C05_Attachment 10- Juniper Exploration Report of Geotechnical Engineering.pdf

PURA VIDA ENGINEERING SERVICES

Geotechnical Engineering Report

Juniper Springs Geotechnical Report Astor in Marion County, Florida

Prepared For:

Tunnell – Spangler – Walsh & Associates, Inc.

1447 Peachtree Street NE Suite 850, Atlanta, Georgia 30309

Prepared By:

Pura Vida Engineering Services

6457 Hazeltine National Drive, Suite 150 Orlando, FL 32822

February 2024

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING - DRILLING SERVICES - SURVEYING SERVICES

CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS TESTING - ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

February 29, 2024

Tunnell – Spangler – Walsh & Associates, Inc.

1447 Peachtree Street NE Suite 850, Atlanta, Georgia 30309

Attention: Mr. Adam Williamson

Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Report Juniper Springs Astor, Florida PVE Project No. J502G

Dear Mr. Williamson:

Pura Vida Engineering Services (PVE) performed the geotechnical engineering exploration for the above referenced project and prepared this report in accordance with Proposal No. P413G dated December 11, 2023.

The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate soil and groundwater conditions at the project site and to use the information obtained to develop geotechnical engineering recommendations to aid in foundations design for the proposed improvements.

This report describes our methodology, documents our field and laboratory test results and presents our evaluation regarding the geotechnical engineering aspects of this project.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to Tunnell – Spangler – Walsh & Associates, Inc.

(TSW), on this exciting task. Should there be any questions regarding the contents of this report, please contact the undersigned.

ii Geotechnical Engineering report

Juniper Exploration

Sincerely, PURA VIDA ENGINEERING SERVICES, LLC

Bradley Williams, E.I. Roger S. Gobin, Ph.D., P.E.

Project Engineer Vice President Florida License No. 67006

This Report has been digitally signed and sealed by Roger S. Gobin, Ph.D., P.E. on the date adjacent to the seal. Printed copies of this document are not considered signed and sealed and the signature must be verified on any electronic copies.

iii Geotechnical Engineering report

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

2.0 REVIEW OF AVAILABLE DATA

2.1 USGS Quadrangle Maps

2.2 NRCS Soil Survey Review

3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION

3.1 DCP/Hand Auger General Procedures

4.0 LABORATORY TESTING

5.0 DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

5.1 Soil Boring Results

5.2 Groundwater Levels

6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Condition of Boardwalks

6.2 Foundation Design

6.3 Construction Considerations and Materials Quality Control Testing

7.0 CLOSING AND LIMITATIONS

APPENDIX

FIGURES

Figure 1: USGS Quadrangle and NRCS Soil Survey Maps Figure 2: Boring Location Plan Figure 3: Soil Boring Results

Juniper Springs Boardwalk Photographic Log

1 Geotechnical Engineering report

1.0 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

The project site is located at 26701 Florida 40, Astor in Marion County, Florida. The site is identified by Parcel ID No. 32909-004-00. The site is approximately 7960 acres and is currently wooded land with a creek and is used as a recreational park facility with hiking trails, camping grounds, boardwalk, swimming area, and canoeing facilities. Based on the CADD plan provided by David Argo of TSW on December 5, 2023, we understand that the proposed improvement includes replacing the existing boardwalk, pedestrian bridge and open-air structure.

This report describes our exploration procedures, exhibits the data obtained and presents our conclusions and recommendations regarding the geotechnical engineering aspects of the proposed improvements.

2.0 REVIEW OF AVAILABLE DATA

PVE reviewed available data including United Stated Geological Survey (USGS) Juniper Springs, FL 1972 Quadrangle Map, the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey of Marion County and other published sources. A summary of this information is presented in the following report sections.

2.1 USGS Quadrangle Maps

Based on our review of the USGS Juniper Springs, Florida Quadrangle maps, dated 1972 and reproduced on Figure 1 in the Appendix, the approximate natural ground surface elevation at the site ranges from +25 to +60 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD). The Quadrangle map also shows a wetland feature generally along the northeastern portion of the site and two relic depressional areas along the west side of the site.

2.2 NRCS Soil Survey Review

The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey of Marion County was reviewed to obtain near-surface soil and groundwater information at the project site. An excerpt of the NRCS Soil Survey map is presented on Figure 1 in the Appendix. The following NRCS Soil Survey soil types are identified within the project site.

2 Geotechnical Engineering report

Table 1 Summary of NRCS Soil Survey Classifications

Unit No.

Soil Name Depth

(inches) Soil Description

Unified Classification

Symbol

Depth to Seasonal High Groundwater

(feet)

Hydrologic Group

Apopka sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes

0 – 6 Sand SP-SM

-- A 6 – 55 Fine sand, sand SP-SM

55 – 80 Loamy fine sand, sand clay loam, sandy clay

SC-SM, SC,

CL

Apopka sand, 5 to 12 percent slopes

0 – 6 Sand SP-SM, SP

-- A 6 – 55 Sand SP-SM, SP

55 – 80 Sandy loam, sandy clay loam

SC-SM, SC

Candler sand 5 to 12 percent slopes 0 – 17 Clay CH

-- C 17 – 78 Sand SP-SM, SP

Eureka loamy fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes

0 – 5 Loamy fine sand

SC-SM, SM,

ML

-- C/D 5 – 13 Loamy fine sand

CL-ML, SC-

SM, CM

13 – 69 Sandy clay, clay CH, CL

69 – 80 Sand clay, clay CH, CL

Ax Astor sand

0 – 8 Sand SP-SM, SP

-- A/D 8 – 32 Sand SP-SM, SP

32 – 80 Sand SP-SM, SP

Tc Terra Ceia muck, frequently ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes

0 – 15 Muck PT

-- A/D 15 – 44 Muck PT

44 – 80 Muck PT

NRCS Web Soil Survey Reference May 2022

In general, the soils at the project site are characterized as nearly level to gently sloping, fine sand soils. The soils classified as SP and SP-SM can be used as engineering fill. The soils classified as muck and mucky peat (PT) shall not be used for engineering fill or direct support of structures.

The SM, SC, SC-SM, CL, CH, and ML material may retain excess moisture and may be difficult to dry and compact. They should be used in the embankment above the water level existing at the time of construction.

The NRCS predicts seasonal high groundwater levels at the natural ground surface and extending to

0.5 feet below the ground surface.

3 Geotechnical Engineering report

The information contained in the NRCS Soil Survey is very general and may be outdated. Therefore, it may not be reflective of actual soil and groundwater conditions, particularly if recent development in the site vicinity has modified soil conditions or surface/subsurface drainage. The information obtained from recent soil borings provides a better characterization of actual site conditions.

3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION

PVE performed a subsurface investigation consisting of hand auger borings with Dynamic Cone Penetrometer testing (DCP) to evaluate soil and groundwater conditions at the site. Our field exploration program is outlined below:

Table 2 Site Exploration Summary

Project Element Boring Nos. Depth Explored (ft.)

Boardwalk B-1 to B-10 8

Pedestrian bridge B-11, B-12 6 to 8 Open-Air Structure B-13 8

The boring locations were chosen by TSW and were located in the field by PVE using a sub-meter accuracy, handheld Global Positioning System (GPS) unit. The method used to locate these borings are sufficient to meet the intent of our study. Some boring locations were moved from the planned for access issues, including relocating outside of the creek and from under the existing boardwalk.

The locations of the borings listed above are shown on the reproduced site plan overlain on an aerial image of the project site on Figure 2.

3.1 DCP/Hand Auger General Procedures

The dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) boring was performed in general accordance with “Dynamic cone for shallow in-situ penetration testing, vane shear and cone penetration testing of in-situ soils”, ASTM STP 399, 1966.

The “N” values shown for the DCP test borings represent approximate standard penetration resistance, blows per foot correlation from measured DCP resistance, blows per 1.74 inches of penetration. The correlation of DCP to SPT “N” values is based on the calibration curve for coastal plains soils, ASTM STP 399, 1966.

The boring depths were limited to eight (8) feet as agreed upon with TSW based on the inaccessibility of the locations for machine powered drilling equipment and the shallow depths anticipated for the proposed foundations. In addition, the high groundwater table coupled with the presence of sandy soils made drilling hand auger borings deeper than about 8-feet impractical.

4 Geotechnical Engineering report

4.0 LABORATORY TESTING

Selected soil samples obtained from the borings were tested in accordance with American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) testing methods and American Standard Testing Methods (ASTM). The laboratory testing program is summarized in the following table:

Table 3 Summary of Laboratory Testing Program

Test Test No.

Percent Fines AASHTO – T88

Natural Moisture Content AASHTO – T265 Organic Content ASTM – D2974

The results of our laboratory tests are shown adjacent to the soil profiles on the Soil Boring Results sheet (Figure 3) in the Appendix.

5.0 DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

PVE’s field exploration was conducted on February 15, 2024, through February 16, 2024. The soil and groundwater conditions encountered are summarized in this section. Please refer to Figure 3 for a detailed description of the subsurface profiles at each boring location shown on Figure 2.

The depths and thicknesses of the subsurface strata indicated on the boring logs were interpolated between samples obtained at different depths in the borings. The actual transition between soil layers may be different than indicated. Earthwork quantity estimates based on the results of the borings will vary from the actual quantities measured during construction.

5.1 Soil Boring Results

Thirteen DCP/hand augers (B-1 through B-13) were performed, ten in the boardwalk area (B-1 thru 10), two in the vicinity of the pedestrian bridge (B-11 and B-12) and one in the vicinity of the open-air structure (B-13). Borings were advanced with hand augers and DCP testing performed at 2 ft intervals to the boring termination depth. Representative soil samples were taken from the hand augers for examination, classification and testing at our laboratory. Please see a summary of our findings below from our field exploration:

5 Geotechnical Engineering report

Boardwalk: Borings B-1 thru B-10 were performed in the general area of the boardwalk to 8 feet below existing grade. The boring generally encountered organic soils (locally referred to as muck) within the upper three feet, followed by medium dense sand soils to the boring termination depth.

Pedestrian Bridge: Borings B-11 and B-12 were performed in the vicinity of the pedestrian bridge abutments to 6 and 8 feet below existing grade, respectively. The boring generally encountered organic soils (muck) within the upper 1 foot, followed by medium dense sand soils to the boring termination depth.

Open Air Structure: Boring B-13 was performed in the general area of the open-air structure to a 8 feet below existing grade. The boring encountered a thin layer of organic soils (muck) between 1 and 1.5 foot, followed by medium dense sand soils to the boring termination depth at 8 feet.

5.2 Groundwater Levels

Groundwater levels were measured at all borings at the project site and summarized in the table below:

Table 5 Summary of Groundwater Levels

Location Range of Measured

Groundwater Levels (ft.)

2/15/2024 to 2/16/2024

Range of Estimated Seasonal High

Groundwater Levels (ft.)

Boardwalk 0.75 – 3.5 0 .0 – 4.0

Pedestrian Bridge 0.5- 2.5 0.0 – 1.0 Open Air Structure 8.0 0.0 - 4.0

We expect the groundwater level at this site to be highly influenced by the level of the stream due to the relatively high permeability of the in-situ soils. Groundwater levels can vary seasonally and with changes in subsurface conditions between boring locations. Alterations in surface and/or subsurface drainage brought about by site development can also affect groundwater levels.

Therefore, groundwater depths measured at different times or at different locations on the site can be expected to vary from those measured during this investigation.

For purposes of this report, estimated seasonal high groundwater levels are defined as groundwater levels that are anticipated at the end of the wet season during a “normal rainfall” year under pre-development site conditions. We define a “normal rainfall” year as a year in which rainfall quantity and distribution were at or near historical averages.

Please refer to Figure 3 for measured and estimated seasonal high groundwater levels at each boring location.

6 Geotechnical Engineering report

6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based in part on the data obtained from a limited number of soil samples and groundwater measurements obtained from widely spaced borings. The sampling methods used indicate subsurface conditions only at the specific boring locations, only to the depths penetrated. Borings cannot be relied upon to accurately reflect the variations that usually exist between locations and these variations may not become evident until construction.

6.1 Condition of Boardwalks

The existing boardwalk is generally in a state of disrepair with missing wooden planks, broken and rotted members, and overgrown with foliage growing. However, the timber pile supports of the boardwalk appears to have relatively intact. Please see photos within the Appendix of this report.

6.2 Foundation Design

We understand that the proposed boardwalk and pedestrian bridge will be supported on proprietary pin piles, while the open air structure will be supported by a slab on grade. Please notify us if the assumed design stated in this report is changed, so PVE can reexamine our recommendations.

Organic material was encountered surficial beneath the proposed boardwalk and pedestrian locations, typically to about 3 feet below existing grade. Organic material should not be considered as competent material for foundation support. PVE recommends ignoring the resistance in the upper three feet below grade due to the prevalence of organic material throughout the site or removal and replacement with compacted engineering fill soils. Resistance for the pin piles should be obtained from the soils that are deeper than three feet below grade. Unless the contractor verified that organic soils are not present at the actual pin locations.

The soils encountered are suitable for support of the slab on grade foundations for the open-air structure, except that any organic soils should be removed and replaced with structural fill, that consists of clean sand with less than 10 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. Structural fill shall be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its maximum dry density, in accordance with ASTM D1557 (Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort).

A modulus of subgrade reaction of 100 psi/inch is recommended for design of slab on grade. Due to the relatively light loads anticipated from the structure, settlement is not anticipated to be a concern.

7 Geotechnical Engineering report

The following parameters are recommended for foundation design:

Table 6 Recommended Soil Design Parameters

Stratum Organic Sand/ Structural Fill

Total Unit Weight (pcf) 90 105

Buoyant Unit Weight (pcf) 27.6 42.6

Design Groundwater Depth (ft) 0 0

Effective Friction Angle (degrees) 0 30

Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (psi/inch) N/A 100

6.3 Construction Considerations and Materials Quality Control Testing

The borings encountered isolated obstructions that appeared to be roots, buried materials or highly weathered limestone, the Contractor shall be prepared to deal with obstructions or weathered limestone, using specialized tools or construction means and methods. In addition, pin piles should be located to avoid existing abandoned foundations.

Groundwater can be expected to be at or close to ground surface throughout the site, therefore the Contractor should be warned to anticipate that dewatering will be required for construction of footing placed below grade or for the placement and compaction of fill to replace any organic soils.

Groundwater should be lowered by a minimum of two feet below the bottom of proposed footing or base of excavation where compacted fill will be placed.

A comprehensive quality control program is required to verify that site preparation areas are constructed in accordance with the recommendations in this report. Materials testing and inspection services should be provided by Pura Vida Engineering Services due to our knowledge of site conditions and understanding of the intent of our recommendations.

7.0 CLOSING AND LIMITATIONS

This section of the report presents important information regarding the proper use of this report, our investigative methods, and the limitations of this study. The test data, conclusions and recommendations presented in this report should be reviewed and applied with these limitations in mind.

Design Changes. The conclusions or recommendations of this report should be disregarded if the nature, design, or location of the facilities is changed. If such changes are contemplated, PVE should

8 Geotechnical Engineering report be retained to review the new plans to assess the applicability of this report in light of the proposed changes.

Contamination Exclusion. The sole purpose of the borings performed by PVE at this site was to obtain indications of subsurface conditions as part of a geotechnical exploration program. PVE has not evaluated the site for the potential presence of contaminated soil or groundwater, nor have we subjected any soil samples to analysis for contaminants.

Report. PVE has prepared this report for the exclusive use of Tunnell – Spangler – Walsh & Associates, Inc., and for specific application to this project. PVE is not responsible for any third party’s interpretation or use of this report’s subsurface data, engineering analysis or recommendations without our written authorization.

Standard of Care. PVE has performed the services described in this report in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of our profession currently practicing in Florida. No other representation is made or implied in this document.

APPENDIX

USGS QUADRANGLE AND

NRCS SOIL SURVEY MAPS

APPEARS THAT A RAMP IS NOT NEEDED AT THIS TRANSITION

ATTENTION TO BOIL

POSTS CENTERED ON WATERLINE

REDUCED SPACE TO ACCOMMODATE

APPROXIMATE LOCATION

OF OPEN-AIR STRUCTURE

APPROXIMATE LOCATION

OF NEW BRIDGE

JUNIPER CREEK

APPEARS THAT A RAMP IS NOT NEEDED AT THIS TRANSITION

ATTENTION TO BOIL

POSTS CENTERED ON WATERLINE

REDUCED SPACE TO ACCOMMODATE

APPROXIMATE LOCATION

OF OPEN-AIR STRUCTURE

APPROXIMATE LOCATION

OF NEW BRIDGE

JUNIPER CREEK

Ax

Tc

PURA VIDA ENGINEERING

SERVICES

6457 HAZELTINE NATIONAL DRIVE, SUITE 150A

ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32822

PH (407) 203-3804

ROGER S. GOBIN, Ph.D., PE 67006

PROJECT NO.

02/28/24

DATE

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY

CHECKED BY 1

FIGURE

NO.

USGS QUADRANGLE AND NRCS SOIL SURVEY MAPS

JUNIPER EXPLORATION

MARION COUNTY, FLORIDA

M. LIFE

SOURCE: 7.5 MINUTE SERIES USGS QUADRANGLE MAP; JUNIPER SPRINGS, FLORIDA, DATED 1972 (HTMC 1973 ed.)

1 INCH ~ 1,500 ft.

(IN FEET)

750 1,500

GRAPHIC SCALE

1 INCH ~ 250 ft.

(IN FEET)

125 250

GRAPHIC SCALE

SOURCE: NRCS SOIL SURVEY OF MARION COUNTY, FLORIDA. MARION COUNTY MAP UNIT LEGEND: 27 - MYAKKA-MYAKKA, WET, FINE SANDS, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES, AX - ASTOR SAND AND TC - TERRA CEIA MUCK, FREQUENTLY PONDED, 0 TO 1 PERCENT SLOPES.

J502G

BW

Approximate Project Site

Approximate Project Site

RG

BORING LOCATION PLAN

SHED

BENCH

SWITCH

USES

RAMP UP OR KEEP FLUSH?

BENCH

RAIL DOESN'T NEED TO EXTEND

EXISTING ON GRADE

TRAIL,

NOT

OPEN DIRT

CAMP

SITE

PATH

METAL

TUBE

SIGN

NEW REST?

SIGN POST

SIGN POST

GRASSLAND

TREE ROOT CAVE RAIL EXTENTS OF

OPEN CREEK SIDE

OPEN CREEK ADD NO

SWIMMING SIGN

OPTIONAL RAIL

CAMP TRAIL

STRUCTURE

'A'

STRUCTURE

'B'

STRUCTURE

'C'

STRUCTURE

'D'

STRUCTURE

'E'

STRUCTURE

'F'

STRUCTURE

'G'

STRUCTURE

'H'

ADD NO

SWIMMING SIGN

OPTIONAL RAIL

KEEP FALLEN PALM

ALL FLOODABLE

NO WADING SIGN

LARGE BUSH

OPTIONAL RAIL

PINE

OPTIONAL RAIL

OPTIONAL RAIL

LEANING TREE

LAWN

OPTIONAL RAIL

PALM

PALM LEVEL

RAISE

OPTIONAL

DESIGN:

3 HEADED PALM

DIRT

WATER MAINTENANCE

STATION

SAND BAG SUPPORT, NO PIERS JUST REPLACE SUPPORTS WITH METAL?

EXISTING RAILING NEEDED?

CUT FALLEN PALM? OR BRACE UP FOR HEAD HEIGHT?

APPEARS THAT A RAMP IS NOT NEEDED AT THIS TRANSITION

ATTENTION TO BOIL

POSTS CENTERED ON WATERLINE

REDUCED SPACE TO ACCOMMODATE

APPROXIMATE LOCATION

OF OPEN-AIR STRUCTURE

APPROXIMATE LOCATION

OF NEW BRIDGE

B-1

B-2

B-3

B-4 B-5

B-6

B-7

B-8

B-9

B-10

B-11 B-12

B-13

JUNIPER CREEK

PURA VIDA ENGINEERING

SERVICES

6457 HAZELTINE NATIONAL DRIVE, SUITE 150A

ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32822

PH (407) 203-3804

ROGER S. GOBIN, Ph.D., PE 67006

PROJECT NO.

02/28/24

DATE

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY

CHECKED BY 2

FIGURE

NO.

BORING LOCATION PLAN

M. LIFE

1 INCH ~ 200 ft.

(IN FEET)

100 200

GRAPHIC SCALE

JUNIPER EXPLORATION

MARION COUNTY, FLORIDA

J502G

BW

RG

APPROXIMATE DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER

(DCP/HAND AUGER) LOCATION

LEGEND

SOIL BORING RESULTS

PURA VIDA ENGINEERING

SERVICES

6457 HAZELTINE NATIONAL DRIVE, SUITE 150A

ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32822

PH (407) 203-3804

ROGER S. GOBIN, Ph.D., PE 67006

PROJECT NO.

02/28/24

DATE

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY

CHECKED BY

FIGURE

NO.

SOIL BORING RESULTS

M. LIFE

BW

RG

JUNIPER EXPLORATION

MARION COUNTY, FLORIDA

J502G

SAND AND SILT CLAY MUCK

LEGEND

BT

STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE, BLOWS PER FOOT

ESTIMATED SEASONAL HIGH GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT.)

ENCOUNTERED GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT.)

BORING TERMINATED AT DEPTH INDICATED

PERCENT PASSING NO. 200 U.S. STANDARD SIEVE

PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT

PERCENT ORGANIC CONTENT

GENERAL NOTES

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN ON THE BORINGS REPRESENT THE CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED AT THE BORING LOCATIONS. ACTUAL CONDITIONS BETWEEN THE BORINGS MAY VARY FROM THOSE SHOWN. UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS SHOWN ON THE BORINGS ARE BASED

ON VISUAL EXAMINATION AND THE LABORATORY TESTING SHOWN.

THE BORING LOCATIONS WERE ESTABLISHED IN THE FIELD USING A SITE PLAN AND GARMIN GPS UNIT.

THE DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) TEST BORINGS WERE PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH “DYNAMIC CONE FOR SHALLOW IN-SITU PENETRATION TESTING, VANE SHEAR AND CONE PENETRATION TESTING OF IN-SITU SOILS”, ASTM STP 399, 1966.

THE “N” VALUES SHOWN FOR THE DCP TEST BORINGS REPRESENT APPROXIMATE STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE, BLOWS PER FOOT CORRELATION FROM MEASURED DCP RESISTANCE, BLOWS PER 1.74 INCHES OF PENETRATION. THE CORRELATION OF DCP TO SPT “N” VALUES IS BASED ON THE CALIBRATION CURVE FOR COASTAL PLAINS SOILS, ASTM STP 399, 1966.

D

EP

TH

(F

T.

GRANULAR SOILS

SANDS VERY LOOSE

LOOSE

MEDIUM DENSE

DENSE

VERY DENSE

NON-GRANULAR SOILS

SILTS, CLAYS,

MUCK, PEAT

VERY SOFT

SOFT

FIRM

STIFF

VERY STIFF

HARD

CONSISTENCY

RELATIVE DENSITY

CORRELATION OF STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE

WITH RELATIVE DENSITY AND CONSISTENCY OF SOIL

0-1 1-3 3-6

6-12 12-24

OVER 24

AUTOMATIC HAMMER

N VALUE

(blows per foot)

AUTOMATIC HAMMER

N VALUE

(blows per foot)

0-3 3-8

8-24 24-40

OVER 40

N

BT AT 8'

B-1

LAT: 29.1842949 N

LONG: -81.7117112 W

RIG TYPE: DCP/HAND AUGER

DRILLER: BRADLEY W.

DATE: 02/15/24

13 DARK BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT AND ROOTS (SP-SM)

D

EPTH

(FT.)

N

SECTION: 20, 21, 17, 16

TOWNSHIP: 15 SOUTH

RANGE: 26 EAST

2.5

SAND SAND AND CLAY

2.5

3.3

3.3

N

BT AT 8'

B-2

LAT: 29.1844423 N

LONG: -81.7117307 W

RIG TYPE: DCP/HAND AUGER

DRILLER: BRADLEY W.

DATE: 02/15/24

7 BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT AND ROOTS (SP-SM)

2.5 2.8 11

D

EP

TH

(F

T.

0 N

BT AT 8'

B-5

LAT: 29.185391 N

LONG: -81.7104951 W

RIG TYPE: DCP/HAND AUGER

DRILLER: BRADLEY W.

DATE: 02/15/24

6 BROWN FINE SAND WITH ROOTS (SP)

D

EPTH

(FT.)

00.0 1.0

N

BT AT 8'

B-6

LAT: 29.1856144 N

LONG: -81.7102941 W

RIG TYPE: DCP/HAND AUGER

DRILLER: BRADLEY W.

DATE: 02/15/24

70.0 0.8

GRAY FINE SAND WITH ROOTS (SP)

GRAY CLAYEY FINE SAND (SC)

DARK BROWN MUCKY FINE SAND WITH ROOTS (PT)

DARK GRAY FINE SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM)

GRAY CLAYEY FINE SAND (SC)

N

BT AT 8'

B-3

LAT: 29.1850109 N

LONG: -81.7115258 W

RIG TYPE: DCP/HAND AUGER

DRILLER: BRADLEY W.

DATE: 02/15/24

3" TOPSOIL0.0

1.4

N

BT AT 8'

B-7

LAT: 29.1855254 N

LONG: -81.7097616 W

RIG TYPE: DCP/HAND AUGER

DRILLER: BRADLEY W.

DATE: 02/15/24

90.0 1.0

ORANGE CLAYEY FINE SAND (SC)

GRAY FAT CLAY (CH)

GRAY FINE SAND (SP)

N

BT AT 8'

B-4

LAT: 29.1854284 N

LONG: -81.7110420 W

RIG TYPE: DCP/HAND AUGER

DRILLER: BRADLEY W.

DATE: 02/16/24

8 DARK GRAY FINE SAND

WITH SILT AND ROOTS (SP-SM)1.0 1.6

N

BT AT 8'

B-8

LAT: 29.1852586 N

LONG: -81.7086649 W

RIG TYPE: DCP/HAND AUGER

DRILLER: BRADLEY W.

DATE: 02/16/24

11 BROWN FINE SAND (SP)

1.0 1.5

DARK GRAY CLAYEY FINE

SAND (SC)

GRAY FINE SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM)

DARK BROWN SANDY MUCK

WITH ROOTS (PT)

GRAY FINE SAND WITH

SILT (SP-SM)

-200

MC

-200=88

MC=373

OC=50

DARK BROWN SANDY MUCK WITH ROOTS (PT)

GRAY CLAYEY FINE SAND (SC)

BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM)

DARK BROWN SANDY MUCK WITH ROOTS (PT)

DARK GRAY CLAYEY FINE SAND WITH ROOTS (SC)

BROWN FINE SAND (SP)

DARK BROWN SANDY MUCK WITH ROOTS (PT)

DARK GRAY SILTY FINE SAND WITH ROOTS (SM)

GRAY FINE SAND WITH SILT AND ROOTS (SP-SM)

GRAY TO BROWN FINE SAND (SP)

DARK BROWN SANDY MUCK (PT)

BROWN FINE SAND (SP)

DARK GRAY SILTY FINE SAND (SM)

OC

LEGEND

BT

STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE, BLOWS PER FOOT

ESTIMATED SEASONAL HIGH GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT.)

ENCOUNTERED GROUNDWATER DEPTH (FT.)

BORING TERMINATED AT DEPTH INDICATED

PERCENT PASSING NO. 200 U.S. STANDARD SIEVE

PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT

PERCENT ORGANIC CONTENT

GENERAL NOTES

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN ON THE BORINGS REPRESENT THE CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED AT THE BORING LOCATIONS. ACTUAL CONDITIONS BETWEEN THE BORINGS MAY VARY FROM THOSE SHOWN. UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS SHOWN ON THE BORINGS ARE BASED

ON VISUAL EXAMINATION AND THE LABORATORY TESTING SHOWN.

THE BORING LOCATIONS WERE ESTABLISHED IN THE FIELD USING A SITE PLAN AND GARMIN GPS UNIT.

THE DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) TEST BORINGS WERE PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH “DYNAMIC CONE FOR SHALLOW IN-SITU PENETRATION TESTING, VANE SHEAR AND CONE PENETRATION TESTING OF IN-SITU SOILS”, ASTM STP 399, 1966.

THE “N” VALUES SHOWN FOR THE DCP TEST BORINGS REPRESENT APPROXIMATE STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE, BLOWS PER FOOT CORRELATION FROM MEASURED DCP RESISTANCE, BLOWS PER 1.74 INCHES OF PENETRATION. THE CORRELATION OF DCP TO SPT “N” VALUES IS BASED ON THE CALIBRATION CURVE FOR COASTAL PLAINS SOILS, ASTM STP 399, 1966.

D

EP

TH

(F

T.

GRANULAR SOILS

SANDS VERY LOOSE

LOOSE

MEDIUM DENSE

DENSE

VERY DENSE

NON-GRANULAR SOILS

SILTS, CLAYS,

MUCK, PEAT

VERY SOFT

SOFT

FIRM

STIFF

VERY STIFF

HARD

CONSISTENCY

RELATIVE DENSITY

CORRELATION OF STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE

WITH RELATIVE DENSITY AND CONSISTENCY OF SOIL

0-1 1-3 3-6

6-12 12-24

OVER 24

AUTOMATIC HAMMER

N VALUE

(blows per foot)

AUTOMATIC HAMMER

N VALUE

(blows per foot)

0-3 3-8

8-24 24-40

OVER 40

N

BT AT 8'

B-9

LAT: 29.1843454 N

LONG: -81.708409 W

RIG TYPE: DCP/HAND AUGER

DRILLER: BRADLEY W.

DATE: 02/16/24

13 DARK BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT AND ROOTS (SP-SM)

D

EPTH

(FT.)

N

SECTION: 20, 21, 17, 16

TOWNSHIP: 15 SOUTH

RANGE: 26 EAST

1.0

1.0

2.0

2.0

N

BT AT 8'

B-10

LAT: 29.1840188 N

LONG: -81.7083065 W

RIG TYPE: DCP/HAND AUGER

DRILLER: BRADLEY W.

DATE: 02/16/24

13 ORANGE AND BROWN FINE SAND (SP)

3.0 3.5

D

EP

TH

(F

T.

0 N

BT AT 8'

B-13

LAT: 29.1837894 N

LONG: -81.7078925 W

RIG TYPE: DCP/HAND AUGER

DRILLER: BRADLEY W.

DATE: 02/16/24

13 GRAY FINE SAND WITH ROOTS (SP)

D

EPTH

(FT.)

4.0

8.0

DARK BROWN SANDY MUCK WITH ROOTS (PT)

GRAY CLAYEY FINE SAND (SC)

DARK BROWN SANDY MUCK (PT)

GRAY FINE SAND (SP)

GRAY CLAYEY FINE SAND (SC)

N

BT AT 8'

B-11

LAT: 29.1838177 N

LONG: -81.7083065 W

RIG TYPE: DCP/HAND AUGER

DRILLER: BRADLEY W.

DATE: 02/16/24

1.5

2.5 11

GRAY CLAYEY FINE SAND (SC)

N

BT AT 6'

B-12

LAT: 29.1838372 N

LONG: -81.7081968 W

RIG TYPE: DCP/HAND AUGER

DRILLER: BRADLEY W.

DATE: 02/16/24

70.0 0.75

GRAY FINE SAND WITH SILT WITH ROOTS (SP-SM)

DARK BROWN MUCKY FINE

SAND WITH ROOTS (PT)

GRAY FINE SAND WITH

SILT AND ROOTS (SP-SM)

-200

MC

-200=17

MC=139

OC=26

DARK BROWN SANDY MUCK (PT)

GRAY SILTY FINE SAND (SM)

GRAY FINE SAND (SP)

PURA VIDA ENGINEERING

SERVICES

6457 HAZELTINE NATIONAL DRIVE, SUITE 150A

ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32822

PH (407) 203-3804

ROGER S. GOBIN, Ph.D., PE 67006

PROJECT NO.

02/28/24

DATE

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY

CHECKED BY 4

FIGURE

NO.

SOIL BORING RESULTS

M. LIFE

BW

RG

JUNIPER EXPLORATION

MARION COUNTY, FLORIDA

J502G

GRAY FINE SAND WITH SILT AND ROOTS (SP-SM)

DARK BROWN SANDY MUCK WITH ROOTS (PT)

GRAY SILTY FINE SAND (SM)

-200=35

OC

-200=23

SAND AND SILT CLAY MUCKSAND SAND AND CLAY

JUNIPER SPRINGS BOARDWALK

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG

Juniper Springs Boardwalk Photographic Log

Client Name:

Tunnell – Spangler – Walsh & Associates, Inc.

Project Name:

Juniper Exploration

Project Location:

Marion County, Florida

PVE Project No.:

J502G

Photo: Date:

1 2/16/2024

Description:

Location: 26701 Florida 40, Astor, Florida

Observed Defects: Broken and missing wooden boards

Photo: Date:

2 2/16/2024

Description:

Location 2: 26701 Florida 40, Astor, Florida

Observed Defects: Broken, Rotten, and missing wooden boards. Also, overgrown foliage causing obstruction.