Loading...
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 ; # .