HomeMy WebLinkAbout110 Coastline Dr Foundation soil investigation correspondanceMichael D. Sims & Associates, Inc. (407) 297-0292
Consulting Engineers in the Earth Sciences, Geotechnology,
Hydrogeology and Construction Materials Testing
July 15, 1988
Spolski General Contractors
P.O. Box 426
Lake Mary, FL 32746
Attention: Mr. John Spolski, Jr.
Subject: STATUS REPORT, FOUNDATION
6, SANFORD CENTRAL PARK,
PN 88-357.2A)
Dear Mr. Spolski:
SOILS INVESTIGATION, LOT
SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA
As requested, we have completed the authorized field investigation
for the above referenced project. This letter provides the status
report of our work to date. Our final report, which will provide
recommendations for foundation support and foundation related site
work for the proposed construction, will be submitted within one
week.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The general vicinity of the site of the proposed construction is
south of SR 46 and east of Interstate 4, adjacent to Coastline
Road in Seminole County, Florida. The proposed development
generally consists of two (2) structurally independent 20 feet
high buildings, a wood truss and block wall office structure in a
pre-engineered metal warehouse structure, with attendent
driveways, parking and retention pond areas. The proposed column
loads are not anticipated to exceed 25 kips for the structures.
FIELD INVESTIGATION
The field investigation for this project was completed on July 14,
1988 and included the drilling and sampling of five (5) Standard
Penetration Test borings to depths ranging from 15 to 20 feet
below the present grade and three (3) auger borings to depths
ranging from to 5.5 feet. These borings were performed in general
accordance with the Standard Penetration Testing Techniques as
outlined in ASTM D-1586.
4780 North Orange Blossom Trail • Orlando • FL 32810
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 6 • Winter Park • FL 32790
i
Spolski General Contractors
PN 88-357.2
Page 2
The soil stratigraphy as encountered in the Soil Borings generally
consisted of loose fine sands to depths ranging from 3 to 4 feet
below the existing grade; underlain by medium dense fine sands to
depths ranging from approximately 6 to 11 feet. A medium dense
slightly silty to silty fine sand was then encountered to a depth
approximately 13.5 feet below the existing grade, at which a 5
foot zone of loose silty fine sand was encountered. Two (2) of
the borings were terminated in a medium dense silty fine sand at a
depth of 20 feet.
The depth to the shallow groundwater table was measured at the
time the borings were drilled and again approximately of 24 hours
later. The groundwater table was encountered at depths ranging
from 0.3 to 1.9 feet below the existing grade. Based on our
review of the site data and the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Survey
maps, as well as the antecedent rainfall conditions, it is our
opinion that the normal seasonal high groundwater level will occur
approximately 6 to 10 inches below the existing grade.
PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the results of our field investigation, it is our opinion
that the soils encountered are of a type and consistency capable
of providing adequate support for the proposed structures. We
recommend that the foundations be designed for net allowing
bearing pressure of 2,000 psf or less,.with a minimum width of 2
feet and a minimum depth of embeddment of 18 inches. The
embeddment depth is measured from the base of the footings to the
lowest adjacent outside grade.
The development of this site will be typical for this area and
should include the usual clearing, stripping and grubbing of the
surface vegetation and topsoil, followed by compaction of the near
surface soils and any fill soils required to reach final grade(s).
In our opinion, due to the estimated high groundwater level,
twelve (12) to eighteen (18) inches of fill will be required to
raise the existing grade sufficiently to prevent groundwater
related problems. As an alternative, underdrains may be used
throughout the pavement areas. In any event, the truck docks or
ramps will need surface drains and underdrains. In addition, it
is our opinion that underdrains may be required for the retention
pond in order to increase its storage recovery as well as protect
the adjacent pavement areas.
Spolski General Contractors
PN 88-357.2
Page 3
CLOSURE
We trust that this letter adequately summarizes our recent
discussions and the work completed to date. Should you have any
questions regarding the data or preliminary conclusions provided,
please contact our office.
Sincerely,
MICHAEL D. SIMS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Andre M. Gal et, M.E., E.I.
Project Engineer
AMG:mas
illiam R. hestak, P.E.
Vice President
Florida Registration No. 24045
N per-M ; # .