34-0007_-_COG_-_RTS_Eastside_Bus_Facility_-_Project_Manual.pdf

SPECIFICATIONS

FOR

EASTSIDE BUS TRANSFER STATION

614 S E 20th S T REET

FOR

CITY OF GAINESVILLE

PROJECT #: 34-0007

100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS

DATE PREPARED: 04/01/2026

112 SW 6th St, Gainesville, FL 32601

(352) 378-4400

CITY OF GAINESVILLE 100% Construction Documents EASTSIDE BUS TRANSFER STATION April 1, 2026

MDG #34-007

TABLE OF CONTENTS 00 01 10 - 1

DOCUMENT 00 01 10

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DIVISION 00 – INTRODUCTORY INFORMATION

00 01 10 Table of Contents 00 31 32 Geotechnical Data

DIVISION 01 -- GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

01 10 00 Summary 01 25 00 Substitution Procedures 01 31 00 Project Management and Coordination 01 32 00 Construction Progress Documentation 01 33 00 Submittal Procedures 01 40 00 Quality Requirements 01 60 00 Product Requirements 01 73 00 Execution 01 74 19 Construction Waste Management and Disposal 01 77 00 Closeout Procedures 01 78 23 Operation and Maintenance Data 01 78 39 Project Record Documents 01 79 00 Demonstration and Training 01 81 13.14 Sustainable Design Requirements 01 91 13 General Commissioning Requirements

DIVISION 03 -- CONCRETE

03 30 00 Cast-in-Place Concrete 03 45 00 Architectural Precast Concrete

DIVISION 04 -- MASONRY

04 22 00 Concrete Unit Masonry 04 73 00 Stone Veneer

DIVISION 05 -- METALS

05 12 00 Structural Steel Framing 05 21 00 Steel Joist Framing 05 31 00 Steel Decking 05 40 00 Cold Formed Steel Framing 05 50 00 Metal Fabrications

DIVISION 06 -- WOOD, PLASTICS, AND COMPOSITES

06 10 53 Miscellaneous Rough Carpentry 06 41 16 Plastic-Laminate-Clad Architectural Casework

DIVISION 07 -- THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION

07 13 26 Self-Adhering Sheet Waterproofing 07 21 00 Thermal Insulation 07 27 26 Fluid Applied Weather Barriers

TABLE OF CONTENTS 00 01 10 - 2

07 41 13 Standing Seam Metal Roof Panels 07 42 93 Metal Panels 07 45 00 Mineral Fiber Reinforced Cementitious Panels 07 54 23 Thermoplastic-Polyolefin (TPO) Roofing 07 62 00 Sheet Metal Flashing and Trim 07 84 13 Penetration Firestopping 07 92 00 Joint Sealants

DIVISION 08 -- OPENINGS

08 11 13 Hollow Metal Doors and Frames 08 31 13 Access Doors and Frames 08 41 13 Aluminum Framed Entrances and Storefronts 08 71 00 Door Hardware 08 80 00 Glazing

DIVISION 09 -- FINISHES

09 22 16 Non-Structural Metal Framing 09 24 00 Cement Plastering 09 29 00 Gypsum Board 09 30 00 Tiling 09 51 13 Acoustical Panel Ceilings 09 54 26 Suspended Wood Ceilings 09 65 00 Resilient Flooring and Accessories 09 67 23 Resinous coating 09 68 13 Tile Carpeting 09 91 00 Painting

DIVISION 10 -- SPECIALTIES

10 26 00 Corner Guards 10 28 00 Toilet Accessories 10 44 00 Fire Protection Specialties 10 73 43 Transportation Shelters

DIVISION 11 -- EQUIPMENT

10 52 13 Projection screen

DIVISION 12 -- FURNISHINGS

12 24 13 Roller Window Shades 12 36 00 Countertops

DIVISION 22 -- PLUMBING

22 01 00 General Provisions for Plumbing 22 05 17 Sleeves and Sleeve Seals for Plumbing Piping 22 05 18 Escutcheons for Plumbing Piping 22 05 19 Meters and Gages for Domestic Water Piping 22 05 23.11 General Duty Valves for Domestic Water Piping 22 05 23.31 General Duty Valves for Sanitary Waste and Storm Drainage Piping 22 05 29 Hangers and Supports for Plumbing Piping and Equipment

TABLE OF CONTENTS 00 01 10 - 3

22 05 53 Identification for Plumbing Piping and Equipment 22 07 19.11 Insulation for Domestic Cold-Water Piping 22 07 19.12 Insulation for Domestic Hot-Water Piping 22 07 19.15 Insulation for ADA Plumbing Fixtures 22 08 00 Commissioning of Plumbing 22 11 16 Domestic Water Piping 22 11 19 Domestic Water Piping Specialties 22 11 23.21 Inline, Domestic-Water Pumps 22 13 16 Sanitary Waste and Vent Piping 22 13 19 Sanitary Waste Piping Specialties 22 13 19.13 Sanitary Drains 22 33 00 Electric, Domestic-Water Heaters 22 42 00 Commercial Plumbing Fixtures 22 46 00 Security Plumbing Fixtures

DIVISION 23 -- HEATING, VENTILATING, AND AIR-CONDITIONING (HVAC)

23 01 00 General Provisions for HVAC 23 05 13 Common Motor Requirements for HVAC Equipment 23 05 16 Expansion Fittings and Loops for HVAC Piping 23 05 17 Sleeves and Sleeve Seals for HVAC Piping 23 05 18 Escutcheons for HVAC Piping 23 05 19 Meters and Gauges for HVAC Piping 23 05 29 Hangers and Supports for HVAC Piping and Equipment 23 05 48.13 Vibration Controls for HVAC 23 05 53 Identification for HVAC Piping and Equipment 23 05 93 Testing, Adjusting, and Balancing for HVAC 23 07 13.11 Insulation for Indoor General HVAC Ducts 23 07 19.16 Insulation for Refrigerant Piping 23 08 00 Commissioning of HVAC 23 21 13.11 Condensate Drain Piping 23 23 00 Refrigerant Piping 23 29 23 Variable-Frequency Motor Controllers 23 31 13.11 Metal Ducts for General HVAC 23 33 00 Air Duct Accessories 23 33 46 Flexible Ducts 23 34 23.12 Ceiling-Mounted Ventilators 23 37 13.13 Air Diffusers 23 37 13.23 Registers and Grilles 23 39 16 Operable Wall Louvers 23 39 19 Fixed Louvers 23 63 13 Air-Cooled Refrigerant Condensers 23 74 33.11 Packaged, High-Percentage Outside Air Units 23 81 26.11 Air-Cooled, Split-System Air-Conditioners (5 Tons and Smaller)

TABLE OF CONTENTS 00 01 10 - 4

DIVISION 26 -- ELECTRICAL

26 01 00 General Provisions for Electrical 26 05 19 Low-Voltage Electrical Power Conductors and Cables 26 05 23 Control-Voltage Electrical Power Cables 26 05 26 Grounding and Bonding for Electrical Systems 26 05 29 Hangers and Supports for Electrical Systems 26 05 33 Raceway and Boxes for Electrical Systems 26 05 44 Sleeves and Sleeve Seals for Electrical Raceways and Cabling 26 05 53 Identification for Electrical Systems 26 08 00 Commissioning of Electrical Systems 26 09 23 Lighting Control Devices 26 09 43.23 Relay-Based Lighting Controls 26 24 16 Panelboards 26 27 26 Wiring Devices 26 28 16 Enclosed Switches and Circuit Breakers 26 33 23.11 Central Battery Equipment for Emergency Lighting 26 43 13 Surge Protective Devices for Low-Voltage Electrical Power Circuits 26 51 19 LED Interior Lighting

DIVISION 27 -- COMMUNICATIONS

27 01 00 General Provisions for Communications 27 05 26 Grounding and Bonding for Communications Systems 27 05 28 Pathways for Communications Systems 27 05 36 Cable Trays for Communications Systems 27 05 53 Identification for Communications Systems 27 11 00 Communications Equipment Room Fittings 27 11 16 Communications Racks, Frames, and Enclosures 27 13 23 Communications Optical Fiber Backbone Cabling 27 15 13 Communications Copper Horizontal Cabling

DIVISION 28 -- ELECTRONIC SAFETY AND SECURITY

28 01 00 General Provisions for Electronic Safety and Security 28 05 23 Control-Voltage Cables for Electronic Safety and Security 28 05 53 Identification for Electronic Safety and Security 28 13 00 Access Control Software and Database Management 28 15 00 Access Control Hardware Devices 28 23 00 Video Surveillance Control and Management Systems 28 25 00 Surveillance Devices

DIVISION 29 – FIRE SAFETY AND EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS

29 01 00 General Provisions for Fire Safety and Emergency Communications 29 05 23 Control-Voltage Electrical Power Cables 29 46 21.11 Addressable Fire-Alarm Systems

TABLE OF CONTENTS 00 01 10 - 5

END OF TABLE OF CONTENTS

MDG #34-007

GEOTECHNICAL DATA 00 31 32 - 1

DOCUMENT 00 31 32

GEOTECHNICAL DATA

1.1 GEOTECHNICAL DATA

A. This Document with its referenced attachment is part of the Available Information for Project. It provides information for Bidders' convenience and is intended to supplement rather than serve in lieu of Bidders' own investigations. It is made available for Bidders' convenience and information.

This Document and its attachments are not part of the Contract Documents.

B. Because subsurface conditions indicated by the soil borings are a sampling in relation to the entire construction area, and for other reasons, the Owner, the Architect, the Architect's consultants, and the firm reporting the subsurface conditions do not warranty the conditions below the depths of the borings or that the strata logged from the borings are necessarily typical of the entire site. Any party using the information described in the soil borings and geotechnical report shall accept full responsibility for its use.

C. The “Geotechnical Engineering Report” dated August, 14, 2025, prepared by NV5, Alachua, FL is appended to this Document.

1. The opinions expressed in this report are those of a geotechnical engineer and represent interpretations of subsoil conditions, tests, and results of analyses conducted by a geotechnical engineer. Owner is not responsible for interpretations or conclusions drawn from the data.

2. Any party using information described in the geotechnical report shall make additional test borings and conduct other exploratory operations that may be required to determine the character of subsurface materials that may be encountered.

END OF DOCUMENT

12080 Technology Avenue, Suite 400, Alachua, FL 32615

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

City of Gainesville RTS Eastside Bus Gainesville, Alachua County, Florida

August 14, 2025

Prepared for:

Barnett Chenault, President/Managing Partner Monarch Design Group, LLC 112 SW 6th St Gainesville, FL 32601

Phone: 352.378.4400 Email: barnett@monarcharchitecture.com

Geotechnical Engineering Report

City of Gainesville RTS Eastside Bus – 24-0965

NV5.COM | i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A Geotechnical exploration was performed for the project site located in the City of Gainesville, Alachua County, Florida.

The subsurface conditions at the site were explored with a total of six (6) SPT borings to a depth of 20 feet bls within the areas of the bus bay structures and building facility, and seven (7) auger borings to depths of 5 feet below land surface (bls) along the roadway and parking areas.

Based on the field explorations, the provided site plan, and our experience with general subsoil conditions for similar developments, the followings summarize our main geotechnical recommendations:

• Subsurface conditions across the site were relatively consistent. The borings encountered varying thicknesses of mixed layers, including very loose to dense poorly graded sand, sand with silt, silty sand with clay, silty clayey sand, and deeper clayey to very clayey sand, extending to the maximum termination depth of 20 feet.

• The performed borings were observed during drilling for the presence and level of groundwater.

The groundwater table was encountered during drilling at depths of 4.5 feet bls. We estimate the seasonal high-water groundwater table to be 2.5 feet below existing grade during the rainy season.

• The subsoil conditions described above are considered suitable to adequately support the bleachers/buildings on conventional shallow foundations in the form of spread/continuous footings or monolithic slab supported on site soil or structural fill. Allowable bearing pressures on the order of 3,000 psf are recommended with minimum embedment depth of 1.5 feet assuming the 12 inches below the foundation level are compacted to 95 percent of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density. Foundation design and construction recommendations are presented later in the report.

• The near-surface soil conditions encountered at most boring locations consisted of poorly graded sand, sand with silt, and silty sand with less than 25 percent fines passing the No. 200 sieve, which are suitable for use as subgrade for conventional pavement sections. The groundwater table was not encountered in the roadway borings; however, groundwater was encountered at 4.5 feet below the existing grade at the site. The seasonal high groundwater table is estimated to be approximately 2.5 feet below the existing grade.

This report should be read in its entirety so that the recommendations presented herein are fully understood and properly implemented in the project geotechnical design.

City of Gainesville RTS Eastside Bus – 24-0965

NV5.COM | ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

2.0 PURPOSE

3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION

4.0 GENERAL POTENTIAL FOR SINKHOLE DEVELOPMENT

5.0 SOIL AND GROUNDWATER CONDITONS

5.1 SOIL SURVEY

5.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

5.3 GROUNDWATER

6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 FOUNDATIONS

6.2 GROUND FLOOR SLABS

6.3 EARTHWORK

6.3.1 Site Preparation

6.3.2 Fill Material and Compaction Requirements

6.3.3 Grading and Drainage

6.3.4 Earthwork Construction Consideration

6.4 EXCAVATION AND DEWATERING

6.5 LIMEROCK BEARING RATIO RESULTS DESIGN PARAMETERS

6.6 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT

6.6.1 Stabilized Subgrade

6.6.2 Base Course

6.6.3 Wearing Surface

6.7 RIGID PAVEMENT

7.0 LIMITATIONS

8.0 CLOSURE

ATTACHMENTS

Drawing No. 1 Topographic Vicinity Map Drawing No. 2 USDA Soils Map Drawing No. 3 Site Plan Showing Approximate Locations of Field Tests Attachment No. 1 Boring Logs and LBR Results Attachment No. 2 Key to Soil Classification Chart Attachment No. 3 Important Information About This Geotechnical Report d City of Gainesville RTS Eastside Bus – 24-0965

NV5.COM | 1

1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

The City of Gainesville wishes to construct a Transfer Station with 5 bus bays, a 50-car park n ride facility and a single story +/- 8,000 sf. Bus Transit Multi-Purpose building that will contain ticketing, bathrooms, and a multi-purpose room.

Eric Throckmorton, P.E. with NV5 structural department provided the structural loads for this project.

The maximum column load is expected to be 50 kips, and the maximum wall load is expected to be 2 kips per linear foot.

2.0 PURPOSE

The purpose of our services on this project is to explore the shallow subsurface in order to provide geotechnical engineering recommendations for:

• Subsurface soil conditions

• Groundwater conditions

• Earthwork and excavation

• Foundation design and construction

• Floor slab design and construction

• Pavement design and construction

3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION

The subsurface conditions at the site were explored with a total of six (6) SPT borings to a depth of 20 feet bls within the areas of the bus bay structures and building facility, and seven (7) auger borings to depths of 5 feet below land surface (bls) along the roadway and parking areas. Borings were performed at the approximate locations shown on Drawing No. 3. Site Plan Showing Approximate Locations of Field Tests and were marked and identified in the field using a GPS unit.

The SPT borings were drilled with a track-mounted drill rig utilizing the flight auger method. Samples of the subsurface materials were recovered at 1.5-foot intervals within the upper 10 feet of the boring and at roughly five-foot intervals thereafter using a Standard Penetration Test split-spoon sampler (SPT) in substantial accordance with ASTM D-1586, "Standard Test Method for Standard Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils." This test procedure drives a 1.4-inch I.D. split-tube sampler into the subsurface profile using a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the second and third six-inch increments is the SPT N-value, in blows per foot, and is an indication of material strength. Upon completion of the borings, the boreholes were backfilled to the ground surface with soil cuttings.

The auger borings were performed in accordance with ASTM D1452. The borings were performed with flight auger equipment that was rotated into the ground in a manner that reduces soil disturbance.

After penetrating to the required depth, the auger was retracted, and the soil collected on the auger flights were field classified and placed in sealed containers. Representative samples of each stratum were retained from the auger borings.

The soil samples recovered from the borings were classified by a geotechnical engineer. The collected samples were later re-examined to confirm field classifications. Visual soil classifications were made

NV5.COM | 2

in accordance with ASTM D2487 and ASTM D2488. Conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs shown in Attachment No. 1. Strata contacts shown on these boring logs are approximate. The boring data reflects conditions at the specific test location only, and at the time the borings were drilled.

4.0 GENERAL POTENTIAL FOR SINKHOLE DEVELOPMENT

Sinkhole development occurs in Florida and varies geographically from areas with almost no potential or a very low potential to areas with a high potential where sinkholes occur frequently. The subject property is approximately in Area I on the United States Geological Survey map entitled “Sinkhole Type, Development, and Distribution in Florida”.

Area I typically has bare soil or thinly covered limestone. Sinkholes are few, generally shallow and broad and develop gradually. Solution sinkholes dominate Area I.

During our limited shallow explorations, we did not encounter traditional signs associated with potential sinkhole development including abnormal downward pore water pressure gradients, obvious raveled zones, surface depressions, etc. However, this evaluation was not planned to specifically address sinkhole potential.

If the sinkhole potential of the site is to be evaluated, additional site-specific data must be obtained.

This might include using geophysical methods such as Electrical Resistivity tests and additional geotechnical tests such as Cone Penetrometer Test (CPT) soundings, and/or more/deeper Standard Penetration Test borings. Interpretation of the test data should be done by a professional geologist/engineer familiar with the use of these tests under local conditions. However, it should be noted that even if indicators of sinkhole activity are found, it is impossible to predict if, when or precisely where a sinkhole may occur. If requested, NV5 can assist in assessing the sinkhole potential of the location of the proposed construction.

5.0 SOIL AND GROUNDWATER CONDITONS

5.1 SOIL SURVEY

The USDA Soil Survey of Alachua County, Florida, as shown on Drawing No. 2, was reviewed for a general description of the near-surface soil types that may be anticipated at the site. It should be noted that the Soil Survey is not intended as a substitute for site-specific geotechnical exploration;

rather it is a useful tool in planning a project scope in that it provides information on soil types likely to be encountered. The major shallow subsurface profile at the project site is represented in the following:

NV5.COM | 3

18 – Wauchula-Urban land complex – This complex consists of poorly drained, nearly level Wauchula soils and Urban land. It is in irregularly shaped, relatively small to large areas. Slopes range from 0 to 2 percent. Most of this complex is within the eastern and northern parts of Gainesville. Small acreages are in the urban sections of Micanopy, Waldo, and Hawthorne.

About 50 to 85 percent of each delineation is open areas of Wauchula soils. These open areas are gardens, vacant lots, lawns, and playgrounds. They are so small or so intermingled with areas of Urban land that it is impractical to map them separately.

About 10 to 20 percent of the soils in these open areas have been modified by cutting, grading, and spreading of soil materials during urban construction.

About 15 to 50 percent of each delineation is Urban land. Urban land consists of areas covered with houses, streets, parking lots, sidewalks, industrial buildings, airports, and other structures. The Urban land of this map unit is generally developed on Wauchula sand.

Typically, the surface layer of Wauchula soils is black to dark gray sand about 8 inches thick. The subsurface layer is sand about 20 inches thick. The upper 6 inches is light brownish gray, the next 4 inches, in which many sand grains have organic coatings, is dark reddish brown; the next 5 inches is dark brown, and the lower 5 inches is pale brown. The subsoil extends to a depth of 62 inches. The upper 9 inches is gray fine sandy loam; the next 19 inches is light brownish gray loamy sand; and the lower 6 inches is light gray fine sandy loam. Between depths of 62 and 80 inches, the underlying material is light gray sandy clay loam.

Included with the unit in mapping are small areas of Pomona, Pelham, Mulat, Newnan, Sparr, and Surrency soils. These included areas make up about 10 to 20 percent of the open areas in some delineations.

In the Wauchula soils, the water table is within 10 inches of the surface for about 1 to 3 months during most years. During dry periods, it recedes to a depth of more than 40 inches. Natural fertility and organic matter content are low. Permeability of the sandy surface and subsurface layers is rapid. It is slow to moderately slow in the loamy subsoil. Available water capacity is low to medium in the surface layer, very low to low in the subsurface layer, and low to high in the subsoil.

48 – Myakka sand – This nearly level, poorly drained soil is in broad areas of the flatwoods. Slopes are nearly smooth to slightly convex and range from 0 to 2 percent.

The areas are irregular or elongated in shape and range from about 10 to 100 acres.

Typically, the surface layer is dark grayish brown sand about 8 inches thick. The underlying layers are sand.to a depth of 82 inches or more. In sequence from the top, the upper 16 inches is light gray, the next 6 inches is very dark brown and has sand grains wen coated with organic materials; the next 5 inches is dark brown; the next 18·inches is very pale brown and has mottles; and the next 29·inches is light brownish gray.

Included with this soil are small areas of Pomona, Sparr, and Pompano soils. Included are small areas of poorly drained soils that have a stained layer that does not meet the

NV5.COM | 4

requirement of a spodic horizon. Also included are few areas of soils that are similar to the Myakka soil except that they have a well coated, organic stained layer 14 to 19 inches below the surface. Total included areas are about 20 percent.

This Myakka soil has a water table that is at a depth of less than 10 inches for 1 to 4 months and at a depth of 10 to 40 inches for 2 to 4 months during most years. The water table recedes to a depth of more than 40 inches during drier seasons. Surface runoff is slow. The available water capacity is very low from 0 to 24 inches, medium to high from 24 to 30 inches, and very low to low below a depth of.30 inches. Permeability is rapid to a depth of about 24 inches, moderate to moderately rapid from 24 to·30 inches, and rapid below a depth of 30 inches. Natural fertility and organic matter content are low.

With the exception of possible native fill soils at the site, the soils encountered in the borings are generally consistent with the soil survey.

5.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Subsurface conditions across the site were relatively consistent. The borings encountered varying thicknesses of mixed layers, including very loose to dense poorly graded sand, sand with silt, silty sand with clay, silty clayey sand, and deeper clayey to very clayey sand, extending to the maximum termination depth of 20 feet.

The Modified Proctor maximum dry density tests indicate that the near-surface grab samples have maximum dry densities ranging from 112.7 to 113.0 pounds per cubic foot, with optimum moisture contents between 9.1 and 9.5 percent. The LBR tests indicate that the soils have LBR values ranging from 36 to 38.

Conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs shown in Attachment No. 1. Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent the approximate location of changes in native soil types; in situ, the transition between materials may be gradual.

5.3 GROUNDWATER

Borings were observed during drilling for the presence and level of groundwater. The groundwater table was encountered during drilling at depths of 4.5 feet bls. We estimate the seasonal high-water groundwater table to be 2.5 feet below existing grade during the rainy season.

It should be recognized that fluctuations of the groundwater table will occur due to seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff and other factors not evident at the time the boring was performed.

Therefore, groundwater levels during construction or at other times in the future may be higher or lower than the levels indicated on the boring logs.

Our estimates of the seasonal groundwater conditions are based on the USDA Soil Survey, the encountered soil types and groundwater and do not represent the temporary rise in water table that occurs immediately following storm events.

NV5.COM | 5

6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The following conclusions and recommendations are based on the project characteristics previously described, the data obtained from our field explorations, and our experience with similar subsurface conditions and construction types. If subsurface conditions differ from those encountered by the borings during construction, we should be notified immediately so that we might review the following recommendations considering such changes.

The final design of a foundation system is dependent upon adequate integration of geotechnical and structural engineering considerations. Consequently, NV5 must review the final foundation design to evaluate the effectiveness and applicability of our initial analysis, and to determine if additional recommendations may be warranted. Without such a review, the recommendations presented herein could be misinterpreted or misapplied resulting in potentially unacceptable performance of the foundation system.

6.1 FOUNDATIONS

Assuming the site is prepared as recommended in Earthwork section of this report, in our opinion, the proposed bus bay structures and building facility may be supported by shallow foundation system in the form of spread/strip footings and/or thickened edge monolithic slab foundations, bearing on native soil or newly placed fill extending to native soil. The design and plan of the bus bay structures has not yet been provided at the time of the report; if deep foundations are required, NV5 can review the design and provide corresponding foundation recommendations. Design recommendations for shallow foundations for the proposed structures are presented below:

• We recommend using a net allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf to size the foundations. Exterior foundations should be embedded to a minimum of 18 inches below lowest adjacent grades. Interior foundations should be embedded a minimum of 12 inches.

• Total settlement of recommended shallow foundations is expected to be less than 1 inch.

Differential settlement is expected to be less than ½ inch between column footing, less than ½ inch over 40 feet for strip footing, and less than ½ inch over 40 feet for monolithic slab foundation.

• Footing subgrade soils should be approved by the geotechnical engineer or his representative prior to placement of concrete and steel. As a minimum acceptance criterion, the footing subgrade soils should be compacted to a minimum density of 95% of the soils Modified Proctor maximum dry density to a depth of 12 inches under foundation bearing levels. Should clayey sand be encountered at the foundation bearing level, these soils should be probed in lieu of density testing.

• A minimum of one field density to a minimum depth of 1 foot below the footing subgrade per column footing and per 50 linear feet for wall and monolithic slab foundation should be performed.

• The base of all foundation excavations should be free of water and loose soil prior to placing concrete. Concrete should be placed soon after excavating to reduce bearing soil disturbance. Should the soils at bearing level become excessively dry, disturbed or saturated, the affected soil should be moisture conditioned and re-compacted or removed

NV5.COM | 6

prior to placing concrete. It is recommended that the geotechnical engineer be retained to observe and test the soil foundation bearing materials.

• NV5 anticipates hand-operated compaction equipment will be utilized, as necessary, in footing cuts, following any mass grading. If unsuitable bearing soils are encountered in footing excavations, the excavation should be extended deeper to suitable soils and the foundation could bear directly on these soils at the lower level or on suitable backfill placed in the excavations. Over-excavation for compacted backfill placement below footings should extend laterally beyond all edges of the footings. The over-excavation should then be backfilled up to the footing base elevation per the preceding general earthwork specifications, using hand operated compaction equipment in footing cuts.

6.2 GROUND FLOOR SLABS

Ground floor slabs may be supported on grade or engineered fill. Slab subgrades should be properly prepared as recommended in the Site Preparation section of this report. Slabs on grade may be designed using a modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pounds per cubic inch (pci). Slabs should be reinforced for the loads that they will sustain, and construction joints should be provided at frequent intervals.

Slabs in contact with soil are subject to movement of moisture from the soil upward through the slab.

To prevent such moisture vapor transmission, a moisture barrier should be placed on the slab subgrade and should be protected from damage during construction. Construction joints should be provided with water stops in any permanently submerged areas.

6.3 EARTHWORK

6.3.1 Site Preparation

Prior to placing any fill, topsoil and any otherwise unsuitable material should be removed from the construction area.

Geotechnical site preparation for construction should consist of removal of all deleterious materials within proposed building, football field, and pavement footprints. Any voids created by the removal of these deleterious materials should be properly backfilled as described in the paragraphs below.

After preparation as described above, areas for structures that will have slabs on grade or pavements should be proof rolled with a heavy roller (with vibrator turned off) or loaded truck. The proof rolling should be observed by the geotechnical engineer to identify and mitigate any weak subgrade conditions evidenced by yielding or rutting at the wheels of the roller or truck.

The site preparation recommended above should include the planned structure and pavement footprints plus a five-foot perimeter.

6.3.2 Fill Material and Compaction Requirements

In general, fill soils placed to raise site grades above existing should consist of either inorganic, non-plastic sand having less than 12% material passing the No. 200 sieve. Fill soils placed within the upper 12 inches of the subgrade of building grade slabs on grade should consist of either sand with less than 10% passing the number 200 sieve. Based on our boring data, some of the near-surface

NV5.COM | 7

sand should satisfy the fill criteria but might require localized sorting and moisture-conditioning prior to re-use. In any event, representative samples of the fill soils should be collected for classification and compaction testing. The maximum dry density, optimum moisture content, gradation, and plasticity should be determined. These tests are needed for quality control of the compacted fill.

Fill soils should be placed with loose lift thicknesses of not more than 12 inches, moisture-conditioned to within two (2) percent of the optimum moisture content based on ASTM D-1557 and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction. One test should be performed for each 2,500 square feet of fill area per lift of fill soil. If during the compaction process fill shows evidence of yielding under the weight of the roller, it should be scarified and re-compacted or removed and replaced with fill described above. The vibrations produced by the operation of the compactor should be monitored for potential adverse effects on adjacent existing structures, pavements, and utilities. If nearby structures may be affected by the vibration of the compactor, the compaction procedure may require modification as approved by the geotechnical engineer.

6.3.3 Grading and Drainage

Final surrounding grades should be sloped away from the structure on all sides to prevent ponding of water. Roof drainage should be discharged to the stormwater system or a minimum of 10 feet beyond the footprint of the proposed structures where there are pervious surfaces. Site grades should be set considering the estimated seasonal high groundwater.

6.3.4 Earthwork Construction Consideration

Construction traffic over the completed subgrade should be avoided to the extent practical. The site should also be graded to prevent ponding of surface water on the prepared subgrades or in excavations. If the subgrade should become desiccated, saturated, or disturbed, the affected material should be removed or these materials should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and re-compacted prior to floor slab and pavement construction.

The geotechnical engineer should be retained during the construction phase of the project to observe earthwork and to perform necessary tests and observations during subgrade preparation; proof-rolling;

placement and compaction of controlled compacted fills; backfilling of excavations into the completed subgrade, and just prior to construction of building floor slabs.

6.4 EXCAVATION AND DEWATERING

Groundwater levels were encountered in the drilled boreholes at depths of approximately 4.5 feet below the existing ground. Localized dewatering may be achieved with pumps and sumps. Dewatering for deeper excavations including installation of utility systems and appurtenances for storm drains and sewer lines might require well points around those excavations. All dewatering and subsequent effluent discharge should meet the requirements of the local jurisdictional agencies. During dewatering the adjacent properties must be monitored for adverse impacts from dewatering drawdown. The dewatering subcontractor should submit a proposed design for dewatering operations to the owner for review and approval prior to commencing work.

Shallow excavations into the near-surface materials will likely stand vertical for short periods of time only. The excavation sides will unravel over time as they are exposed to weather and construction traffic. Deeper excavations, especially those that extend below the groundwater table, as well as excavations that will remain open for longer periods of time will require support in the form of

NV5.COM | 8

temporary shoring or sliding trench boxes to prevent instability of excavation walls and to protect workers from injury. All excavations should comply with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) design and safety requirements. Shoring designs should be signed and sealed by a Florida-licensed professional engineer and should be provided for the Owner’s review.

6.5 LIMEROCK BEARING RATIO RESULTS DESIGN PARAMETERS

The LBR test results indicate the LBR values range from 36 to 38 or a 90% Method of 36. This corresponds to a resilient modulus of approximately 11,500 psi using Table 5.1 from the FDOT Flexible Pavement Design Manual, January 2025.

6.6 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT

Overall soil conditions encountered by the borings at this site are suitable for supporting conventional limerock base and asphalt wearing surface pavements. We have not been provided the anticipated traffic loading conditions; therefore, the following pavement component recommendations should be used only as guidelines.

The seasonal high groundwater table is estimated to be approximately 2.5 feet beneath existing grade at the site. We recommend a minimum separation of either 12 to 24 inches (depending upon the pavement section design) be present between the bottom of the base course and the estimated seasonal high groundwater table. If this separation cannot be achieved by site grading, NV5 recommends underdrains be used beneath the base course.

6.6.1 Stabilized Subgrade

If a crushed limerock or recycled concrete base is used, we recommend a stabilized subgrade be located beneath the base. The stabilized subgrade should have a minimum Limerock Bearing Ratio (LBR) of 40, with minimum thicknesses of 6 inches for automobile parking areas and 12 inches for driveways.

The stabilized subgrade can be imported material or a mixture of imported and on-site material. If a mix is proposed, a mix design should be performed to determine the optimum mix proportions.

The stabilized subgrade should be compacted to a minimum of 98 percent of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D1557) for soils with less than 15 percent fines content. Soils with 15 percent or greater fines content should be compacted to 100 percent of the Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D698).

6.6.2 Base Course

The base course can consist of either crushed limerock, soil cement, or recycled concrete. If you should use a soil cement base course, a stabilized subgrade is not required.

Limerock should have a LBR of at least 100, be obtained from a FDOT approved source and meet FDOT gradation requirements. The base course thickness should be a minimum of 6 inches in automobile parking areas, and 8 inches in driveway areas. The base course should be compacted to at least 98 percent of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D1557). We recommend a minimum 24 inches separation between the bottom of the limerock base course and the estimated seasonal high-water table. If site grading does not allow for this separation, we recommend underdrains be considered.

NV5.COM | 9

Soil cement can consist of an imported material or a blend of the on-site soils and cement. A mix design should be performed to determine the optimum cement content. We recommend the soil cement have a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 500 psi. Soil cement can be blended off-site (in a pug mill) or on site. Soil cement pills should be cast from each day’s production to verify the recommended compressive strength has been achieved at 28 days. We recommend the soil cement base course be a minimum of 8 inches thick throughout the project. We recommend a minimum 18 inches separation between the bottom of the soil cement base course and the estimated seasonal high-water table. If site grading does not allow for this separation, we recommend underdrains be considered.

Recycled concrete should have a LBR of at least 150, be obtained from a FDOT approved source and meet FDOT gradation requirements. The base course thickness should be a minimum of 8 inches. The base course should be compacted to at least 98 percent of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D1557). We recommend a minimum 12 inches separation between the bottom of the recycled concrete base course and the estimated seasonal high-water table. If site grading does not allow for this separation, we recommend underdrains be considered.

6.6.3 Wearing Surface

The asphalt-wearing surface should consist of an FDOT Type SP Hot Mix Asphalt mixture. For automobile parking areas, the thickness should be a minimum of 1.5 inches. For driveway areas, the thickness should be a minimum of 2 inches. The asphalt-wearing surface should consist of an SP-12.5 mix. The asphalt should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the mix design density.

The constructability of differing asphalt thicknesses may be difficult, and having a uniform 2-inch-thick asphalt wearing surface may be more practical.

6.7 RIGID PAVEMENT

Concrete pavement is a rigid pavement that results in smaller load transfers to the subgrade soils than flexible pavement. For concrete pavement subgrade, we recommend using the existing surficial sands or recommended clean sand (SP) fill, compacted to at least 98 percent of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density without additional stabilization with the following stipulations:

o Subgrade soils must be compacted to at least 98 percent of Modified Proctor maximum dry density to a depth of at least 2 feet prior to placement of concrete.

o The surface of the subgrade soils must be smooth and any disturbances or wheel rutting corrected prior to placement of the concrete.

o The subgrade soils must be moistened prior to placement of concrete.

o Concrete pavement thickness should be uniform throughout, with the exception of thickened edges (curb or footing).

o The bottom of the pavement should be separated from the estimated seasonal high groundwater level by at least 18 inches.

o Limerock or any other impermeable base is not suitable unless it meets the minimum recommended permeability of 10 feet/day.

o The upper 12 inches of subgrade underlying the base course must also be “free-draining” and water that enters the base and subgrade must be allowed to seep out by

NV5.COM | 10

gravity or if this is not possible, underdrains must be incorporated into the subgrade. A “bathtub” condition within the base/subgrade must be avoided.

Our recommendations for slab thickness for both light-duty and heavy-duty concrete pavements is based on a.) subgrade soils are compacted to 98 percent of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density, b.) modulus of subgrade reaction (k) of 150 pounds per cubic inch, c.) a 20-year design life, and d.)

previously stated design parameters. For an anticipated light-duty traffic group, a minimum pavement thickness of 5.5 inches is recommended, using Table 2.4 from the ACI 330 Guide for Design and Construction of Concrete Parking Lots, ACI 330R-01. For an anticipated heavy-duty traffic group, a minimum pavement thickness of 8 inches is recommended, using Table 3.4 from the FDOT Rigid Pavement Design Manual, January 2019.

We recommend using concrete with a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4,000 pounds per square inch and a minimum 28-day flexural strength (modulus of rupture) of at least 600 pounds per square inch based on the third point loading of concrete beam test samples. Minimum control joint spacing of 15 by 15 feet is suggested. Lay-out of sawcut control joints should form square panels, and the depth of sawcut joint should be at least 1/4 of the concrete slab thickness (a minimum 2-inch sawcut control joint depth for the recommended 8-inch slab thickness). The joints should be sawed within six hours of concrete placement or as soon as the concrete has developed sufficient strength to support workers and equipment.

For further details on concrete pavement construction, refer to “Guide to Jointing Non-reinforced Concrete Pavements” published by the Florida Concrete and Products As-sociates, Inc. and “Building Quality Concrete Parking Areas”, published by the Portland Cement Association.

7.0 LIMITATIONS

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the Owner and other members of the design/construction team for the specific projects discussed in this report. This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted local geotechnical engineering practices; no other warranty is expressed or implied.

During the design development phase of the project, it is recommended that NV5 be retained to provide consultation to the ownership and design team, to review final foundation specifications and review foundation design drawings, and to ensure that its recommendations have been correctly interpreted and implemented. Furthermore, NV5 should be retained to provide inspections during geotechnical construction. If the client does not provide NV5 with the opportunity to participate in the installation of the foundation, as is recommended in this report, then the client acknowledges and agrees that NV5 has no responsibility for the interpretation of the recommendations made in this report or for the performance of the foundation.

The evaluation and recommendations submitted in this report are based in part upon the data collected from the field exploration. The nature or extent of variations throughout the subsurface profile may not become evident until the time of construction. If variations then appear evident, it may be necessary to evaluate our recommendations as provided in this report. In the event changes are made in the nature, design or locations of the proposed project construction, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed, and conclusions modified or verified in writing by NV5.

NV5.COM | 11

8.0 CLOSURE

We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical engineering services on this project. In the event that you have any questions concerning the contents of this report, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely, NV5, Inc.

Angelina X. Liu, P.E. Jason E. Gowland., P.E.

Geotechnical and Materials Regional Director of Geotechnical Testing Group Leader Engineering and Testing Florida License No. 99246 Florida License No. 66467

\\fs01.chw-inc.local\jobs2\2024\24-0965\Departments\07_Geotechnical (RTS Transfer Station)\Reports\RPT 250814 City of Gainesville RTS Eastside Bus – Geo.docx

ATTACHMENTS

Drawing No. 1

Topographic Vicinity Map

0 1300

SCALE: 1" = 1300' APPROX.

NOR

TH

PROJECT NO.: 24-0965

DRAWN BY: SP

APPROVED BY: JEG

DATE: 8/7/25

TOPOGRAPHIC VICINITY 0AP

DRAWING

NO.

SOURCE: UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, GAINESVILLE EAST QUADRANGLE, FLORIDA, 2024

Santosh.Parodkar Rectangle

Santosh.Parodkar Callout

PROJECT LOCATION

Drawing No. 2

USDA Soils Map

0 190

SCALE: 1" = 190' APPROX.

NOR

TH

PROJECT NO.: 24-0965

DRAWN BY: SP

APPROVED BY: JEG

DATE: 8/7/25

U.S.D.A. SOIL MAP

DRAWING

NO.

SOIL MAP INDEX - U.S.D.A. SOIL SURVEY ALACHUA COUNTY, )LORIDA

18. WAUCHULA-URBAN LAND COMPLEX

48. MYAKKA-MYAKKA, WET, SANDS, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES

Drawing No. 3

Site Plan Showing Approximate Locations

0 40

SCALE: 1" = 40' APPROX.

PROJECT NO.: 24-0965

DRAWN BY: SP

APPROVED BY: JEG

DATE: 8/7/25

SITE PLAN SHOWING APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS O) )IELD TESTS

DRAWING

NO.

LEGEND :

SPT BORING

AUGER BORING

NORTH

A-1

B-1

B-2

B-3 B-4

B-5

B-6 B-7

B-8

A-2

A-3

A-4 A-5 A-6

A-7

LBR-1

LBR-2

LIMEROCK BEARING RATIO (LBR)

Attachment No. 1

Borings Logs and LBR Results

AU

AU

4.0

5.0

(SM) Dark brown silty SAND

(SP-SM) Brown and gray SAND with silt

Bottom of borehole at 5.0 feet.

G R

AP

H

IC

AL

LO

G

G R

O U

N D

W

AT

ER

D

EP

TH

S (f t)

S

AM

PL

E

ID

D

EP

TH

(f t)

0.0

2.5

5.0

VISUAL CLASSIFICATIONS

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

NOTES

GROUND WATER LEVELS:

AT TIME OF DRILLING NE

ESTIMATED SEASONAL HIGH 2.5 ft

DATE PERFORMED: 7/23/2025

DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Whitaker Drilling, Inc.

LOGGED BY: WDI

CHECKED BY: AXL

BORING ID A-1

(Continued Next Page)

NV5 PROJECT NUMBER: 24-0965

NV5 PROJECT NAME: City of Gainesville RTS Eastside Bus CLIENT: Monarch Design Group, LLC PROJECT LOCATION: Gainesville, Alachua County, Florida

12080 Technology Avenue, Suite 400 Alachua, Florida, 32615 Telephone: (352) 331-1976

NV5 BEYOND ENGINEERING

A B

P

O R

T R

A

IT

G

IN

T

S T

D U

S .G

D T

/1

/2

:3

\F S

.C H

W -I

N C

.L O

C A

L \J

O B

S

\2

\2

-0

\D E

P A

R T

M E

N T

S \0

G E

O T

E C

H N

IC

A

L

R T

S T

R A

N S

F E

R S

T A

T

IO

N

B O

R

IN

G S

\2

-0

B O

R

IN

G S

.G P

J

AU

AU

4.5

5.0

%PASS-200 = 12

MC = 18

(SM) Dark brown silty SAND

(SP-SM) Gray SAND with silt

Bottom of borehole at 5.0 feet.

G R

AP

H

IC

AL

LO

G

G R

O U

N D

W

AT

ER

D

EP

TH

S (f t)

S

AM

PL

E

ID

D

EP

TH

(f t)

0.0

2.5

5.0

VISUAL CLASSIFICATIONS

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

NOTES

GROUND WATER LEVELS:

AT TIME OF DRILLING NE

ESTIMATED SEASONAL HIGH 2.5 ft

DATE PERFORMED: 7/23/2025

DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Whitaker Drilling, Inc.

LOGGED BY: WDI

CHECKED BY: AXL

BORING ID A-2

AU

4.0

5.0

(SM) Dark brown and gray silty SAND

(SP) Gray and pale brown SAND

Bottom of borehole at 5.0 feet.

G R

AP

H

IC

AL

LO

G

G R

O U

N D

W

AT

ER

D

EP

TH

S (f t)

S

AM

PL

E

ID

D

EP

TH

(f t)

0.0

2.5

5.0

VISUAL CLASSIFICATIONS

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

NOTES

GROUND WATER LEVELS:

AT TIME OF DRILLING NE

ESTIMATED SEASONAL HIGH 2.5 ft

DATE PERFORMED: 7/23/2025

DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Whitaker Drilling, Inc.

LOGGED BY: WDI

CHECKED BY: AXL

BORING ID A-3

(Continued Next Page)

NV5 PROJECT NUMBER: 24-0965

NV5 PROJECT NAME: City of Gainesville RTS Eastside Bus CLIENT: Monarch Design Group, LLC PROJECT LOCATION: Gainesville, Alachua County, Florida

12080 Technology Avenue, Suite 400 Alachua, Florida, 32615 Telephone: (352) 331-1976

NV5 BEYOND ENGINEERING

A B

P

O R

T R

A

IT

G

IN

T

S T

D U

S .G

D T

/1

/2

:3

\F S

.C H

W -I

N C

.L O

C A

L \J

O B

S

\2

\2

-0

\D E

P A

R T

M E

N T

S \0

G E

O T

E C

H N

IC

A

L

R T

S T

R A

N S

F E

R S

T A

T

IO

N

B O

R

IN

G S

\2

-0

B O

R

IN

G S

.G P

J

4.0

5.0

(SP-SM) Brown and gray SAND with silt

(SP) Pale brown SAND

Bottom of borehole at 5.0 feet.

G R

AP

H

IC

AL

LO

G

G R

O U

N D

W

AT

ER

D

EP

TH

S (f t)

S

AM

PL

E

ID

D

EP

TH

(f t)

0.0

2.5

5.0

VISUAL CLASSIFICATIONS

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

NOTES

GROUND WATER LEVELS:

AT TIME OF DRILLING NE

ESTIMATED SEASONAL HIGH 2.5 ft

DATE PERFORMED: 7/23/2025

DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Whitaker Drilling, Inc.

LOGGED BY: WDI

BORING ID A-4

AU

2.5

5.0

(SM) Dark brown and gray silty SAND

(SP-SM) Gray and brown SAND with silt

Bottom of borehole at 5.0 feet.

G R

AP

H

IC

AL

LO

G

G R

O U

N D

W

AT

ER

D

EP

TH

S (f t)

S

AM

PL

E

ID

D

EP

TH

(f t)

0.0

2.5

5.0

VISUAL CLASSIFICATIONS

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

NOTES

GROUND WATER LEVELS:

AT TIME OF DRILLING NE

ESTIMATED SEASONAL HIGH 2.5 ft

DATE PERFORMED: 7/23/2025

DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Whitaker Drilling, Inc.

LOGGED BY: WDI

CHECKED BY: AXL

BORING ID A-5

(Continued Next Page)

NV5 PROJECT NUMBER: 24-0965

NV5 PROJECT NAME: City of Gainesville RTS Eastside Bus CLIENT: Monarch Design Group, LLC PROJECT LOCATION: Gainesville, Alachua County, Florida

12080 Technology Avenue, Suite 400 Alachua, Florida, 32615 Telephone: (352) 331-1976

NV5 BEYOND ENGINEERING

A B

P

O R

T R

A

IT

G

IN

T

S T

D U

S .G

D T

/1

/2

:3

\F S

.C H

W -I

N C

.L O

C A

L \J

O B

S

\2

\2

-0

\D E

P A

R T

M E

N T

S \0

G E

O T

E C

H N

IC

A

L

R T

S T

R A

N S

F E

R S

T A

T

IO

N

B O

R

IN

G S

\2

-0

B O

R

IN

G S

.G P

J

AU

AU

2.5

3.5

5.0

(SP) Brown and pale gray SAND

(SP) Gray SAND

(SM) Brown and gray silty SAND

Bottom of borehole at 5.0 feet.

G R

AP

H

IC

AL

LO

G

G R

O U

N D

W

AT

ER

D

EP

TH

S (f t)

S

AM

PL

E

ID

D

EP

TH

(f t)

0.0

2.5

5.0

VISUAL CLASSIFICATIONS

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

NOTES

GROUND WATER LEVELS:

AT TIME OF DRILLING NE

ESTIMATED SEASONAL HIGH 2.5 ft

DATE PERFORMED: 7/23/2025

DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Whitaker Drilling, Inc.

LOGGED BY: WDI

BORING ID A-6

AU

1.5

5.0

(SM) Dark brown silty SAND

(SP-SM) Gray SAND with silt

Bottom of borehole at 5.0 feet.

G R

AP

H

IC

AL

LO

G

G R

O U

N D

W

AT

ER

D

EP

TH

S (f t)

S

AM

PL

E

ID

D

EP

TH

(f t)

0.0

2.5

5.0

VISUAL CLASSIFICATIONS

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

NOTES

GROUND WATER LEVELS:

AT TIME OF DRILLING NE

ESTIMATED SEASONAL HIGH 2.5 ft

DATE PERFORMED: 7/23/2025

DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Whitaker Drilling, Inc.

LOGGED BY: WDI

CHECKED BY: AXL

BORING ID A-7

NV5 PROJECT NUMBER: 24-0965

NV5 PROJECT NAME: City of Gainesville RTS Eastside Bus CLIENT: Monarch Design Group, LLC PROJECT LOCATION: Gainesville, Alachua County, Florida

12080 Technology Avenue, Suite 400 Alachua, Florida, 32615 Telephone: (352) 331-1976

NV5 BEYOND ENGINEERING

A B

P

O R

T R

A

IT

G

IN

T

S T

D U

S .G

D T

/1

/2

:3

\F S

.C H

W -I

N C

.L O

C A

L \J

O B

S

\2

\2

-0

\D E

P A

R T

M E

N T

S \0

G E

O T

E C

H N

IC

A

L

R T

S T

R A

N S

F E

R S

T…