Appendix_6_Redington_Shores_Geotech_report.pdf
PDF 9 MB Posted
- Attached to
- Infrastructure Repair Work Order Contract
- Solicitation number
- 26-0208-ITB-C
- Issued by
- Pinellas County, Florida
About this file
This is a geotechnical exploration report prepared by AREHNA Engineering, Inc. for Pinellas County, Florida, documenting subsurface conditions at the Beach Access Parks pavement improvement project located at 18200 Gulf Boulevard in Redington Shores. The project scope includes parking lot improvements consisting of pavement resurfacing, wheel stops, striping, and ADA compliance establishment. AREHNA completed fifteen pavement cores with shallow hand auger borings to evaluate existing pavement thickness and subsurface conditions. The exploration activities included site reconnaissance, utility location coordination through Sunshine811, laboratory analysis of soil samples using AASHTO classification standards, and engineering analysis presented in a professional engineer-sealed report dated August 8, 2025.
The geotechnical investigation revealed that the existing asphalt pavement ranges from 2.8 to 4.5 inches in thickness, with a shell base layer varying from 4.0 to 12.0 inches. The pavement is in fair to poor condition with longitudinal, transverse, and block cracking observed throughout the parking lot. The subgrade material consists of light gray fine sand classified as A-3 soil. Seven of the fifteen core locations (RB-4, RB-7, RB-9, RB-10, RB-12, RB-14, and RB-15) exhibited substandard base layer thickness. The report provides milling depth recommendations and supports the County's preference for parking lot resurfacing as the appropriate remedial approach for the identified pavement and subsurface deficiencies.
View the file
Other files
Show all 38
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
www.arehna.com
5012 West Lemon Street Tampa, Florida 33609 Ph 813.944.3464 │ Fax 813.944.4959
August 8, 2025
Mr. Matthew R Ivie, P.E.
Ayres Associates, Inc.
8875 Hidden River Parkway, Suite 200 Tampa, Florida 33637
Subject: Report of Geotechnical Exploration Beach Access Parks – Pavement Improvements Task 03 – Redington Shores Pinellas County, Florida AREHNA Project B-20-034.03
AREHNA Engineering, Inc. (AREHNA) is pleased to submit this report of our geotechnical exploration for the proposed project. Services were conducted in general accordance with AREHNA Proposal B.Prop-24-048c, dated June 20, 2025. The purpose of our geotechnical study was to obtain information on the general pavement and subsurface conditions at the subject site.
This report presents our understanding of the project, outlines our exploratory procedures, documents the field data obtained, and includes our recommendations for the proposed improvements.
AREHNA appreciates the opportunity to have assisted you on this project. Should you have any questions regarding this report, or if we can be of any further assistance, please contact this office.
Best Regards, AREHNA ENGINEERING, INC.
FLORIDA BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NO. 28410
Jordan Fox, P.E. Kevin M. Hill, P.E.
Senior Geotechnical Engineer Senior Geotechnical Engineer Florida Registration 87472 Florida Registration 72949 On the date adjacent to the seal.
Printed copies of this document are not considered signed and sealed, and the signature must be verified on any electronic copies
Distribution: 1 – Addressee - Electronic 1 – File
Attachments: Sheet 1 – Coring Location Plan
Table 1 - Pavement Evaluation Coring and Condition Data Table 2 - General Milling Depth Recommendations Pavement Core Photographs
Beach Access Parks – Pavement Improvement August 8, 2025 Task 03 – Redington Shores AREHNA Project B-20-034.03 Pinellas County, Florida
1 | P a g e
PROJECT INFORMATION
The project site is located at 18200 Gulf Boulevard in Redington Shores, Florida. The project consists of parking lot improvements including pavement resurfacing, wheel stops, striping, and establishing compliance with ADA requirements.
The purpose of our geotechnical study was to obtain pavement and subsurface information at the project site and to provide general resurfacing recommendations.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The following services were performed to achieve the above-outlined objective:
Performed a site reconnaissance and marked coring locations.
Requested utility location services from Sunshine811.
Performed 15 Pavement Cores with shallow hand auger borings to identify the subgrade material at areas of pavement distress.
Visually classified and stratified the soil samples in the laboratory using the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Soil Classification System.
Reported the results of the field exploration and engineering analysis. The results of the subsurface exploration are presented in this report signed and sealed by a professional engineer specializing in geotechnical engineering.
FIELD EXPLORATION
Fifteen (15) pavement cores were performed to document the condition and measure the existing pavement thickness at the project site. The pavement cores were extracted with a 4-inch inside diameter core bit.
Upon completion, the pavement cores were removed and transported to our laboratory where they were further examined, measured and photographed by an engineer.
At each core location a shallow hand auger boring was advanced to a depth of approximately 1-foot below the existing pavement surface to collect samples of the base and subgrade materials for classification and laboratory testing, if needed. The hand auger borings were performed by manually advancing a 3-inch diameter, 6-inch-long sampler into the soil. Soil sampling was performed in general accordance with ASTM Test Designation D-1452, entitled “Soil Investigation and Sampling by Auger Borings”. Once completed, the boreholes were backfilled with soil cuttings and the pavement surface was restored with asphalt cold patch.
The approximate pavement core and hand auger locations are shown on the Core Location Plan presented on Sheet 1 in the Attachments.
2 | P a g e
PAVEMENT AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
AREHNA performed a visual inspection of the pavement surface and observed numerous locations with longitudinal and transverse cracking, and some block cracking throughout the parking lot. The pavement is generally in fair to poor condition.
The asphalt thickness ranged from approximately 2.8 to 4.5 inches. The base consisted of shell ranging from approximately 4.0 to 12.0 inches in thickness. The underlying subgrade material consisted of light gray, fine sand (A-3).
Pavement section data at each core location is summarized in Table 1 - Pavement Evaluation Coring and Condition Data presented in the Attachments. Photographs of the pavement cores are also presented.
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
We understand that the County’s preference is to resurface the subject parking lot. While the asphalt thickness exceeded minimum County requirements, a portion of the core locations (RB-4, RB-7, RB-9. RB- 10, RB-12, RB-14, and RB-15) had substandard base layer thickness (<6 inches). Inadequate base thickness at these locations is likely contributing to the poor condition of the pavement surface.
At each pavement core location where cracking (longitudinal, transverse, and/or block) was observed, the cracks fully penetrated the pavement. This type of distress is indicative of fatigue cracking, which is the cracking of the pavement surface as a result of repetitive loading which can be governed by the inherent fatigue resistance of the surface asphalt layer and/or magnitude of the cyclic tensile strains at the bottom layer (generally caused by low stiffness or insufficient thickness of the base layer). The majority of the core locations appear to be experiencing fatigue cracking due to the integrity of the asphalt properties as well as general wear and tear over time.
Resurfacing may be the most economical option and generally sufficient to address the existing surficial pavement issues observed, however, it may not address some of the underlying problems causing cracking.
Additionally, the majority of the pavement cores encountered full depth cracks. Milling and resurfacing will temporarily resolve the issue, however the new asphalt will experience reflective cracking as the repeated traffic loads stress the asphalt overlay causing it to crack over existing weaknesses in the underlying pavement. The result will be pavement that will crack more quickly and will require more frequent patching.
Our recommendation would be to remove all of the asphalt, expose the base, re-compact the base, and lay new asphalt a minimum of 1.5 inches thick where full depth cracking was encountered. Consideration for adding additional base material may be necessary where the base is thin. However, as previously mentioned, we understand that resurfacing is preferred by the County. Thus, we recommend milling and replacing 2.0 inches of asphalt and applying a separation membrane or similar material over exposed cracks after milling before placing new pavement to help reduce the chance for reflective cracking.
3 | P a g e
Based on the core data milling 2 inches is not anticipated to expose the base material. However, if base material is exposed during milling, any loosened or uneven base should be compacted to at least 98% of the modified proctor maximum dry density and properly prepared prior to placing new asphalt. If the base material is exposed during milling, asphalt should be placed no later than the next day after the surface was milled to prevent degradation from traffic and rain. Note that milling and resurfacing will not fix underlying problems with the base material/thickness. Increased maintenance of the roadway may be required in these areas (i.e., shorter pavement lifetime). Our general recommendations of milling depths for each location are presented in Table 2 - General Milling Depth Recommendations in the Attachments.
CERTIFICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS
The subsurface information presented in this report is based on the results and interpretations of the testing and/or data collection activities performed at the site, and the information available to AREHNA at the time the report was issued. AREHNA is not responsible for the conclusions, opinions, or recommendations made by others based on the data presented in this report. This report was prepared for the exclusive use of Ayres Associates, Inc. and Pinellas County. Use of this report by persons or groups without the permission of Ayres Associates, Inc. and Pinellas County, and AREHNA Engineering, Inc. is not authorized. AREHNA reserves the right to update this report should additional information become available.
Attachments
Fe et
N R
B-
R B-
R
B-
R B-
R B-
R
B-
R B-
R B-
R B-
R
B-
R B-
R B-
R B-
R B-
R B-
GULF BLVD
1S
T
AV
E W
2N
D
AV
E W
D A
TE
A
PP
R
O
VE
D R
EV
IS
IO
N
S D
A
TE
N A
M E
SU
PE
R
VI
SE
D
B Y:
C H
EC
K
ED
B
Y:
D
R A
W N
B Y:
D
ES
IG
N
ED
B
Y:
En gi ne er in g, In c.
A
RE
HN
A
PR
EP
AR
ED
B Y:
N O
D
ES
C
R
IP
TI
O
N S
SH
EE
T N
O
PR
O
JE
C
T N
O
PR
O
JE
C
T N
A M
E
D:\1-Arehna\Projects\2020\B-20-034.03 - Redington Shores\B-20-034.03.dwg (1-CLP) 613767 Aug 07, 2025 - 10:55pm
C O
R
IN
G L
O C
AT
IO
N P
LA
N
R
ED
IN
G
TO
N
S H
O R
ES
PI
N
EL
LA
S
C O
U N
TY
, F
LO
R
ID
A
K ev in M
. H ill
, P .E
K H
D
GJF
B-
-0
.0
8/
8/
8/
SO
U
R C
E:
FD
O
T A
ER
IA
L.
LE
G
EN
D
A
PP
R O
XI
M
A
TE
L O
C A
TI
O
N O
F
PA
VE
M
EN
T
C O
R E
TE
ST
BA
SE
(I N
SH
EL
L
RB
-1
4.
6.
A-
4.
PO
O
R Fu ll de pt h cr ac k;
tra ns ve rs e an d lo ng itu di na l c ra ck in g ob se rv ed
RB
-2
3.
7.
A-
3.
FA
IR
Fu ll de pt h cr ac k;
tra ns ve rs e an d lo ng itu di na l c ra ck in g ob se rv ed
RB
-3
4.
7.
A-
4.
PO
O
R Fu ll de pt h cr ac k;
tra ns ve rs e an d lo ng itu di na l c ra ck in g ob se rv ed
RB
-4
4.
5.
A-
4.
PO
O
R Fu ll de pt h cr ac k;
tra ns ve rs e an d lo ng itu di na l c ra ck in g ob se rv ed
RB
-5
2.
9.
A-
2.
PO
O
R Fu ll de pt h cr ac k;
tra ns ve rs e an d lo ng itu di na l c ra ck in g ob se rv ed
RB
-6
3.
7.
A-
3.
FA
IR
Fu ll de pt h cr ac k;
tra ns ve rs e cr ac ki ng o bs er ve d.
RB
-7
4.
5.
A-
4.
PO
O
R Fu ll de pt h cr ac k;
tra ns ve rs e, lo ng itu di na l, an d bl oc k cr ac ki ng o bs er ve d.
RB
-8
3.
8.
A-
3.
PO
O
R Fu ll de pt h cr ac k;
tra ns ve rs e cr ac ki ng o bs er ve d.
RB
-9
4.
7.
A-
4.
PO
O
R Fu ll de pt h cr ac k;
tra ns ve rs e, lo ng itu di na l, an d bl oc k cr ac ki ng o bs er ve d.
RB
-1
4.
5.
A-
4.
PO
O R
Fu ll de pt h cr ac k;
tra ns ve rs e, lo ng itu di na l, an d bl oc k cr ac ki ng o bs er ve d.
RB
-1
3.
.0 A-
3.
PO
O R
Fu ll de pt h cr ac k;
tra ns ve rs e an d lo ng itu di na l c ra ck in g ob se rv ed
RB
-1
3.
4.
A-
3.
PO
O R
Fu ll de pt h cr ac k;
tra ns ve rs e an d lo ng itu di na l c ra ck in g ob se rv ed
RB
-1
4.
7.
A-
4.
PO
O R
Fu ll de pt h cr ac k;
tra ns ve rs e, lo ng itu di na l, an d bl oc k cr ac ki ng o bs er ve d.
RB
-1
3.
4.
A-
3.
PO
O R
Fu ll de pt h cr ac k;
tra ns ve rs e an d lo ng itu di na l c ra ck in g ob se rv ed
RB
-1
3.
5.
A-
3.
PO
O R
Fu ll de pt h cr ac k;
tra ns ve rs e an d lo ng itu di na l c ra ck in g ob se rv ed
N ot e 1:
P av em en t c on di tio n ba se d on li m ite d vi su al o bs er va tio ns
N ot e
2:
H an d au ge r b or in gs w er e pe rfo rm ed th ro ug h th e co re h ol e to d ep th s o f u p to
-fo ot b el ow th e ex ist in g pa ve m en t s ur fa ce a t e ac h pa ve m en t c or e lo ca tio n.
PA
VE
M
EN
T
CO
N D
IT
IO
N (1
SU
BG
RA
D E
M
AT
ER
IA
L
TA
BL
E
PA
VE
M
EN
T
EV
AL
U
AT
IO
N C
O
RI
N G
AN
D
C O
N D
IT
IO
N D
AT
A
CO
M
M
EN
TS
BE
AC
H
AC
CE
SS
P
AR
KS
PA
VE
M
EN
T
IM
PR
O
VE
M
EN
T
- R
ED
IN
GT
O N
S
HO
RE
S
PI
N
EL
LA
S
CO
UN
TY
, F
LO
RI
DA
AR
EH
N A
Pr oj ec t N um be r:
B-
-0
.0
CO
RE
N O
AS
PH
AL
T (A
C)
PA
VE
M
EN
T
(IN
CR
AC
K
D
EP
TH
(I
N
4.0 2.0 SP 12.5
3.5 2.0 SP 12.5
4.0 2.0 SP 12.5
4.0 2.0 SP 12.5
2.8 2.0 SP 12.5
3.3 2.0 SP 12.5
4.3 2.0 SP 12.5
3.8 2.0 SP 12.5
4.3 2.0 SP 12.5
4.5 2.0 SP 12.5
3.3 2.0 SP 12.5
3.5 2.0 SP 12.5
4.0 2.0 SP 12.5
3.5 2.0 SP 12.5
3.5 2.0 SP 12.5
Note 1:
TABLE 2
GENERAL MILLING DEPTH RECOMMENDATIONS
BEACH ACCESS PARKS - PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENT - REDINGTON SHORES
PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA
AREHNA Project Number: B-20-034.03
If cracks are exposed after milling a separation membrane or similar material should be placed over the cracks before placing new pavement to reduce the chance of reflective cracking.
CORE NO.
RB-1
RB-12
RB-13
RB-14
RB-15
EXISTING PAVEMENT
THICKNESS (IN)
RECOMMENDED
ASPHALT TYPE
RECOMMENDED
MINIMUM MILLING
DEPTH (IN)
RB-2
RB-3
RB-9
RB-10
RB-11
RB-4
RB-5
RB-6
RB-7
RB-8
G U
LF
O
F M
EX
IC
O
R
ED
IN
G
TO
N
S H
O R
ES
B
EA
C
H A
C C
ES
S
G ul f B ou le va rd
R ed in gt on S ho re s, F lo rid a
8-
GULF BOULEVARD
M
AP
N O
T
TO
S C
AL
E
Pa rk in g
R es tro om
Sh ow er s
Sw im m in g
L E
G E
N D
Beach
ENTRANCE
2N
D A
VE
N
U E
W
ES
T
1S
T
AV
EN
U
E W
ES
T
E N
TR
A
N C
E
N O
RT
H
Pr oj ec t N o:
G 1-
A4
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .