SUBGRADE PORTION OF THE ROADBED DUE TO ITS ORGANIC CONTENT.. THE MATERIAL FROM STRATUM NO. SHALL BE REGARDED AS MUCK.. REMOVAL OF MUCK OCCURRING WITHIN THE ROADWAY SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED IN ACCORDANCE WITH FDOT STANDARD PLANS INDEX - UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THE PLANS. THE MATERIAL USED IN EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH FDOT STANDARD PLANS INDEX -. St. Johns Bluf Rd S., Suite Jacksonvile, Florida Phone () - Fax () - Certificate of Authorization: Engineer of Record: Bruce Khosrozadeh, P.E. Florida Registration Number: DRAWING OF DATE: APR. PROJECT NO.: --- RELEASED FOR CONSTRUCTION BY

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED //. ft / Elev. ft. ft / Elev. ft st " nd " rd " th " " TOPSOIL LIGHT GRAY FINE SAND (A-) BROWN TO DARK BROWN FINE SAND (A-) /.'' - /.'' - Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED //. ft / Elev. ft. ft / Elev. ft " TOPSOIL st " nd " rd " th " LIGHT BROWN FINE SAND (A-) Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED //. ft / Elev. ft. ft / Elev. ft " TOPSOIL st " nd " rd " th " BROWN TO LIGHT BROWN FINE SAND (A-) Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED //. ft / Elev. ft. ft / Elev. ft " TOPSOIL st " nd " rd " th " LIGHT GRAY FINE SAND (A-) DARK BROWN SLIGHTLY SILTY FINE SAND (A-) Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED //. ft / Elev. ft. ft / Elev. ft " TOPSOIL st " nd " rd " th " LIGHT GRAY FINE SAND (A-) Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED // --- ABOVE EXISTING GRADES. ft / Elev. ft " TOPSOIL st " nd " rd " th " GRAY FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS LIGHT GRAY FINE SAND (A-) DARK BROWN FINE SAND (A-) Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED // --- ABOVE EXISTING GRADES. ft / Elev. ft " TOPSOIL st " nd " rd " th " DARK BROWN SLIGHTLY SILTY FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS AND ORGANICS BROWN FINE SAND (A-) Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED // --- ABOVE EXISTING GRADES. ft / Elev. ft " TOPSOIL st " nd " rd " th " BROWN FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS DARK BROWN TO BROWN FINE SAND (A-) Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED // --- ABOVE EXISTING GRADES. ft / Elev. ft " TOPSOIL st " nd " rd " th " DARK BROWN FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS DARK BROWN TO BROWN FINE SAND (A-) Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED // --- ABOVE EXISTING GRADES --- RECORDED.' ABOVE EXISTING GRADES st " nd " rd " th " DARK GRAY ORGANIC FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS DARK BROWN FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS BROWN FINE SAND (A-) LIGHT BROWN FINE SAND (A-) - Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED // --- ABOVE EXISTING GRADES --- RECORDED.' ABOVE EXISTING GRADES st " nd " rd " th " DARK GRAY ORGANIC SILTY FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS BROWN FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS BROWN FINE SAND (A-) Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED // --- ABOVE EXISTING GRADES. ft / Elev. ft st " nd " rd " th " DARK GRAY ORGANIC SILTY FINE SAND (A-) WITH FEW ROOTS AND WOOD PIECES BROWN FINE SAND (A-) WITH MANY ROOTS AND WOOD PIECES BROWN FINE SAND (A-) LIGHT GRAY FINE SAND (A-) - Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED // --- ABOVE EXISTING GRADES. ft / Elev. ft st " nd " rd " th " DARK GRAY ORGANIC SILTY FINE SAND (A-) WITH FEW ROOTS DARK GRAY ORGANIC SILTY FINE SAND (A-) LIGHT BROWN FINE SAND (A-) Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED // --- ABOVE EXISTING GRADES --- RECORDED.' ABOVE EXISTING GRADES " TOPSOIL st " nd " rd " th " DARK GRAY SILTY FINE SAND (A--) WITH FEW ROOTS AND ORGANICS /'' - /'' - LIGHT GRAY TO GRAY FINE SAND (A-) - Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED // --- ABOVE EXISTING GRADES --- RECORDED.' ABOVE EXISTING GRADES " TOPSOIL st " nd " rd " th " DARK GRAY SILTY FINE SAND (A--) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS AND ORGANICS WOH /'' - DARK BROWN SLIGHTLY SILTY FINE SAND (A-) BROWN FINE SAND (A-) - Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED // --- ABOVE EXISTING GRADES --- RECORDED.' ABOVE EXISTING GRADES " TOPSOIL st " nd " rd " th " BROWN SLIGHTLY SILTY FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS WOH BROWN FINE SAND (A-) Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED // --- ABOVE EXISTING GRADES --- RECORDED.' ABOVE EXISTING GRADES " TOPSOIL st " nd " rd " th " DARK GRAY SILTY FINE SAND (A--) WITH TRACE OF ORGANICS AND ROOTS /'' - DARK BROWN SILTY FINE SAND (A--) BROWN FINE SAND (A-) WITH FEW WOOD PIECES BROWN FINE SAND (A-) - Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED // --- ABOVE EXISTING GRADES --- RECORDED.' ABOVE EXISTING GRADES " TOPSOIL st " nd " rd " th " BROWN SLIGHTLY SILTY FINE SAND (A-) LIGHT BROWN FINE SAND (A-) BROWN TO GRAY FINE SAND (A-) - Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED // --- ABOVE EXISTING GRADES --- RECORDED.' ABOVE EXISTING GRADES " TOPSOIL st " nd " rd " th " DARK GRAY FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS /'' - - - /'' DARK BROWN TO BROWN SLIGHTLY SILTY FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED //. ft / Elev. ft. ft / Elev. ft " TOPSOIL st " nd " rd " th " DARK BROWN SLIGHTLY SILTY FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS BROWN FINE SAND (A-) Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED // --- ABOVE EXISTING GRADES. ft / Elev. ft " TOPSOIL st " nd " rd " th " BROWN FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS LIGHT GRAY FINE SAND (A-) Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED //. ft / Elev. ft. ft / Elev. ft st " nd " rd " th " DARK GRAY ORGANIC SILTY FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS /'' - /'' - BROWN SLIGHTLY SILTY FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS LIGHT BROWN FINE SAND (A-) Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED //. ft / Elev. ft. ft / Elev. ft st " nd " rd " th " DARK GRAY ORGANIC FINE SAND (A-) WITH FEW ROOTS BROWN FINE SAND (A-) - Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE-A PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED //. ft / Elev. ft. ft / Elev. ft '' TOPSOIL BROWN FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS st " nd " rd " th " BROWN SLIGHTLY SILTY FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE-B PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED // --- ABOVE EXISTING GRADES. ft / Elev. ft " TOPSOIL st " nd " rd " th " DARK GRAY ORGANIC FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS DARK BROWN SLIGHTLY ORGANIC SILTY FINE SAND (A--) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. B-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft COMPLETED //. ft / Elev. ft. ft / Elev. ft " TOPSOIL DARK BROWN SLIGHTLY SILTY FINE SAND (A-) WITH FEW ROOTS st " /'' nd " - rd " - th " - /'' BROWN FINE SAND (A-) Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. PB-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // COMPLETED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft. ft / Elev. ft. ft / Elev. ft SAMPLE " TOPSOIL st " PENETRATION BLOWS nd " rd " th " GRAY FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS BROWN TO DARK BROWN FINE SAND (A-) BROWN FINE SAND (A-) GRAY FINE SAND (A-) Boring Terminated at. feet.

SPT BORING NO. PB-WE- PAGE OF PROJECT --- DATE STARTED // COMPLETED // GROUND ELEVATION. ft. ft / Elev. ft. ft / Elev. ft SAMPLE " TOPSOIL st " PENETRATION BLOWS nd " rd " th " GRAY FINE SAND (A-) WITH TRACE OF ROOTS DARK BROWN FINE SAND (A-) BROWN SILTY FINE SAND (A--) (HARDPAN) /.'' BROWN FINE SAND (A-) Boring Terminated at. feet.

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS UNF Transportation Improvements Eco Road Extension Jacksonville, Florida Boring No. Sample No. Approximate Depth Natural Moisture Content (%) Organic Content (%) Percent Passing Sieve Size (%) Atterberg Limits # # # # # # LL Pl Soil Classification Symbol Soil Stratum No. B-WE-. -. A- B-WE-. -. A- B-WE-. -. A- B-WE-. -. A- B-WE-. -. A- B-WE-. -. A- B-WE-. -. A- B-WE-A. -. A- PB-WE-. -. A- B-WE-. -. A-- B-WE-B. -. A-- PB-WE-. -. A-- B-WE-. -. A- B-WE-. -. A- B-WE-. -. A-

ENVIRONMENTAL CORROSION TEST RESULTS UNF Transportation Improvements Eco Road Extension Jacksonville, Florida Sample No. Soil Stratum No. Depth ph Resistivity Sulfates Chlorides (S.U.) a (ohm-cm) (ppm) (ppm) Environmental Classification (Substructures) Steel Concrete PB-WE-. -.., Extremely Aggressive Extremely Aggressive B-WE-. -.., U Extremely Aggressive Extremely Aggressive Recommended Environmental Classification -----------------------------------------------> Extremely Aggressive Extremely Aggressive Notes: a S.U. : ph standard units b U: Compound tested for but not detected

St. Johns Bluff Rd. S, Suite, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA / () - LIMEROCK BEARING RATIO (LBR) AND MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST RESULTS LIMEROCK BEARING RATIO (LBR) RESULTS DATE: PROJECT: -Mar- UNF Transportation Improvements Eco Road Extension Jacksonville, Florida CSI JOB No.: --- SAMPLE NO: LOCATION: LBR-WE- B-WE- STATION: + OFFSET: ' RT Sample Depth: " LBR SOIL DESCRIPTION: Light Gray Fine SAND (A-) MAXIMUM LBR VALUE: Modified Proctor Test Results MAXIMUM DENSITY (PCF):. Dry Density OPTIMUM MOISTURE (%):. Moisture Content

St. Johns Bluff Rd. S, Suite, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA / () - LIMEROCK BEARING RATIO (LBR) AND MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST RESULTS LIMEROCK BEARING RATIO (LBR) RESULTS DATE: PROJECT: -Mar- UNF Transportation Improvements Eco Road Extension Jacksonville, Florida CSI JOB No.: --- SAMPLE NO: LOCATION: LBR-WE- B-WE- STATION: + OFFSET: ' RT Sample Depth: " LBR SOIL DESCRIPTION: Dark Brown Slightly Silty Fine SAND (A-) MAXIMUM LBR VALUE: Modified Proctor Test Results MAXIMUM DENSITY (PCF):. Dry Density OPTIMUM MOISTURE (%):. Moisture Content

KEY TO SOIL CLASSIFICATION Correlation of Penetration Resistance with Relative Density and Consistency Granular Materials Safety Hammer SPT N-Value (Blows/foot) Automatic Hammer SPT N-Value (Blows/foot) Silts and Clays Safety Hammer SPT N-Value (Blows/foot) Automatic Hammer SPT N- Value (Blows/foot) Relative Density Consistency Very Loose Less than Less than Very Soft Less than Less than Loose Soft Medium Dense - - Firm - - Dense - - Stiff - - Very Dense Greater than Greater than Very Stiff - - Hard Greater than Greater than Particle Size Identification (Unified Soil Classification System) Boulders: Cobbles: Gravel: Sand: Diameter exceeds inches to inches diameter Coarse - / to inches in diameter Fine -. mm to / inch in diameter Coarse -. mm to. mm in diameter Medium -. mm to. mm in diameter Fine -. mm to. mm in diameter Modifiers These modifiers provide our estimate of the amount of fines (silt or clay size particles) in soil samples. Approximate Fines Content Modifiers % Fines % Slightly silty or slightly clayey % Fines % Silty or clayey % Fines % Very silty or very clayey These modifiers provide our estimate of shell, rock fragments, or roots in the soil sample. Approximate Content, By Weight Modifiers % to % Trace % to % Few % to % Some % to % Many These modifiers provide our estimate of organic content in the soil sample. Organic Content Modifiers % to % Trace % to % Slightly Organic % to % Organic % to % Highly Organic (Muck) > % Peat

FIELD AND LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES FIELD TEST PROCEDURES: Penetration Borings Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) borings were made in general accordance with ASTM D--, "Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils". The borings were sampled at. foot intervals to ft, and at foot intervals thereafter. Below the groundwater levels, the borings were advanced using rotary drilling techniques with side discharge and circulating bentonite fluid for borehole flushing and stability. At the above mentioned intervals, the drilling tools were removed from the borehole and a split-barrel sampler inserted to the borehole bottom and driven inches into the material using a -pound SPT hammer falling on the average inches per hammer blow. The number of hammer blows for the final inches of penetration is termed the "penetration resistance, blow count, or N-value". After driving the sampler inches or to refusal at each test interval, the sampler was retrieved from the borehole and a representative sample of the material within the split-barrel was placed in a glass jar or plastic bag and sealed. After completing the drilling operations, the samples for the boring were transported to our laboratory where they were examined by one of our geotechnical engineers to verify the driller's field classifications. LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES: Percent Organic Content This test is based on the percent of organics by weight of the total sample. This test was conducted in accordance with ASTM D. Percent Fine Content To determine the percentage of soils finer than No. sieve, the dried samples were washed over a mesh sieve. The material retained on the sieve was oven dried and then weighed and compared with the unwashed dry weight in order to determine the weight of the fines. The percentage of fines in the soil sample was then determined as the percent of weight of fines in the sample to the weight of the unwashed sample. This test was conducted in accordance with ASTM D. Natural Moisture Content The water content is the ratio, expressed as a percentage, of the weight of water in a given mass of soil to the weight of the solid particles. This test was conducted in the general accordance with ASTM D. Grain Size Distribution The grain size tests were performed to determine the particle size and distribution of the samples tested. Each sample was dried, weighed, and washed over a No. mesh sieve. The dried sample was then passed through a standard set of nested sieves to determine the grain size distribution of the soil particles coarser than the No. sieve. This test is similar to that described by ASTM D.

FIELD AND LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES ph The ph is an expression of the concentration of dissociated hydrogen ions present in an aqueous solution. ph values range from to, with values below indicating acidic conditions and values above indicating alkaline (basic) conditions. This test is performed using a calibrated electronic ph meter with a sensing probe. The meter is calibrated by immersing the probe in a solution with a known ph. The soil ph is determined by mixing equal weights of soil and distilled water and testing the supernatant solution with the ph probe. Electrical Resistivity Resistivity is a measure of the resistance to flow of electrical current through the soil. Resistivity, the inverse of conductivity, is measured in units of ohmcentimeters. This measurement is performed with a calibrated electronic conductivity/resistivity meter which is equipped with a sensing probe. The conductivity/resistivity of soil samples is conductivity/resistivity of the supernatant solution with the sensing probe. Sulfate and Chloride Content The sulfate (SO, - ) and chloride (Cl - ) content of the site soils were performed in general accordance with ASTM D- for chloride ions in soils, and ASTM D- for sulfate ions in soils. Limerock Bearing Ratio (LBR) -This test is a measure of the bearing properties of a soil sample compacted and tested in the laboratory at various densities and water contents. The compacted soil samples are saturated for a period of hours and then a millimeter diameter piston is pushed into each soil sample. During the penetration test, the load on the piston and the corresponding deflection of the soil are recorded. The test results are then plotted graphically and corrected for curve non-linearity. The correct unit load at. millimeter penetration is divided by to give the LBR percentage. The test results are presented on the Limerock Bearing Ratio (LBR) and Modified Proctor Compaction Test Results sheets in the Appendix. The test method utilized was FDOT FM -. Modified Proctor Test This test is performed to estimate the maximum dry density of a soil specimen and the respective optimum water content. The results are used to establish compaction criteria of soils to be used in construction. The test follows guidelines established by ASTM D or AASHTO T- and consists of dropping a lb hammer times from a distance of inches on layers of soil material placed in a metal mold. The mold is generally inches in diameter, although a inch mold is specified for soils with particle sizes larger than the No. sieve.

Geotechnical Exploration and Evaluation Report Revision No. 01