lcroy Image lcroy Image

SECTION 000001 – TABLE OF CONTENTS

LA# 20052.04 – OLD RIVERSIDE PARK PROJECT

00 00 01 - 1

PROJECT MANUAL

DIVISION 00 – FRONT END

000001 TABLE OF CONTENTS

000002 INVITATION TO BID

000003 BID FORMS

000004 SUPPLEMENTARY CONDITIONS

000200 GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION

000200-A GEOTECHNICAL REPORT

DIVISION 01 - GENERAL

010000 SUMMARY

012200 UNIT PRICES

012400 WEATHER DELAYS

012500 SUBSTITUTION PROCEDURES

012600 CONTRACT MODIFICATION PROCEDURES

012900 PAYMENT PROCEDURES

013100 PROJECT MANAGEMENT COORDINATION

013200 CONSTRUCTION PROGRESS DOCUMENTATION

013233 PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION

013300 SUBMITTAL PROCEDURES

014000 QUAILTY REQUIREMENTS

014200 REFERENCES

015000 TEMPORARY FACILITIES AND CONTROLS

015639 TEMPORARY TREE AND PLANT PROTECTION

016000 PRODUCT REQUIREMENTS

017300 EXECUTION

017329 CUTTING AND PATCHING

017419 CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT

017700 CLOSEOUT PORCEDURES

017823 OPERATIONAL AND MAINTENANCE DATA

017839 PROJECT RECORD DOCUMENTS

017900 DEMONSTRATION AND TRAINING

DIVISION 02 – EXISTING CONDITIONS

024116 DEMOLITION

DIVISION 03 - CONCRETE

033001 SITE CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE

DIVISION 11 – EQUIPMENT

116900 PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT

DIVISION 12 – FURNISHINGS

129300 SITE FURNISHINGS

DIVISION 26 – ELECTRICAL

260501 ELECTRICAL GENERAL PROVISIONS

260519 LOW VOLTAGE POWER CONDUCTORS AND CABLES

260526 GROUNDING AND BONDING

260533 RACEWAYS AND BOXES

262726 WIRING DEVICES

262813 OVERCURRENT PROTECTIVE DEVICES

262816 ENCLOSED SWITCHES AND CIRCUIT BREAKERS

00 00 01 - 2

DIVISION 31 – EARTHWORK

310000 EARTHWORK

311000 SITE CLEARING

312300 EXCAVATION SUPPORT AND PROTECTION

313116 TERMITE CONTROL

DIVISION 32 – EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS

321216 ASPHALT PAVING

321313 CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT

321373 PAVEMENT JOINT SEALANTS

323113 CHAIN-LINK FENCES AND GATES

329200 LAWNS AND GRASSES

329300 EXTERIOR PLANTS

DIVISION 33 – UTILITIES

331100 WATER SYSTEM

332240 DEWATERING

334001 STORM DRAINAGE

334616 SITE SUBDRAINAGE

APPENDIX

APP 01 PLAYGROUND SYSTEM QUOTE

APP 02 SHADE SYSTEM QUOTE

00 00 01 - 3

SCHEDULE OF DRAWINGS

SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS

Sheet Number Sheet Title

C0.00 COVER

C0.01 GENERAL NOTES

Sheet 1 of 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS (Boundary and Topographic Survey)

C0.10 DEMOLITION PLAN

C0.40 OVERALL TREE PROTECTION

C0.41 TREE PROTECTION

C0.42 TREE PROTECTION

C0.43 IMPACTED TREE SCHEDULE

C1.00 SITE SERIES KEY

C1.01 SITE SERIES

C1.02 SITE SERIES

C1.03 SITE SERIES

C1.04 SITE SERIES

C1.05 SITE SERIES

C1.06 SITE SERIES

C1.07 SITE SERIES

C1.08 SITE SERIES

C1.09 SITE SERIES

C1.10 SITE SERIES

C1.11 ACCESS DRIVE PLAN AND PROFILE

C1.12 SITE FENCE LAYOUT

C2.00 GRADING AND DRAINAGE SERIES

C2.01 GRADING PLAN

C2.02 GRADING PLAN

C2.03 DRAINAGE PLAN

C2.04 DRAINAGE PLAN

C2.10 DRAINAGE PROFILES

C2.11 DRAINAGE PROFILES

C2.12 DRAINAGE PROFILES

C2.13 DRAINAGE PROFILES

C2.14 PIPE SCHEDULE

C2.20 STORMWATER DETAILS

C2.21 STORMWATER DETAILS

C2.30 LAND DISTURBANCE PLAN

C3.00 ESPC COVER SHEET

C3.10 ESPC PHASE 1

C3.11 ESPC PHASE 2

C3.12 ESPC PHASE 3

C3.20 ESPC NOTES

C3.21 ESPC NOTES

C3.22 ESPC NOTES

C3.23 ESPC NOTES

C3.30 ESPC DETAILS

C3.31 ESPC DETAILS

C3.32 ESPC DETAILS

C4.00 DETAIL SERIES

C4.01 DETAIL SERIES

C4.02 DETAIL SERIES

C4.03 DETAIL SERIES

C4.04 DETAIL SERIES

00 00 01 - 4

C4.05 DETAIL SERIES

C4.06 DETAIL SERIES

C4.07 DETAIL SERIES

C4.08 DETAIL SERIES (RESTROOM BLDG)

C4.09 DETAIL SERIES

C5.00 UTILITY SERIES KEY

C5.01 UTILITY SERIES

C5.10 UTILITY DETAILS

S0.1 GENERAL NOTES

S1.0 SITE PLAN

S1.1 FOUNDATION PLAN

S3.1 SECTION & DETAILS

E1.00 ELECTRICAL PLAN

L1.00 LANDSCAPE SERIES

L1.01 LANDSCAPE SERIES

L1.02 LANDSCAPE SERIES

L1.03 LANDSCAPE SERIES

L1.04 LANDSCAPE SERIES

L1.05 LANDSCAPE SERIES

L1.10 PLANT NOTES & SCHEDULE

L1.11 LANDSCAPE DETAILS

ROMTEC BUILDING PLANS

Sheet Number Sheet Title

G0 TITLE PAGE, SHEET & REVISION SCHEDULE

G1 GENERAL NOTES/ SYMBOL LEGEND

G2 DESIGN CRITERIA AND CODE SUMMARY

A1.1 FLOOR PLAN

A1.2 ADA CLEARANCES

A1.3 ADA RESTROOM FIXTURE DETAILS

A1.4 INTERIOR ELEVATION VIEWS

A2.1 EXTERIOR ELEVATION VIEWS

A2.2 EXTERIOR ELEVATION VIEWS

A3.1 SECTION VIEWS

A3.2 SECTION VIEWS

A3.3 SECTION VIEWS

A3.4 SECTION VIEWS

A4.1 WALL FINISH SCHEDULE (INTERIOR/EXTERIOR)

A4.2 WALL FINISH DETAILS

A4.3 WALL FINISH DETAILS

A4.4 WALL FINISH DETAILS

A5.1 DOOR SCHEDULE

A5.2 DOOR DETAILS

A5.3 SIGN DETAILS

S7.1 FOUNDATION PLAN

S7.2 FOUNDATION DETAILS

S7.3 FOUNDATION DETAILS

S8.1 STRUCTURAL CMU PLAN

S8.2 STRUCTURAL CMU REBAR LAYOUT

S8.3 STRUCTURAL CMU DETAILS

S8.4 STRUCTURAL CMU ELEVATION VIEWS

S8.5 STRUCTURAL CMU ELEVATION VIEWS

S9.1 ROOF FRAMING PLAN

S10.1 ROOF CONNECTION DETAILS

00 00 01 - 5

S10.2 ROOF CONNECTION DETAILS

S10.3 ROOF CONNECTION DETAILS

S10.4 ROOF CONNECTION DETAILS

S10.5 ROOF CONNECTION DETAILS

S10.6 ROOF CONNECTION DETAILS

R1 ROOFING PLAN

R2 ROOFING DETAILS

R3 ROOFING DETAILS

P1 PLUMBING SCHEDULE

P2 PLUMBING PLAN

M1 MECHANICAL PLAN

E1 ELECTRICAL SCHEDULE

E2 ELECTRICAL PLAN

E3 ELECTRICAL RISER DETAILS

E4 ELECTRICAL PANEL SCHEDULE

END OF TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 000004 – SUPPLEMENTARY CONDITIONS

LD# 20052.04– OLD RIVERSIDE PARK PROJECT

000004 - 1

1.) ACTIVE FACILITIES:

The Fulton County sewer pump station, located in the north corner of the park property, will remain in operation during the duration of construction of the park. A 12’ wide access drive to the pump station must be maintained at all times during construction. Power to the pump station cannot be turned off without notifying Fulton County Public Works. The contractor must provide a 24-hour contact and their information for the City and County to use if needed.

2.) FEES:

The General Contractor is responsible for any and all fees associated with construction. The General Contractor is responsible for contacting all applicable utility agencies and permitting agencies to determine applicable project fees for inclusion in the Lump Sum Base Bid. The Owner is not obligated to pay additional funds to the General Contractor for failure to include these costs in the bid.

3.) EROSION, SEDIMENTATION AND POLLUTION CONTROL MAINTENANCE:

The Contractor is solely responsible for installing and maintaining erosion, sedimentation, and pollution controls for the project. No payment will be made for any portion of the project for which temporary erosion, sedimentation and pollution controls are not properly installed and maintained.

Any fines or delays for non-compliance of erosion control measures levied by any agency shall be the responsibility of the Contractor.

The contractor shall sign the NPDES Notice of Intent as the operator for the project. The contractor is solely responsible for compliance with all aspects of the NPDES permit including installation, maintenance, all inspections, storm water sampling and documentation required by the permit.

Copies of all inspections, reports, submittals, etc. shall be provided to the Owner. Any enforcement actions, including fines, issued by regulating authorities for failure to comply with the terms of the permit or due to any other issues related to erosion control are the responsibility of the contractor.

4.) CONTRACT DRAWINGS AND PROJECT MANUAL:

The Contractor will receive an electronic (.PDF) copy of the plans and project manual from the Owner.

The Contractor is responsible for ensuring that any reproductions of the contract drawings are to scale. Hardcopies of wet-stamped permit approved drawings will be provided by the Owner where required by permit officials.

The General Contractor is responsible for becoming familiar with the requirements of all construction documents, which includes drawings, bid and contract documents, specifications, and all addenda.

Letter prefixes for each drawing sheet indicating the engineering discipline are for convenience only.

Information affecting the scope of work for all trades will be found throughout all documents and is not limited to only those documents with the appropriate letter prefix. The General Contractor is responsible for providing subcontractors with all necessary information and drawings.

The drawings and specifications are complementary to each other and what is called for by one shall be as binding as if called for by both. In a discrepancy exists between the drawings and specifications, the higher cost shall be included, and the Owner notified of the discrepancy.

5.) EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS FOR GENERAL CONTRACTOR:

The Bidder shall have completed construction of a minimum of three (3) projects of similar size and complexity within the past five (5) years. Contractors are to include project reference forms for no less than three (3) and no more than five (5) in their bid submittal package. Project reference forms will be limited to one page per project and include the following information: project name, project

LD# 20052.04- OLD RIVERSIDE PARK PROJECT

000004 - 2 location, summary scope of work, original contract price, final contract price, original contract period, final contract period, and current reference contact information for the project Owner.

6.) EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS FOR ROCK GARDEN CONTRACTOR/SUB-CONTRACTOR:

The Bidder and/or sub-contractor shall have completed construction of a minimum of three (3) projects of similar size and complexity within the past five (5) years. Contractors are to include project reference forms for no less than three (3) and no more than five (5) in their bid submittal package.

Project reference forms will be limited to one page per project and include the following information:

project name, project location, summary scope of work, and current reference and contact information for the project Owner.

7.) GRASSING:

Establishment of permanent vegetation in accordance with the contract documents must be accomplished at the date of substantial completion. Refer to project specifications Section 329200- Lawns and Grasses for additional requirements.

8.) UTILITIES:

The General Contractor is responsible for coordination with utility providers, temporary and permanent service connections, and verification of sizes and locations of connection points. If required, traffic control is the responsibility of the General Contractor and shall be in compliance with the current edition of the MUTCD and any requirements of local and state officials.

All costs associated with the provision of temporary and permanent service shall be the sole responsibility of the General Contractor. The contractor shall apply for and establish accounts for utilities serving the facilities during construction. Utility costs during construction are to be included in the Contractor’s bid and the Owner shall have no obligation to compensate the Contractor for utility costs during construction. Upon the Owner’s acceptance of buildings and facilities at the time of substantial completion, the accounts shall be transferred to the name of the Owner.

9.) LOCKSETS:

All locksets, latches, deadbolts, padlocks and cores shall be small format, ICC rated, KABA compliant and in conformance with City Standards and shall be compatible with the City’s keying system. All keyed cylinders shall be provided with temporary construction cores for use during construction.

Removable temporary plastic cores will not be permitted. The General Contractor shall be responsible for furnishing and installing permanent cores prior to substantial completion. Permanent cores shall be the same finish as the lockset finish.

10.) SCHEDULE OF VALUES:

After award of contract, the General Contractor shall submit a Schedule of Values, identifying costs for meaningful areas of the Work, such that progress payments can be easily evaluated, as determined by the Owner. The Schedule of Values shall be broken down in sufficient detail to facilitate a thorough review.

The Schedule of Values shall specifically include unit prices identified in the contract.

11.) CONSTRUCTION LAYOUT:

The Contractor is responsible for all construction layout and control for the project. Layouts of construction items must consider all elements of the Work adjacent and/or in close proximity; e.g.

catch basins must be located for proper relationships with curb and gutter, etc.

The Contractor shall proceed with construction layout in such a manner that discrepancies between construction items, existing built features and site conditions that are in conflict with the plans may be examined by the Owner’s Representative prior to construction of items in conflict. Failure to notify the Owner’s Representative of conflicts prior to constructing items will result in all remedial actions

000004 - 3 being paid for by the Contractor including but not limited to additional materials, reinspection fees, professional service fees and survey cost by all parties to the projects.

12.) MULCH MANAGEMENT:

Should the Contractor decide to stockpile mulch derived from the clearing operations on the site, or mulch delivered from off site, he is responsible for managing the stockpiled mulch to prevent combustion of the material. Should the stockpiled mulch materials ignite and/or burn, Contractor shall be responsible for extinguishing the fire and redistributing the stockpile appropriately to prevent future combustion. Repair of or replacement required due to damage to the property or adjacent properties will be the responsibility of the Contractor.

13.) TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPING:

The topographic mapping utilized for the development of these construction documents was compiled via field run survey unless noted otherwise. These surveys were prepared following standard survey practices and standards and are the best available information on the site. It is the belief of the Designer and the Owner that the information is correct, but neither party warrants or implies a level of accuracy beyond standard surveying practices. The contractor shall visit the site to review the site topographic conditions and conduct verification surveys if so desired prior to the bid to verify the accuracy of the information provided. Topographic variations discovered after bidding will not be grounds for additional compensation.

14.) EARTHWORK:

Contractor is responsible for all grading shown on the plans, unless noted otherwise. The Contractor shall conduct his own quantity take off based on the Bid Documents. Earthwork related quantities shown on the plans (if any) are provided for reference only and shall not be utilized for bidding purpose. Any haul-off of excess materials or import of materials needed to complete the grading shall be by the contractor. Should the contractor import materials from any another site, the contractor shall provide sample(s) to the materials testing firm for testing and approval. Refer to specifications Section 310000- Earthwork for additional requirements.

15.) GEOTECHNICAL REPORT:

A subsurface investigation has been performed at the site and a report is included in another section.

This investigation was conducted, and the reports obtained, solely for design purposes. The use and interpretation of this information will be entirely the responsibility of the using party. Neither the Owner nor any Designer on the project is responsible for variations in the subsurface conditions. Bidders shall decide for themselves the character of the material to be encountered.

16.) ENGINEERING BY THE CONTRACTOR:

The General Contractor is solely responsible for the design, engineering, permitting and construction of modular block retaining walls, pre-engineered bridges, pre-engineered structures, and other improvements, as identified in the contract documents. All drawings must be sealed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Georgia. Additionally, all soils and materials testing associated with the design and construction of these elements shall be responsibility of the General Contractor and shall be provided in accordance with the recommendations of the manufacturer and professional engineer. The General Contractor is responsible for ensuring that the design, engineering, and construction considers all existing and proposed conditions.

17.) SUBMITTALS:

After award of contract, the General Contractor shall submit a Submittal Schedule for review by the Designer and the Owner. The Submittal Schedule shall provide sufficient detail to convey anticipated submittal distribution and return dates, applicable project specification section and a unique identification format for each submittal. The General Contractor is responsible for collecting and submitting project submittals for review in a timely manner to facilitate implementation of the

000004 - 4

Contractor’s schedule for construction. Refer to specifications Section 013300- Submittal Procedures for additional requirements.

Submittals by the Contractor shall be compiled in a manner to convey all pertinent information for a product, system or assembly or trade in a single document; e.g., product data, certifications, warranties, samples, shop drawings, etc. for fencing must be submitted together as a single submittal.

Submittals returned to the Contractor as “Amend and Resubmit” or “Rejected” shall be revised by the Contractor and resubmitted for review by the Designer. In the event at a revised submittal has sufficient justification to again be marked for resubmittal, the General Contractor shall be responsible for costs associated with additional reviews, including professional consulting services by the Designer. Additionally, no additional contract time will be provided to the Contractor for schedule impacts due to additional reviews following the initial revision.

18.) CONTRACTOR REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION:

Contractor Requests for Information (RFI) shall contain sufficient detail to convey specific issues/clarifications for consideration by the Owner and the Designer. Requests for Information must contain a reference to specific plan sheet(s) or specification sections and indicate potential impacts to project costs or schedule. Responses to Requests for Information will be returned by the Designer in a timely manner; however, the Designer reserves the right to review the requests for up to five (5) business days following the receipt of any RFIs.

19.) AS-BUILT DRAWINGS AND DOCUMENTATION:

The General Contractor is responsible for furnishing and submitting as-built documents as required by permit officials. The Contractor shall contact permit officials to determine their requirements.

Additionally, the Contractor shall provide as-built documents where required in the contract documents. Refer to specifications Section 017839- Project Record Documents for additional information.

20.) CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY:

It shall be the Contractor’s responsibility to ensure all required inspections and submittals are completed in a timely manner in order to receive a Certificate of Occupancy or other required final acceptance documents. The Contractor shall contact and coordinate with local officials and any other authorities to identify all final inspections and submittals required. The Contractor shall obtain a final sign off from the special inspections testing firm and submit it to the Designer for final review and certification. Upon completion of all inspections, submittal, and approval of all required as built documents or any other items required by the County, the Contractor shall obtain the Certificate of Occupancy from and deliver it to the Owner’s representative.

21.) OMISSIONS:

Omissions and Errors from the drawings, and /or specifications, or the mis-description of details of work which are manifestly necessary to carry out the intent of the drawings and/or specifications, or which are customarily performed, shall not relieve the Contractor from performing such omitted or mis-described details of the work, but they shall be performed as if fully and correctly set forth and described in the drawings and specifications.

000004 - 5

22.) CERTIFICATE OF SUBSTATIAL COMPLETION:

For a Certificate of Substantial Completion to be dated and issued the following items must be completed:

a.) All as-builts must be submitted, b.) All required attic stock and deliverables must be provided, c.) All closeout documents must be provided in the specified format, d.) Final pay application must be submitted, less retention withheld, e.) All tests and inspections required by the contract documents and applicable building codes have been performed and certified, f.) All Notices of Non-Compliant work, if any have been issued, have been addressed and closed, g.) Certificates of Occupancy have been obtained from all regulatory agencies, h.) All commissioning has been successfully completed, i.) All pending change orders for credits due have been submitted, and j.) The Final Punchlist specifying minor or permitted incomplete work items has been issued.

23.) PROJECT MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE

The City uses Trimble e-Builder for their project management. The contractor must use e-Builder for construction administration: RFI’s, submittals, change orders, payment applications, etc. Access to the City’s account will be provided at no cost to the contractor.

END OF SECTION

000004 - 6

THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK

SECTION 000200 - GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO BIDDERS

LD# 20052.04 – OLD RIVERSIDE PARK PROJECT

SECTION 000200 - GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO BIDDERS

PART 1 - GENERAL

A. Subsurface investigation has been performed at the site by the Owner. This investigation was conducted, and the reports obtained, solely for design purposes and are not a part of the Contract Documents.

B. The use and interpretation of this information will be entirely the responsibility of the using party.

Neither the Owner nor any Designer on the project is responsible for variations in the subsurface conditions. Bidders shall decide for themselves the character of the material to be encountered.

C. The report(s) of the findings of this investigation follow this section.

PART 2 - PRODUCTS (Not used)

PART 3 - EXECUTION (Not used)

SECTION 000200 – GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO BIDDDERS

000200 - 2

Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation

Old Riverside Road Park Sandy Springs, Georgia Geo-Hydro Project Number 231317.20

Prepared for Lose Design June 13, 2024

400 Chastain Center Boulevard, Suite 430 • Kennesaw, Georgia 30144 o: 770.426.7100 • www.geohydro.com

Mr. Daryl McCann, RLA June 13, 2024

Lose Design

220 West Crogan Street, Suite 100

Lawrenceville, Georgia 30046

Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation

Old Riverside Road Park Sandy Springs, Georgia

Geo-Hydro Project Number 231317.20

Dear Mr. McCann :

Geo-Hydro Engineers, Inc. has completed the authorized subsurface exploration for the above referenced project. The scope of services for this project was outlined in our proposal number 231101.P0 REV 1 dated

May 7, 2024.

Project Information

The project consists of a new park to be located on the west side of Old Riverside Road north and south of an existing Fulton County pump station at 6500 Old Riverside Road in Sandy Springs, Georgia. The new park will include hiking trails, two river overlooks, a restroom building, parking lot, playground, and walking loop. We have assumed that the building and other ancillary structures will be wood-framed or masonry structures with wall loads not exceeding 2 kips per lineal foot. We expect any column loads to be less than 25 kips. We have assumed that the pedestrian bridge will be a wood-framed or pre-fabricated, single-span structure. We expect the abutment loads to be less than 100 kips for the roughly

75-foot long pedestrian bridge.

The project is currently a combination of wooded and grassed areas. We expect site grading to involve minor adjustments primarily to help direct surface runoff to the site stormwater management system. The annotated aerial photograph below shows the location of the existing pump station and the general project area.

Old Riverside Road Park • Sandy Springs, Georgia Project Number 231317.20

June 13, 2024 | 2

Exploratory Procedures

The initial subsurface exploration consisted of four machine-drilled soil test borings performed at the approximate requested locations shown on Figure 2 included in the Appendix. Boring B-4 was inaccessible via drill rig. The subsurface exploration for boring B-4 was switched to a hand auger boring performed at the approximate location shown on Figure 2 in the Appendix. The borings were located in the field by

Geo-Hydro utilizing a handheld GPS unit with preloaded coordinates. The ground surface elevations shown on the test boring records and hand auger log were interpolated from the Site Series Key plan (Sheet C1.00) prepared by Lose Design dated January 19, 2024. The elevation data is not certified as correct by this engineer, and users of the data do so at their own risk. In general, the locations and elevations of the test boreholes should be considered approximate.

Standard penetration testing, as provided for in ASTM D1586, was performed at select depth intervals in the machine-drilled soil test borings. Dynamic cone penetrometer testing (ASTM STP-399) was performed at select depths in the hand auger boring. Soil samples obtained from the subsurface exploration were examined and classified in general accordance with ASTM D2488 (Visual-Manual Procedure for

Description of Soils). Soil classifications include the use of the Unified Soil Classification System described in ASTM D2487 (Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes). The soil classifications also include our evaluation of the geologic origin of the soils. Evaluations of geologic origin are based on our experience and interpretation and may be subject to some degree of error.

Descriptions of the soils encountered, groundwater conditions, standard penetration test resistances, dynamic cone penetrometer resistances, and other pertinent information are provided in the test boring records and hand auger log included in the Appendix.

Regional Geology

The project site is located within the Brevard Fault Zone which separates the Northern Piedmont geologic province from the Southern Piedmont geologic province. The Brevard Fault Zone is a narrow belt of deformed rocks, consisting primarily of mica schist, biotitic gneiss, and amphibolite in the project area.

The area has undergone several episodes of deformation and metamorphism, the latest of which occurred some 200 to 300 million years ago. The Brevard Fault Zone is presently considered to be inactive. In this report, we will refer to the site as being within the Piedmont Region for the sake of simplicity.

Soils in this area have been formed by the in-place weathering of the underlying crystalline rock, which accounts for their classification as “residual” soils. Residual soils near the ground surface, which have experienced advanced weathering, frequently consist of red brown clayey silt (ML) or silty clay (CL). The thickness of this surficial clayey zone may range up to roughly 6 feet. For various reasons, such as erosion or local variation of mineralization, the upper clayey zone is not always present.

With increased depth, the soil becomes less weathered, coarser grained, and the structural character of the underlying parent rock becomes more evident. These residual soils are typically classified as sandy micaceous silt (ML) or silty micaceous sand (SM). With a further increase in depth, the soils eventually become quite hard and take on an increasing resemblance to the underlying parent rock. When these

June 13, 2024 | 3 materials have a standard penetration resistance of 100 blows per foot or greater, they are referred to as partially weathered rock. The transition from soil to partially weathered rock is usually a gradual one, and may occur at a wide range of depths. Lenses or layers of partially weathered rock are not unusual in the soil profile.

Partially weathered rock represents the zone of transition between the soil and the indurated metamorphic rocks from which the soils are derived. The subsurface profile is, in fact, a history of the weathering process which the crystalline rock has undergone. The degree of weathering is most advanced at the ground surface, where fine grained soil may be present. And the weathering process is in its early stages immediately above the surface of relatively sound rock, where partially weathered rock may be found.

The thickness of the zone of partially weathered rock and the depth to the rock surface have both been found to vary considerably over relatively short distances. The depth to the rock surface may frequently range from the ground surface to 80 feet or more. The thickness of partially weathered rock, which overlies the rock surface, may vary from only a few inches to as much as 40 feet or more.

Soil Test Boring Summary

Machine-Drilled Boring Summary

Starting at the ground surface, borings B-1 and B-2 encountered approximately 3 inches of topsoil. Borings

B-3 and B-5 encountered approximately 3 inches of asphalt followed by 8 inches of crushed stone base.

Beneath the surface materials, all borings encountered fill materials extending to depths ranging from about

3 to greater than 15 feet. Boring B-1 encountered auger refusal in fill materials at a depth of 15 feet. The fill materials were classified as silty sand, silty clay, and sandy clay with varying amounts of rock fragments and organics. Standard penetration test resistances recorded in the fill material ranged from 7 to greater than 100 blows per foot. Elevated standard penetration test resistances recorded in borings B-1 and B-2 were artificially inflated by rock fragments. Such artificially elevated standard penetration test resistances are not considered representative of the fill’s consistency and cannot be relied upon to evaluate the engineering properties of the fill mass.

Beneath the fill, boring B-3 encountered alluvial (water-deposited) soils classified as clayey silt extending from about 12 to 17 feet. A standard penetration test resistance of 12 blows per foot was recorded in the alluvium.

Beneath the fill materials, boring B-2 encountered residual soils typical of the Piedmont Region. The residual soils were generally classified as silty sand. A standard penetration test resistance of 34 blows per foot was recorded in the residuum.

Partially weathered rock was encountered in borings B-3 and B-5 at depths of about 17 feet and 3 feet, respectively. Partially weathered rock is locally defined as residual material having a standard penetration resistance of 100 blows per foot or greater.

June 13, 2024 | 4

Materials causing auger refusal were encountered in all borings at depths ranging from 5 to 20 feet. Borings

B-1 and B-5 were each offset twice to attempt to penetrate the refusal materials. Auger refusal is the condition that prevents advancement of the boring using conventional soil drilling techniques. The material causing auger refusal may consist of debris within the fill, a structure, a boulder, a lens or layer of rock, the upper surface of relatively massive rock, or other hard material.

At the time of drilling, groundwater was not encountered in any of the borings. The borings were backfilled after the groundwater level check. It should be noted that groundwater levels will fluctuate depending on yearly and seasonal rainfall variations, the water level of the Chattahoochee river, and other factors, and may rise in the future.

Hand Auger Boring Summary

Starting at the ground surface, boring B-4 encountered approximately 4 inches of topsoil. Beneath the surface materials, boring B-4 encountered fill materials extending to a depth of about 3 feet. The fill materials were classified as clayey sand with varying amounts rock fragments. A dynamic cone penetrometer resistance of 5 blows per increment was recorded in the fill.

Beneath the fill, boring B-4 encountered residual soils typical of the Piedmont region. The residual soils were classified as clayey sand with varying mica content. Dynamic cone penetrometer resistances of 6 and greater than 25 blows per increment were recorded in the residual soils.

Boring B-4 encountered dense soils causing hand auger refusal at a depth of 4½ feet. Hand auger refusal conditions should not be construed as indicative of rock or difficult excavation. Hand equipment refusal is not a reliable indicator of excavation characteristics.

For more detailed descriptions of subsurface conditions, please refer to the test boring records included in the Appendix.

Machine-Drilled Boring Summary

Boring Ground Surface

Elevation

Bottom of Fill Groundwater* Top of PWR Auger Refusal Boring

Termination

Depth (feet)

Elev.

Depth (feet)

Elev.

Depth (feet)

Elev.

Depth (feet)

Elev.

Depth (feet)

Elev.

B-1 818 NE --- NE --- NE -- 9, 7, 15 803 15 803

B-2 812 12 800 NE --- NE --- 18 794 18 794

B-3 809 12 797 NE --- 17 792 20 789 20 789

B-5 810 3 807 NE --- 3 807 8 802 8 802

All Depths in this Summary Table are Approximate NE: Not Encountered PWR: Partially Weathered Rock *Groundwater level measured after completion #, #, #: Initial and offset auger refusal depths

June 13, 2024 | 5

Hand Auger Boring Summary

Boring Ground Surface

Elevation

Bottom of Fill Groundwater* Hand Auger

Refusal Boring

Termination

Depth (feet)

Elev.

Depth (feet)

Elev.

Depth (feet)

Elev.

Depth (feet)

Elev.

B-4 810 3 807 NE --- 4½ 805 4½ 805

All Depths and Elevations in this Summary Table are Approximate NE: Not Encountered PWR: Partially Weathered Rock *Groundwater level measured after completion

Infiltration Testing Procedures and Results

We performed infiltration testing at five locations shown on Figure 2 in the Appendix. The test locations were established in the field using a handheld GPS unit with preloaded coordinates. In general, the test locations should be considered approximate.

The tests were all advanced to their requested target depths.

The test holes were advanced using mechanical drilling equipment or hand auger equipment producing approximately 6-inch diameter and 4-inch diameter boreholes, respectively. The tests were then performed using an Aardvark constant head permeameter to measure the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat) of the soil. The

Aardvark Permeameter estimates soil hydraulic conductivity using the amount of supplied water measured at equal time intervals, which is the equivalent to the amount of water that was infiltrated by the soil. The tests were performed until the soil-water infiltration rate reached a steady value that did not change over time. Soil hydraulic conductivity (Ksat) was then calculated using this steady flow rate (Q). The test procedure and model components are shown in the figure to the right.

Saturated hydraulic conductivity was calculated using the

Reynolds and Elrick Method. The saturated hydraulic conductivity of a soil under steady flow from a borehole was calculated using the following equation:

Where QS is the steady flow rate in volume of water (cm3) per time (min), h is the height of water ponded in the borehole (cm), r is the radius of the hole (cm), α is the soil macroscopic capillary length (cm-1), and

June 13, 2024 | 6

C0 is a unitless geometric factor. The values of α and C0 are dependent on the texture and structure of the soil, and are fixed values predetermined by Reynolds and Elrick (1992)1.

The following table presents the results of the infiltration tests.

Infiltration Test Test Depth (feet) Approximate Test Elevation Interpreted Infiltration Rate

(inches/hour)

I-1 5 804 1.50

I-2 5 804 0.67

I-3 2½ 810 0.00

I-4 2 810 0.18

I-5 2½ NA 0.24

All Depths and Elevations in this Table are Approximate

Tests I-1 through I-4 were performed in fill materials classified as silty fine sand with varying amounts of rock fragments and organics. Test I-5 was performed in residual soils classified as silty fine sand. It is important to note that infiltration properties can vary horizontally and vertically, and the results of the infiltration tests may not be representative of the entire area where infiltration is intended. Appropriate judgement should be used when selecting values for design.

1 Reynolds and Elrick (1992). Advances in measurement of soil physical properties: Bringing theory into practice (Vol. 30, pp. 1-24). Soil Science

Society of America.

June 13, 2024 | 7

Evaluations and Recommendations

The following evaluations and recommendations are based on the information available regarding the proposed construction, our observations, the data obtained from the test borings, and our experience with soils and subsurface conditions similar to those encountered at this site. Because the test borings represent a very small statistical sampling of subsurface conditions, it is possible that conditions may be encountered during construction that are substantially different from those indicated by the borings. In these instances, adjustments to the design and construction may be necessary.

Geotechnical Considerations

The following geotechnical characteristics of the site should be considered for planning and design:

• Fill material and residual soils should be readily removable with conventional earth moving equipment. Partially weathered rock was encountered in boring B-5 at depths of about 3 feet, suggesting that difficult excavation conditions may be encountered during grading and installation of underground utilities. The Brevard Fault Zone is notorious for differential weathering including intermittent or discontinuous partially weathered rock layers and boulders, which makes subsurface conditions more variable and unpredictable than otherwise expected.

• At the time of drilling, groundwater was not encountered in any of the borings. While we do not expect excavations for the project to extend below the groundwater level, if temporary dewatering is necessary, the groundwater level should be maintained approximately 2 to 3 feet below the lowest prevailing excavation depth. In most cases, we expect that direct pumping from the excavation will provide satisfactory temporary construction dewatering. However, the actual dewatering approach will be dictated by conditions at the time of excavation. Sand layers or other more permeable soil layers may significantly increase the amount of water inflow into open excavations. The contractor should be prepared to manage groundwater and surface water throughout the site. In areas near creeks and rivers, the stabilized groundwater level is typically at the approximate water level in the water feature or shallower, generally following the topography of the area.

• Borings B-3, located in the west abutment area of the planned pedestrian bridge, encountered auger refusal at a depth of 20 feet. Hand auger boring B-4, located roughly at the east end of the pedestrian bridge, encountered relatively firm residual soils at a depth of about 3 feet before hand auger refusal occurred at a depth of 4½ feet. Based on the results of the soil test borings, it is our opinion that the planned bridge can be supported using conventional reinforced concrete abutments. At the time of this report, we have not been provided structural loading information for the pedestrian bridge. Based on our experience with similar projects, we expect the abutment loads to be less than 100 kips for the roughly 75-foot long pedestrian bridge. We recommend using an allowable bearing pressure of

2,500 psf for abutment design.

• At the time of this report, we have not been provided structural loading information for the planned park building. Based on our experience with similar projects, we have assumed that column loads will not exceed 25 kips, with wall loads no greater than 2 kips per lineal foot. Based on the results of the

June 13, 2024 | 8 soil test borings, it is our opinion that the planned building and any ancillary structures can be supported using conventional shallow foundations and slab-on-grade floors. We recommend an allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 psf for foundation design.

• It is our opinion that the test borings performed for the project were not extended to a depth sufficient to characterize the upper 100 feet of the soil subsurface for the purposes of determining the Site Class in accordance with the 2018 International Building Code (Chapter 20, ASCE 7-16). We recommend using a default Site Class of D as suggested in the code. The mapped and design spectral response accelerations are as follows: SS=0.203, S1=0.088, SDS=0.216, SD1=0.141.

The following sections provide recommendations regarding these issues and other geotechnical aspects of the project.

Existing Fill Materials

Fill materials were encountered in all borings. There are several important facts that should be considered regarding existing fill materials and the limitations of subsurface exploration.

• The quality of existing fill materials can be highly variable, and test borings are often not able to detect all of the zones or layers of poor-quality fill materials.

• Layers of poor-quality fill materials that are less than about 2.5 to 5 feet thick may often remain undetected by soil test borings due to the discrete-interval sampling method used in this exploration.

• The interface between existing fill materials and the original ground surface may include a layer of organic material that was not properly stripped off during the original grading. Depending on its relationship to bearing surfaces, an organic layer might adversely affect support of foundations and structures supported at grade. If such organic layers are encountered during construction, it may be necessary to “chase out” the organic layer by excavating the layer along with overlying soils.

• Subsurface exploration is simply not capable of disclosing all conditions that may require remediation.

General Site Preparation

Topsoil, trees, roots and other deleterious materials should be removed from the proposed construction areas. All existing utilities should be excavated and removed unless they are to be incorporated into the new construction. Additionally, site clearing, grubbing, and stripping should be performed only during dry weather conditions. Operation of heavy equipment on the site during wet conditions could result in excessive rutting and mixing of topsoil and debris with underlying soils.

We recommend, wherever possible, that areas to receive structural fill be proofrolled prior to placement of structural fill. Areas of proposed excavation should be proofrolled after rough finished subgrade is achieved. Proofrolling should be performed with multiple passes in at least two directions using a fully loaded tandem axle dump truck weighing at least 18 tons. If low consistency soils are encountered that

June 13, 2024 | 9 cannot be adequately densified in place, such soils should be removed and replaced with well compacted fill material placed in accordance with the Structural Fill section of this report. Proofrolling should be observed by Geo-Hydro to determine if remedial measures are necessary.

For planning purposes, we suggest considering that approximately 35 percent of the aggregate areas to be occupied by buildings and pavement will require undercutting and recompaction or replacement extending to a depth of about 2 feet below current grades (fill areas) or below target subgrade elevation (cut areas).

The suggested stabilization approach is intended only as a tool to estimate a cost associated with ground stabilization. The need for, extent of, location, and optimal method of ground stabilization should be determined by Geo-Hydro at the time of construction based on actual site conditions. The extent and cost of ground stabilization may exceed the suggested budgetary estimate.

During site preparation, burn pits or trash pits may be encountered. All too frequently such buried material occurs in isolated areas which are not detected by the soil test borings. Any buried debris or trash found during the construction operation should be thoroughly excavated and removed from the site.

Excavation Characteristics

Fill material and residual soils should be readily removable with conventional earth moving equipment.

Partially weathered rock was encountered in boring B-5 at depths of about 3 feet, suggesting that difficult excavation conditions may be encountered during grading and installation of underground utilities. The

Brevard Fault Zone is notorious for differential weathering including intermittent or discontinuous partially weathered rock layers and boulders, which makes subsurface conditions more variable and unpredictable than otherwise expected.

For construction bidding and field verification purposes it is common to provide a verifiable definition of rock in the project specifications. The following are typical definitions of mass rock and trench rock:

• Mass Rock: Material which cannot be excavated with a single-tooth ripper drawn by a crawler tractor having a minimum draw bar pull rated at 56,000 pounds (Caterpillar D-8K or equivalent), and occupying an original volume of at least one cubic yard.

• Trench Rock: Material occupying an original volume of at least one-half cubic yard which cannot be excavated with a hydraulic excavator having a minimum flywheel power rating of 123 kW (165 hp);

such as a Caterpillar 322C L, John Deere 230C LC, or a Komatsu PC220LC-7; equipped with a 5-tooth short tip radius bucket not wider than 42 inches.

The foregoing definitions are based on large equipment typically utilized for mass grading. Excavations for small-scale or limited-access projects are often performed with smaller equipment such as rubber-tired backhoe/loaders or even mini-excavators. Depending on the depth of excavation, small equipment might encounter difficult excavation during trail construction or during utility installation. Contractors will often request additional payment for mobilizing larger equipment than that which was anticipated during preparation of their construction bid. The amount of additional compensation, if any, and the minimum

June 13, 2024 | 10 equipment size necessary to qualify for any additional compensation should be defined before the start of construction.

Suitability of Excavated Material for Reuse as Structural Fill

Residual soils at the site appear suitable for reuse as structural fill. Routine adjustment of moisture content

(predominately drying) will be necessary to allow proper placement and compaction. Because of their high variability, alluvial soils should not be used as structural fill.

It is important to establish as part of the construction contract whether soils having elevated moisture content will be considered suitable for reuse. We often find this issue to be a point of contention and a source of delays and change orders. From a technical standpoint, soils with moisture contents wet of optimum as determined by the standard Proctor test (ASTM D698) can be reused provided that the moisture is properly adjusted to within the workable range. From a practical standpoint, wet soils can be very difficult to dry in small or congested sites and such difficulties should be considered during planning and budgeting. A clear understanding by the general contractor and grading subcontractor regarding the reuse of excavated soils will be important to avoid delays and unexpected cost overruns.

Partially weathered rock materials will be suitable for reuse as structural fill only if they break down into a reasonably well-graded material that can be satisfactorily compacted. The presence of cobble size or boulder size material, which does not break down under the action of compaction equipment, will limit the suitability of partially weathered rock materials for reuse. Engineering judgment will be required in the field to evaluate the acceptability of partially weathered rock materials for reuse as structural fill.

Structural Fill

Materials selected for use as structural fill should be free of organic debris, waste construction debris, and other deleterious materials. The material should not contain rocks having a diameter over 4 inches. It is our opinion that the following soils represented by their USCS group symbols will typically be suitable for use as structural fill and are usually found in abundance in the Piedmont: (SM), (ML), and (CL). The following soil types are typically suitable but are not abundant in the Piedmont: (SW), (SP), (SC), (SP-SM), and (SP-SC). The following soil types are considered unsuitable: (MH), (CH), (OL), (OH), and (Pt).

Laboratory Proctor compaction tests and classification tests should be performed on representative samples obtained from the proposed borrow material to provide data necessary to determine acceptability and for quality control. The moisture content of suitable borrow soils should generally be no more than 3 percentage points below or above optimum at the time of compaction. Tighter moisture limits may be necessary with certain soils.

It is possible that highly micaceous soils could be utilized as structural fill material. The use of such materials will require very close attention to quality control of moisture content and density. Additionally, it is our experience that highly micaceous soils tend to rut under rubber-tired vehicle traffic. Continuous maintenance of areas subjected to construction traffic is typically required until construction is completed.

June 13, 2024 | 11

Suitable fill material should be placed in thin lifts. Lift thickness depends on the type of compaction equipment, but a maximum loose-lift thickness of 8 inches is generally recommended. The soil should be compacted by a self-propelled sheepsfoot roller. Fill placed on the face of existing slopes should be adequately benched into the existing slope to provide a horizontal surface for compaction and minimize the chances of slippage at the cut/fill interface.

We recommend that structural fill be compacted to at least 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D698). The upper 12 inches of subgrade soils should be compacted to at least 98 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density. Additionally, the in-place maximum dry density of structural fill should be no less than 90 pcf. Following Georgia DOT guidelines, the upper 12 inches of pavement subgrade soils should be compacted to at least 100 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density. Geo-Hydro should perform density tests during fill placement.

Earth Slopes

Temporary construction slopes should be designed in strict…