Attachment-D2-Specifications.pdf

WICKHAM ROAD PUBLIC WORKS

BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS (CD)

PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS

AUGUST 31, 2024

PHASE 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

BREVARD COUNTY, FL

COMMISSION NO. 2023-P014

DIVISION 00 – PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS

00 01 01 PROJECT TITLE PAGE

00 01 15 LIST OF DRAWING SHEETS

00 04 00 STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

00 05 00 ASBESTOS STATEMENT

00 31 19 EXISTING CONDITION INFORMATION

00 31 32 GEOTECHNICAL DATA

00 73 10 FLORIDA STATUTE ON PUBLIC ENTITY CRIMES

DIVISION 01 – GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

01 10 00 SUMMARY

01 31 00 PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION

01 32 33 PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION

01 33 00 SUBMITTAL PROCEDURES

01 40 00 QUALITY REQUIREMENTS

01 42 00 REFERENCES

01 57 23 TEMPORARY STORM WATER POLLUTION CONTROL

01 60 00 PRODUCT REQUIREMENTS

01 60 20 FLORIDA PRODUCT APPROVAL

01 73 00 EXECUTION

01 74 19 CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL GENERAL

01 77 00 CLOSEOUT PROCEDURES GENERAL

01 78 23 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE DATA

01 78 39 PROJECT RECORD DOCUMENTS

01 79 00 DEMONSTRATION AND TRAINING GENERAL

01 81 13.33 SUSTAINABLE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

01 91 13 GENERAL COMMISSIONING REQUIREMENTS

DIVISION 02 – EXISTING CONDITIONS

02 41 19 SELECTIVE DEMOLITION

DIVISION 03 - CONCRETE

03 11 00 CONCRETE FORMING

03 20 00 CONCRETE REINFORCING

03 30 00 CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE

03 35 43 POLISHED CONCRETE FINISHING

03 39 35 INTEGRALLY COLORED CONCRETE

DIVISION 04 - MASONRY

04 05 13 MASONRY MORTARING

04 05 16 MASONRY GROUTING

04 05 23 MASONRY ACCESSORIES

04 22 00 CONCRETE UNIT MASONRY

DIVISION 05 - METALS

05 12 00 STRUCTURAL STEEL FRAMING

05 21 00 STEEL JOIST FRAMING

05 31 00 STEEL DECKING

05 50 00 METAL FABRICATIONS

05 52 13 PIPE AND TUBE RAILINGS

DIVISION 06 – WOOD, PLASTICS, AND COMPOSITES

06 10 00 ROUGH CARPENTRY

DIVISION 07 – THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION

07 21 00 THERMAL INSULATION

07 21 19 FOAMED-IN-PLACE INSULATION

07 26 10 UNDERSLAB VAPOR BARRIER

07 27 26 FLUID-APPLIED MEMBRANE AIR BARRIERS

07 41 13.16 STANDING-SEAM METAL ROOF PANELS

07 62 00 SHEET METAL FLASHING AND TRIM

07 72 00 ROOF ACCESSORIES

07 84 43 JOINT 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 33 23 OVERHEAD COILING DOORS

08 41 13 ALUMINUM-FRAMED ENTRANCES AND STOREFRONTS

08 71 00 DOOR HARDWARE

08 71 13 POWER DOOR OPERATORS

08 80 00 GLAZING

08 83 00 MIRRORS

08 91 19 FIXED LOUVERS

DIVISION 09 - FINISHES

09 22 16 NON-STRUCTURAL METAL FRAMING

09 29 00 GYPSUM BOARD

09 30 13 CERAMIC TILING

09 51 13 ACOUSTICAL PANEL CEILINGS

09 65 13 RESILIENT BASE AND ACCESSORIES

09 91 13 EXTERIOR PAINTING

09 91 23 INTERIOR PAINTING

09 96 00 HIGH-PERFORMANCE COATINGS

DIVISION 10 - SPECIALTIES

10 14 23.16 ROOM-IDENTIFICATION PANEL SIGNAGE

10 14 73 PAINTED SIGNAGE

10 28 00 TOILET, BATH, AND LAUNDRY ACCESSORIES

10 44 13 FIRE PROTECTION CABINETS

10 44 16 FIRE EXTINGUISHERS

10 51 29 PHENOLIC LOCKERS

10 56 29 STORAGE RACKS

DIVISION 11 - EQUIPMENT

11 06 10 SCHEDULES FOR VEHICLE AND PEDESTRIAN EQUIPMENT - AIA

11 11 00 SHOP EQUIPMENT

11 30 13 RESIDENTIAL APPLIANCES

DIVISION 12 - FURNISHINGS

12 32 16 MANUFACTURED PLASTIC-LAMINATE-CLAD CASEWORK

12 36 61.16 SOLID SURFACING COUNTERTOPS

DIVISION 13 – SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION

13 34 19 METAL BUILDING SYSTEMS

DIVISION 14 – CONVEYING EQUIPMENT

14 45 00 VEHICLES LIFTS

DIVISION 21 – FIRE SUPPRESSION

21 05 00 FL COMMON WORK RESULTS FOR FIRE SUPPRESSION

21 05 23 FL GENERAL-DUTY VALVES FOR WATER-BASED FIRE-SUPPRESSION PIPING

21 05 29 FL HANGERS AND SUPPORTS FOR FIRE-SUPPRESSION PIPING AND

EQUIPMENT

21 05 53 FL IDENTIFICATION FOR FIRE-SUPPRESSION PIPING AND EQUIPMENT

21 10 00 FL WATER-BASED FIRE-SUPPRESSION SYSTEMS

DIVISION 22 - PLUMBING

22 05 00 FL COMMON WORK RESULTS FOR PLUMBING

22 05 23 FL GENERAL-DUTY VALVES FOR PLUMBING PIPING

22 05 53 FL IDENTIFICATION FOR PLUMBING PIPING AND EQUIPMENT

22 07 19 FL PLUMBING PIPING INSULATION

22 11 14 AUTOMOTIVE LUBRICATION FLUIDS

22 11 16 FL DOMESTIC WATER PIPING

22 11 19 FL DOMESTIC WATER PIPING SPECIALTIES

22 13 16 FL SANITARY WASTE AND VENT PIPING

22 13 19 FL SANITARY WASTE PIPING SPECIALTIES

22 13 19.13 FL SANITARY DRAINS

22 13 23 FL SANITARY WASTE INTERCEPTORS

22 15 13 FL GENERAL SERVICE COMPRESSED AIR PIPING

22 15 19 FL GENERAL SERVICE PACKAGED AIR COMPRESSORS AND RECEIVERS

22 33 00 FL ELECTRIC, DOMESTIC-WATER HEATERS

22 36 20 FACILITY FUELING SYSTEMS

DIVISION 23 – HEATING, VENTILATING, AND AIR CONDITION (HVAC)

23 05 00 FL COMMON WORK RESULTS FOR HVAC

23 05 48.13 FL VIBRATION CONTROLS FOR HVAC

23 05 53 FL IDENTIFICATION FOR HVAC PIPING AND EQUIPMENT

23 05 93 FL TESTING, ADJUSTING, AND BALANCING FOR HVAC

23 07 13 FL DUCT INSULATION

23 09 00 FL INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL FOR HVAC

23 23 00 FL REFRIGERANT PIPING

23 31 13 FL METAL DUCTS

23 33 00 FL AIR DUCT ACCESSORIES

23 34 00 FL HVAC FANS

23 73 130.16 FL INDOOR, SEMI-CUSTOM AIR-HANDLING UNITS

23 81 26 FL SPLIT-SYSTEM AIR-CONDITIONERS

DIVISION 26 – ELECTRICAL

26 00 10 FL BASIC ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS

26 05 19 FL LOW-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL POWER CONDUCTORS AND CABLES

26 05 23 FL CONTROL-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL POWER CABLES

26 05 26 FL GROUNDING AND BONDING FOR ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS

26 05 29 FL HANGERS AND SUPPORTS FOR ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS

26 05 33 FL RACEWAYS AND BOXES FOR ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS

26 05 44 FL SLEEVES AND SLEEVE SEALS FOR ELECTRICAL RACEWAYS AND

CABLING

26 05 53 FL IDENTIFICATION FOR ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS

26 05 73 FL OVERCURRENT PROTECTIVE DEVICE COORDINATION STUDY

26 05 74 FL OVERCURRENT PROTECTIVE DEVICE ARC-FLASH STUDY

26 08 00 FL COMMISSIONING OF ELECTRICAL

26 09 23 FL LIGHTING CONTROL DEVICES

26 22 00 FL LOW-VOLTAGE TRANSFORMERS

26 24 16 FL PANELBOARDS

26 27 26 FL WIRING DEVICES

26 28 13 FL FUSES

26 28 16 FL ENCLOSED SWITCHES AND CIRCUIT BREAKERS

26 29 13.13 FL MANUAL AND MAGNETIC MOTOR CONTROLLERS

26 32 13.13 DIESEL-ENGINE-DRIVEN GENERATOR SETS

26 36 00 TRANSFER SWITCHES

26 41 13 FL LIGHTNING PROTECTION FOR STRUCTURES

26 43 13 FL SURGE PROTECTIVE DEVICES FOR LOW-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL POWER

CIRCUITS

26 50 00 FL LIGHTING

26 56 13 FL LIGHTING POLES AND STANDARDS

DIVISION 27 - COMMUNICATIONS

27 05 28 FL PATHWAYS FOR COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS

27 11 00 FL COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ROOM FITTINGS

27 13 23 FL COMMUNICATIONS OPTICAL FIBER BACKBONE CABLING

27 15 13 FL COMMUNICATIONS COPPER HORIZONTAL CABLING

DIVISION 28 – ELECTRONIC SAFETY AND SECURITY

28 10 00 FL ACCESS CONTROL

28 15 00 FL INTEGRATED ACCESS CONTROL HARDWARE DEVICES

28 15 23 FL INTERCOM ENTRY SYSTEMS

28 20 00 FL VIDEO SURVEILLANCE

28 31 11 FL ADDRESSABLE FIRE-ALARM SYSTEMS

DIVISION 31 – EARTHWORK

31 10 00 SITE CLEARING

31 20 00 EARTH MOVING

31 23 19 DEWATERING

31 31 16 TERMITE CONTROL

31 50 00 EXCAVATION SUPPORT AND PROTECTION

DIVISION 32 – EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS

32 12 16 ASPHALT PAVING

32 13 13 CONCRETE PAVING

32 16 13 CONCRETE CURBS GUTTERS

32 16 23 SIDEWALK

32 31 11 GATE OPERATOR

32 31 13 CHAIN-LINK FENCE AND GATES

32 84 00 PLANTING IRRIGATION

32 92 00 TURF AND GRASSES

32 93 00 LANDSCAPE PLANTS

DIVISION 33 - UTILITIES

33 05 00 COMMON WORK RESULTS FOR UTILITIES

33 14 15 SITE WATER DISTRIBUTION PIPING

33 31 00 SANITARY-UTILITY-SEWERAGE-PIPING

33 41 00 FL STORM UTILITY DRAINAGE PIPING

33 42 00 FL STORMWATER CONVEYANCE

DIVISION 41 – MATERIAL PROCESSING AND HANDLING EQUIPMENT

41 22 00 CRANES AND HOISTS

DIVISION 00 -

PROCUREMENT AND

CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS

BREVARD COUNTY

WICKHAM RD PUBLIC

WORKS

2023-P014 MELBOURNE, Florida

PROJECT TITLE PAGE

00 01 01 - 1

SECTION 00 01 01 - PROJECT TITLE PAGE

PART 1 - GENERAL

1.1 PROJECT MANUAL

A. VOLUME 1.

1. Wickham Road Public Works.

2. Brevard County.

3. Brevard County, FL.

4. Owner Project No. TBD.

5. Architect Project No. 2023-P014.

6.

7. jl2 ARCHITECTURE.

8. 1678 Kingston Road.

9. Longwood, FL.

10. Phone: 407.340.2879.

11. Website: N/A.

12. Issued: June 28, 2024.

13. Copyright 2024, jl2 ARCHITECTURE.

PART 2 - PRODUCTS (Not Used) PART 3 - EXECUTION (Not Used)

END OF SECTION 00 01 01

WORKS

2023-P014 MELBOURNE, Florida

LIST OF DRAWING SHEETS 00 01 15 - 1

DOCUMENT 00 01 15 - LIST OF DRAWING SHEETS

PART 1 - GENERAL

1.1 LIST OF DRAWINGS

A. Drawings: Drawings that will be enumerated in the Owner/Contractor Agreement as part of the Contract Documents are listed on the Table of Contents page of the separately bound drawing set titled BREVARD COUNTY WICKHAM ROAD PUBLIC WORKS, CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS - YEAR 1, dated JUNE 28, 2024, as modified by subsequent Addenda and Modifications.

PART 2 - PRODUCTS (Not Used)

END OF DOCUMENT 00 01 15

INDEX OF DRAWINGS

GENERAL

G000 COVER SHEET

AE001 GENERAL INFORMATION AND ABBREVIATIONS

GI101 SITE PHASING INFORMATION - YEAR ONE & TWO

GI102 SITE PHASING INFORMATION - YEAR THREE & FOUR

LIFE SAFETY

GC10B LIFE SAFETY INFORMATION - MAINTENANCE BUILDING & FUELING

ISLAND

CIVIL

C1 COVER SHEET

C2 CONSTRUCTION NOTES

C3 CONSTRUCTION NOTES

C5 DEMOLITION & EROSION CONTROL PLAN

C6 OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

C7 GEOMETRY,SIGNAGE & STRIPING PLAN

C8 PAVING, GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN

C10 UTILITY PLAN

C11 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS

C12 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS

C13 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS

C14 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS

C15 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS

LA1 LANDSCAPE PLAN & DETAILS

LA2 LANDSCAPE PLAN & DETAILS

LA3 LANDSCAPE PLAN & DETAILS

STRUCTURAL

B-SE001 STRUCTURAL GENERAL NOTES

B-SE002 STRUCTURAL GENERAL NOTES

B-SE003 STRUCTURAL GENERAL NOTES

B-SE004 STRUCTURAL GENERAL NOTES

B-SE101 MAINTENANCE BUILDING - FLOOR FRAMING PLAN - PHASE 1

B-SE120 MAINTENANCE BUILDING - MEZZ FRAMING PLAN - PHASE 1

B-SE201 FOUNDATION SECTIONS AND DETAILS

B-SE301 FRAMING SECTIONS AND DETAILS

B-SE401 SCHEDULES

H-SE001 STRUCTURAL GENERAL NOTES

H-SE002 STRUCTURAL GENERAL NOTES & WIND SCHEDULE

H-SE101 FUEL CANOPY

H-SE201 FUEL CANOPY - SECTIONS AND DETAILS

ARCHITECTURE

AS101 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN

AS102 SCREEN WALL

B-AE101 MAINTENANCE BUILDING - FLOOR PLAN, PHASE 1

B-AE102 MAINTENANCE BUILDING, FLOOR PLAN, AREA A, MEZZANINE

B-AE111 REFLECTED CEILING PLAN, PHASE 1

B-AE120 ROOF PLAN, PHASE 1

B-AE201 MAINTENANCE BUILDING - ELEVATIONS PHASE 1

B-AE202 MAINTENANCE BUILDING - ELEVATIONS PHASE 1

B-AE301 MAINTENANCE BUILDING - SECTIONS

B-AE302 MAINTENANCE BUILDING - SECTIONS PHASE 1

B-AE311 MAINTENANCE BUILDING - WALL SECTIONS

B-AE401 MAINTENANCE BUILDING - ENLARGED PLANS

B-AE501 MAINTENANCE BUILDING - EXTERIOR DETAILS

B-AE502 MAINTENANCE BUILDING - INTERIOR DETAILS

B-AE503 MAINTENANCE BUILDING - PLAN DETAILS

B-AE504 MAINTENANCE BUILDING - PLAN DETAILS

B-AE510 MAINTENANCE BUILDING - ROOF DETAILS

B-AE601 DOOR AND WINDOW SCHEDULE - PHASE 1

B-AE603 DOOR AND WINDOW DETAILS

B-AE801 PARTITION TYPES AND DETAILS

B-AE810 INTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE

B-AE811 INTERIOR DETAILS

B-AE821 FIRE RATED PENETRATIONS

B-AE815 INTERIOR SIGNAGE FLOOR PLAN & DETAILS

B-AE816 BUILDING / ROOF SIGNAGE MESSAGE SCHEDULE

H-AE101 FUEL CANOPY - FLOOR PLAN

EQUIPMENT

Q101 MAINTENANCE BUILDING - EQUIPMENT PLAN

Q102 MAINTENANCE BUILDING - CRANE ENVELOPES & EQUIPMENT DETAILS

VS-100 VEHICLE SERVICES GENERAL NOTES ABBREVIATIONS,LEGENDS

AND SCHEDULES

VS-101 VEHICLE SERVICES MAINTENANCE BLDG

VS-401 VEHICLE FUELING PART PLANS

VS-501 VEHICLE SERVICES DETAILS

VS-502 VEHICLE SERVICES DETAILS

VS-503 VEHICLE SERVICES DETAILS AND ENLARGED PLAN

FIRE PROTECTION

FP001-1 FIRE PROTECTION SYMBOLS, LEGEND,NOTES, DETAILS AND INDE

FP100-1 FIRE PROTECTION SITE PLAN

B-FP101-1 FIRE PROTECTION FLOOR PLAN - MAINTENANCE BUILDING - PHASE 1

PLUMBING

P001-1 PLUMBING / FIRE PROTECTION SYMBOLS, LEGEND, NOTES, AND INDEX

P100-1 PLUMBING OVERALL PLAN

B-P101-1 PLUMBING FLOOR PLAN - MAINTENANCE BUILDING - PHASE 1

B-P301-1 PLUMBING RISERS - MAINTENANCE BUILDING - PRESSURE

B-P302-1 PLUMBING RISERS - MAINTENANCE BUILDING - GRAVITY

MECHANICAL

M001-1 MECHANICAL SYMBOLS, LEGEND , NOTES, AND INDEX

M100-1 MECHANICAL OVERALL PLAN

B-M101-1 MECHANICAL FLOOR PLAN - MAINTENANCE BUILDING - AREA A

M500-1 MECHANICAL DETAILS

M600-1 MECHANICAL CONTROLS

M700-1, MECHANICAL SCHEDULES

ELECTRICAL

E001-1 ELECTRICAL LEGEND AND NOTES

ES101-1 ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN - PHASE 1

ES201-1 PHOTOMETRIC SITE PLAN - PHASE 1

B-E101 POWER PLAN - MAINTENANCE BUILDING - PHASE 1

B-E111 LIGHTING PLAN - MAINTENANCE BUILDING - PHASE 1

B-E121 LIGHTING PLAN - MAINTENANCE BUILDING - MEZZANINE - PHASE 1

E501-1 ELECTRICAL DETAILS

E502-1 ELECTRICAL DETAILS

E601-1 ELECTRICAL ONE-LINE DIAGRAM - PHASE 1

E602-1 LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE

E603-1 ELECTRICAL PANEL SCHEDULES

H-E101-1 ELECTRICAL PLANS - FUEL CANOPY

FIRE ALARM

FA001-1 FIRE ALARM LEGEND AND NOTES

B-FA101 FIRE ALARM PLAN - MAINTENANCE BUILDING - PHASE 1

TECHNOLOGY

T001-1 TECHNOLOGY SYMBOLS LEGEND, NOTES AND INDEX - PHASE 1

TS101 - 1 TECHNOLOGY SITE PLAN - PHASE 1

B-T101 - 1 TECHNOLOGY VOICE/DATA FLOOR PLAN - MAINTENANCE BUILDING -

PHASE 1

B-T102 - 1 TECHNOLOGY AV/SECURITY FLOOR PLAN - MAINTENANCE BUILDING -

PHASE 1

B-T401-1 TECHNOLOGY ENLARGED PLANS - MAINTENANCE BULDING - PHASE 1

T501-1 TECHNOLOGY DETAILS - PHASE 1

T502-1 TECHNOLOGY DETAILS - PHASE 1

T601-1 TECHNOLOGY DETAILS - PHASE 1

STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE 00 04 00 - 1

DOCUMENT 00 04 00 – STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

1.1 To the best of our knowledge, the Plans and Specifications comply with the applicable minimum building codes, and the applicable fire-safety standards as determined by the local authority in accordance with this section and 633 Florida Statutes.

PART 2 - PRODUCTS (Not Used)

END OF DOCUMENT 00 04 00

ASBESTOS STATEMENT

00 05 00 - 1

DOCUMENT 00 05 00 – ASBESTOS STATEMENT

1.1 To the best of our knowledge, these Contract Documents do not contain any asbestos-containing materials intended for use in construction.

PART 2 - PRODUCTS (Not Used)

END OF DOCUMENT 00 05 00

WORKS

2023-P014 MELBOURNE, Florida

EXISTING CONDITION INFORMATION 00 31 19 - 1

DOCUMENT 00 31 19 - EXISTING CONDITION INFORMATION

PART 1 - GENERAL

1.1 EXISTING CONDITION INFORMATION

A. This Document with its referenced attachments is part of the Procurement and Contracting Requirements for Project. They provide Owner's information for Bidders' convenience and are intended to supplement rather than serve in lieu of the Bidders' own investigations. They are made available for Bidders' convenience and information.

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

B. Survey information that includes information on existing conditions, prepared by Allen Engineering, Inc., dated 10/26/23, is available for viewing as part of Drawings.

C. Related Requirements:

1. Document 003132 "Geotechnical Data" for reports and soil-boring data from geotechnical investigations that are made available to Bidders.

PART 2 - PRODUCTS (Not Used)

END OF DOCUMENT 00 31 19

WORKS

2023-P014 MELBOURNE, Florida

GEOTECHNICAL DATA 00 31 32 - 1

DOCUMENT 00 31 32 - GEOTECHNICAL DATA

PART 1 - GENERAL

1.1 GEOTECHNICAL DATA

A. This Document, with its referenced attachments, is part of the Procurement and Contracting Requirements for the Project. They provide Owner's information for Bidders' convenience and are intended to supplement rather than serve in lieu of Bidders' own investigations. They are 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, Owner, Architect, 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 accepts full responsibility for its use.

C. Soil-Boring Data for Project, obtained by ECS Florida, LLC, dated February 7, 2024, is available for viewing as appended to this Project Manual.

D. A Geotechnical Investigation Report for Project, prepared by ECS Florida, LLC, dated February 7, 2024, is available for viewing as appended to this Project Manual.

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 will make additional test borings and conduct other exploratory operations that may be required to determine the character of subsurface materials that may be encountered.

E. Related Requirements:

1. Document 003119 "Existing Condition Information" for information about existing conditions that is made available to Bidders.

PART 2 - PRODUCTS (Not Used)

END OF DOCUMENT 00 31 32

WP

ECS Florida, LLC Subsurface Exploration & Geotechnical Engineering Report Wickham Road Brevard Public Works Facility Development

4960 N Wickham Rd Melbourne, Brevard County, Florida

ECS Project No. 24:7571

February 7, 2024

February 7, 2024 JL2 Architecture, LLC 1678 Kingston Road Suite 202 Longwood, FL 32750

Attention: Mr. Johnnie Lohrum Jr.

ECS Project No. 24:7581

Reference: Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Report Wickham Road Brevard Public Works Facility Development 4960 N Wickham Road Melbourne, Brevard County, Florida

Dear Mr. Lohrum:

ECS Florida, LLC (ECS) has completed the subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, and geotechnical engineering analyses for the above-referenced project. Our services were performed in general accordance with our agreed to scope of work. This report presents our understanding of the geotechnical aspects of the project along with the results of the field exploration and laboratory testing conducted, and our design and construction recommendations.

It has been our pleasure to be of service to JL2 Architecture during the design phase of this project. We would appreciate the opportunity to remain involved during the continuation of the design phase, and we would like to provide our services during construction phase operations as well to verify subsurface conditions assumed for this report. Should you have any questions concerning the information contained in this report, or if we can be of further assistance to you, please contact us.

Respectfully submitted, ECS Florida, LLC

Aditya Revanth Putcha David W. Spangler, P.E.

Geotechnical Project Manager Chief Engineer APutcha@ecslimited.com FL PE No. 58770 Dspangler@ecslimited.com

David Wilshaw, P.G.

Senior Principal FL PG No. 2413 DWilshaw@ecslimited.com

David W. Spangler, State of Florida

Professional Engineer, License No. 58770

This item has been digitally signed and sealed by

David W. Spangler on the date indicated here.

Printed Copies of this document are not considered signed and sealed and the signature must be verified on any electronic copies.

2024.02.07 18:33:25 -05'00' mailto:APutcha@ecslimited.com mailto:Dspangler@ecslimited.com mailto:DWilshaw@ecslimited.com

Wickham Road Brevard Public Works Facility Development February 7, 2024 ECS Project No. 24:7571 Page i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.0 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..3

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

2.1 Project Location/Current Site Use/Past Site Use

2.2 Proposed Construction

3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING

3.1 Subsurface Characterization

3.2 Groundwater Observations

3.3 Karst Geology

3.4 Laboratory Testing

4.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Foundations

4.2 Slabs On Grade

4.3 Pavements

4.4 Stormwater Management System

5.0 SITE CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Subgrade Preparation

5.1.1 Stripping and Grubbing

5.1.2 Proof-rolling

5.1.3 Subgrade Densification

5.1.4 Site Temporary Dewatering

5.2 Earthwork Operations

5.2.1 Engineered Fill

5.3 Foundation and Slab Observations

5.4 Utility Installations

6.0 CLOSING

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Diagrams

• Site Location Diagram

• Boring Location Diagram(s)

• Sub-Surface Cross-Sections(s)

• Soil Survey Map

Appendix B – Field Operations

• Reference Notes

• Exploration Procedures

• Boring Logs

Appendix C – Laboratory Testing

• Laboratory Test Results Summary

ECS Project No. 24:7571 Page 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The following paragraphs provide a brief discussion of our findings and recommendations. Please refer to the complete report for a more detailed discussion.

ECS Florida, LLC (ECS) has completed the subsurface exploration for the proposed redevelopment of the Brevard County Public Works facility located at 4960 N Wickham Road in Melbourne, Brevard County, Florida. The project information summarized below is based exclusively on the information made available to us by JL2 Architecture, LLC at the time of this report. Our findings, conclusions and recommendations are summarized below.

PROJECT INFORMATION:

• Site Location: 4960 N Wickham Rd in Melbourne, Brevard County, Florida

• Scope: Two (2) one-story buildings, several covered parking structures, one

(1) stormwater management pond and associated pavement areas

• Building Type: Shallow foundations, slab-on-grade, concrete masonry unit

• Assumed Loads: Max. column loads = 100 kips, Max. wall loads = 5 klf

• Earthwork: Estimated cuts/fills of up to 5 feet based upon provided topographic information

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS:

• Field Exploration: Twenty-six (26) Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings drilled within the subject property limits to the depths ranging between 10 feet and 35 feet below existing ground level.

• Site Conditions: Brevard County Public works facility

• Probable Fill: SAND (SP) and SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM) Containing limerock, gravel, and wood to depths up to 8 feet below existing grades.

• Natural Soils: SAND (SP), SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), SAND WITH CLAY (SP-SC), CLAYEY

SAND (SC), and SILTY SAND (SM)

• Organic Materials: SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM) WITH Trace Organics

• Refusal Materials: Encountered within borings B-08, B-10, B-17 and SWM-02

• Groundwater: Encountered between 1 foot and 8 feet below the ground surface approximately at the boring locations. Seasonal high groundwater table is anticipated to form between depths of 0.5 and 6.5 feet below the existing grades, approximately.

GEOTECHNICAL & CONSTRUCTABILITY CONSIDERATIONS:

• Very Loose and Loose Soils: Encountered generally within the upper 10 feet of the soil profile during this exploration. Earthwork operations during the preparation of the building pad area and excavations for foundations will require continuous observation of yielding areas and a

ECS Project No. 24:7571 Page 2 contingency should be included in the budget for isolated undercutting during proof-roll operations. After completing the clearing and stripping operations and installing the temporary groundwater control measures (where required), the exposed surface should be compacted with a heavy vibratory roller having a minimum static, at-drum weight, on the order of 8 tons to 10 tons. Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) soundings, performed by hand, should also be carried out on the surface soils following the heavy compaction operations in the area of the building pads to confirm densification of the very loose soils within the upper 6 feet of the proposed finish floor elevation.

• Fill Soils: Uncontrolled fill soils containing limerock, gravel and wood and root debris were encountered within borings B-01, B-04 through B-09, B-13 through B-15, R-02 and SWM-01 to depths up to 8 feet below current grade. These uncontrolled fill soils could contain excessive organics from in place or placed topsoil grubbing operations. Uncontrolled fill soils may contain organic material that can decompose over time and lead to the formation of nested voids within the soil column. We recommend removal and replacement of heavily debris-laden material. Special attention should be paid to the completion of proof-rolling and subgrade densification. We also recommend ECS perform a test pit exploration prior to construction in the area of Borings B-04 and R-02 which encountered, wood, roots, and zones of very loose soil within the upper 4 to 5 feet of the borings.

• Shallow ground water table: Shallow groundwater was observed across the site and will need to be considered when determining site grading, stormwater management, pavement design and dewatering of foundation and utility excavations.

• Existing Site Conditions: The site is currently used as Brevard County Public Works facility.

Buried infrastructure should be anticipated during redevelopment.

DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS:

• Shallow foundations:

Max. Net Allow. Bearing Pressure = 2,500 psf Min. Exterior Embedment = 12 inches Min. Column/Strip Footing Width = 18 inches

• Slab Subgrade Modulus: = 150 pci

This summary should not be considered apart from the entire text of the report with all the qualifications and considerations mentioned herein. Details of our conclusions and recommendations are discussed in the report text.

ECS Project No. 24:7571 Page 3

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to provide geotechnical information for the design of structure foundations together with other geotechnical construction consideration and recommendations associated with the proposed re-development of the Brevard County Public Works public facility. This report also includes geotechnical recommendations regarding the design of the stormwater management system, pavements, and associated utilities. This report contains the results of our subsurface explorations and laboratory testing programs, site characterization, engineering analyses, and recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed redevelopment. The recommendations developed for this report are based on the Schematic Design Plan by Zev Cohen & Associates, Inc. provided to us on December 29th 2023.

Our services were provided in accordance with our Proposal No. 24:16526-GP dated January 2, 2024, and as authorized by Johnnie Lohrum with JL2 Architecture, LLC on January 17, 2024. Terms and Conditions of Service are in accordance with the Subconsultant Services Agreement between ECS Florida, LLC and JL2 Architecture, LLC dated January 17, 2024.

The report includes the following items.

• A brief review and description of our field and laboratory test procedures and the results of testing conducted.

• A review of surface topographical features and site conditions.

• A review of area and site geologic conditions.

• A review of subsurface soil stratigraphy with pertinent available physical properties.

• Final copies of our soil test boring logs.

• Recommendations for site preparation and construction of compacted fills, including an evaluation of on-site soils for use as compacted fills and delineation of potentially unsuitable soils and/or soils exhibiting excessive moisture at the time of sampling.

• Evaluation and recommendations relative to groundwater control.

• Recommended net allowable bearing capacity and anticipated settlements for the proposed foundation construction.

• Recommendations for slab-on-grade design and construction.

• Recommended geotechnical parameters for stormwater design.

• General recommendations for pavement design.

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

2.1 PROJECT LOCATION/CURRENT SITE USE/PAST SITE USE

The subject site is located at 4960 N Wickham Road in Melbourne, Brevard County, Florida. The subject property consists of portion of one (1) Brevard County parcel (approximately 17.88 acres in area) identified as Parcel Identification Number (PIN) 26-36-36-00-1. A Site Location Drawing is presented as Figure 2.1.1 below and reproduced within Appendix A of this report.

ECS Project No. 24:7571 Page 4

Figure 2.1.1. Site Location

The site slopes upwards from the northwest (low) to the southeast (high) with existing grades varying between approximately EL. +32 feet-datum and EL. +39 feet-datum. The surface elevations are interpolated from one-foot contour intervals contained within the Boundary and Topographic Survey by Allen Engineering, Inc. dated October 26, 2023, and should be considered approximate to the closest half-foot. Based on the aerial photographs of the site, many high stockpiles of soil/material were located in the back western portion of the site previously.

2.2 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

Based upon the Schematic Design Plan by Zev Cohen & Associates, Inc. provided to us on December 29th

2023, ECS understands that the proposed construction forming part of the redevelopment of the Brevard County Public Works facility consists of two (2) new buildings, several covered parking structures, one (1) stormwater management pond and associated paved areas.

We would anticipate based on current site grading and the topographic information that that finished floor elevation of the proposed development would be within 4 feet of existing grades once the existing stockpiles have been removed from the site. Based on the existing and proposed grades, we expect maximum cuts and fills for the structure to be less than 5 feet given the current conceptual drawings for the development.

ECS estimates (for the purposes of geotechnical analysis) that structural loads for the proposed buildings could be up to approximately 100 kips for column loads and up to about 5 kips per linear foot (klf) for continuous wall loads. If the stated assumed loadings are different from the actual loading provided by your structural engineer, please notify ECS immediately.

3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING

Our exploration procedures are explained in greater detail in Appendix B including the insert entitled Subsurface Exploration Procedures. Our scope of work included drilling twenty-six (26) SPT borings for

ECS Project No. 24:7571 Page 5 this exploration. Our borings were located with a handheld GPS unit and their approximate locations are shown on the Boring Location Diagram in Appendix A.

3.1 SUBSURFACE CHARACTERIZATION

The subsurface conditions encountered were generally consistent with published geological mapping.

The following sections provide generalized characterizations of the soil. Please refer to the boring logs in Appendix B.

Based on the Geologic Map of Florida, East Central Florida geologic conditions can generally be described in terms of two basic sedimentary layers. The near-surface layer is primarily composed of a mixture of wind-blown sands (deposited as beach ridges and dunes) and undifferentiated marine shelly sands with clay, silt, and organic matter. These sandy deposits lie above the Plio-Pliocene Anastasia Formation, comprising interbedded sands and coquinoidal limestones.

Based upon a review of the September 2017 Potentiometric Contours map published by the US Geological Survey, the potentiometric surface elevation of the Upper Floridan Aquifer in the project vicinity is at EL.

+30 feet datum, approximately. As indicated in Section 2.1, the project site elevations generally range from approximately EL. +32 to +39 feet, so the aquifer is in an area of slight recharge.

The United States Department of Agriculture Soil Survey for Brevard County, Florida maps the property as being underlain by several soil types namely namely 28 – Immokalee sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes, poorly drained with a depth to water table of 6 to 18 inches, 36 – Myakka sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes, poorly drained with a depth to water table of 6 to 18 inches and 53 – Satellite sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes, poorly drained with a depth to water table of 18 to 42 inches.

The soils encountered during this exploration are generally consistent with the Regional Geology and the published Soil Survey and are described within the table below.

ECS Project No. 24:7571 Page 6

Approximate Depth (ft)

Elevation(1)

(ft) Stratum Description Ranges of

SPT(2) N-values (bpf)

0 – 1 EL. +32 to EL. +31 - Asphalt N/A

0- 8(4) EL. +32 to EL. +24 I Fill Material consisting of SAND (SP), and SAND with

SILT (SP-SM) with limerock, gravel and wood WH(3) to 45

0-35(6)

EL. +32 to

EL. -3 II

SAND (SP), SAND with SILT (SP-SM) with trace organics, SAND WITH CLAY (SP-SC), CLAYEY SAND (SC), and SILTY SAND (SM) WH(3) to 50/4(5)

22.5-30

EL. +8 to EL. 2 III Limestone 10 to 37

Notes:

(1) Elevations at the boring locations were interpolated from one-foot contour intervals within the Boundary and Topographic Survey prepared by Alle Engineering, Inc dated October 26, 2023, and should be considered approximate to the closest half-foot.

(2) Standard Penetration testing using a Manual Hammer System.

(3) WH = Weight of Hammer - sample spoon and drill rods sank once hammer was rested upon the drive anvil.

(4) Encountered in borings B-01, B-02, B-04, B-05, B-06, B-07, B-08, B-09, B-13, B-14, B-15, B-16, R-02, R-03, and SWM-01,.

(5) 50 blows for 4 inches

(6) Termination depth of deepest borings A graphical presentation of the subsurface conditions is shown on the Subsurface Cross Section Diagram included in Appendix A.

3.2 GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS

Water levels were measured during drilling and are noted upon our boring logs in Appendix B.

Groundwater depths measured at the time of drilling were between 1 foot and 8 feet below the existing ground surface, approximately. Variations in the long-term water table may occur as a result of changes in precipitation, evaporation, surface water runoff, construction activities, and other factors. Based upon our interpretation of the subsurface data, it appears that the seasonal high groundwater level will form between depths of 0.5 and 6.5 feet below the existing ground surface, depending upon location.

3.3 KARST GEOLOGY

Areas within Central Florida are known to have karst geology. Karst terrain is characterized by voids, soil domes, soil raveling, interrupted drainage, disappearing streams, and topographical features such as sinkholes and closed depressions. These features are the result of the dissolution of soluble bedrock such as limestone by groundwater and/or the infiltration of surface water.

As water enters fractures, bedding planes, and other bedrock discontinuities within soluble bedrock, it slowly dissolves the rock and enlarges the discontinuities. Over geologic time, this results in the formation of solution channels or underground passages and ravines which may develop into surficial manifestations such as sinkholes and closed depressions. The dissolution of bedrock is generally a very slow process.

However, soil may be eroded or raveled into the enlarged bedrock fractures, creating soil domes.

Eventually, soil in these features can be lost through groundwater movement, resulting in surface depressions and potential sudden ground subsidence.

ECS Project No. 24:7571 Page 7

The soils derived from and overlying the carbonate bedrock are typically a clayey and silty soil with varying amounts of sand and rock fragments. The bedrock within the general geographic region is characterized by jointed and faulted soluble carbonate lithologies interbedded with non-carbonate lithologies. These carbonate formations are generally moderately to highly solution prone.

The degree of weathering or solutioning is often controlled by lithological variations and structural orientations. Where structural discontinuities intersect or in areas which are highly fractured, solutioning is intensified creating low areas and seams that are typically filled with residual clayey soils. Conversely, more competent, high areas represent slightly- to non-fractured lithologies that are often coarser grained and only slightly solution prone.

Karst activity in East Central Florida is uncommon due to the relatively recent depositional history of the Anastasia Formation and the depth of burial of older, more indurated limestone formations.

3.4 LABORATORY TESTING

The laboratory testing consisted of selected tests performed on samples obtained during our field exploration operations. Classification and index property tests were performed on representative soil samples. The index testing program included natural moisture content tests (ASTM D 2216), percent passing the No. 200 sieve (ASTM D 6913), organic content (ASTM D29740), and falling head permeability tests (ASTM D2434).

Each sample was visually classified on the basis of texture and plasticity in accordance with ASTM D2488 Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedures) and including USCS classification symbols, and ASTM D2487 Standard Practice for Classification for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System [(USCS)]. After classification, the samples were grouped in the major zones noted on the boring logs in Appendix B. The group symbols for each soil type are indicated in parentheses along with the soil descriptions. The stratification lines between strata on the logs are approximate; in situ, the transitions may be gradual.

4.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 FOUNDATIONS

Provided subgrades and engineered fills are prepared as recommended in this report, the proposed new buildings re-development of planned for the Brevard County Public Works facility can be supported by shallow foundations including column footings and continuous wall footings.

Fill material comprising a matrix of SAND (SP), and SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM) containing limerock, gravel, wood and roots debris were encountered within borings B-01, B-04 through B-09, B-13 through B-15, R- 02, R-03, and SWM-01, , to depths up to 8 feet below current grades. An ECS technician must be present during excavation of foundations. If potentially deleterious fill soils are identified at or below foundations, pond bottoms, utility structures or utility lines, the fill materials must be removed and replaced with suitable engineered fill.

ECS Project No. 24:7571 Page 8

Very loose and loose sandy soils were encountered in the upper 10 feet below the existing ground surface at several boring locations within the proposed building footprints. A heavy vibratory roller should be used to compact the surface soils in the area of the building footprints. Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) soundings, performed by hand, should also be carried out following the surface soil heavy compaction operations, to confirm densification of the very loose soils within the upper 6 feet of the finished floor elevations. This is in addition to conventional soil compaction testing for density and moisture content verification.

We recommend the foundation design use the following parameters.

Option #1: Conventional Shallow Foundations

Shallow Foundation:

Design Parameter Column Footing Wall Footing

Net Allowable Bearing Pressure(1) 2,500 psf 2,500 psf

Acceptable Bearing Soil Material

SAND (SP), SAND WITH

SILT (SP-SM), SAND WITH

CLAY (SP-SC) and CLAYEY

SAND (SC) - Stratum I and II

SAND (SP), SAND WITH

SILT (SP-SM), SAND

WITH CLAY (SP-SC) and

CLAYEY SAND (SC) -

Stratum I and II

Minimum Width 24 inches 18 inches

Min. Footing Embedment Depth (below slab or finished grade) 12 inches 12 inches

Estimated Total Settlement (2) Less than 1- inch Less than 1- inch

Estimated Differential Settlement (3)

Less than ¾ inches between columns Less than ¾ inches

Notes:

(1) Net allowable bearing pressure is the applied pressure in excess of the surrounding overburden soils above the base of the foundation.

(2) Based on assumed structural loads. If final loads are different, ECS must be contacted to update foundation recommendations and settlement calculations.

(3) Based on maximum column/wall loads and variability in borings. Differential settlement can be re-evaluated once the foundation plans are more complete.

Potential Undercuts: Most of the soils at the foundation bearing elevation are anticipated to be suitable for support of the proposed structure. If soils with excessive organics (> 6%), soft or unsuitable soils are observed at the footing bearing elevations, the unsuitable soils should be undercut and removed. Any undercut should be backfilled with lean concrete (f’c ≥ 1,000 psi at 28 days) up to the original design bottom of footing elevation; the original footing shall be constructed on top of the hardened lean concrete.

Option #2: Post-Tensioned Foundations

Post-tensioned foundations can also be considered as a suitable foundation system based on the type of development; these would consist of slabs with turned down footings. Based on our subsurface

ECS Project No. 24:7571 Page 9 exploration and laboratory testing, we are providing the following design recommendations to support the proposed multifamily structure on shallow monolithic PT slab with grade beams (or footings) under load bearing walls. The PT slabs should be designed in accordance with WRI/CRSI “Design Slab-On-Ground Foundations” (BRAB) or PTI “Design and Construction of Post-Tensioned Slabs-On-Ground” (PTI “Type II”).

The following BRAB parameters may be used:

Design Parameter Prepared Subgrade (PVR = 1.0 Inches)

Net Allowable Bearing Pressure 2,500 psf Design PI 15

Climatic Rating (Cw) 30 Unconfined Compressive Strength (tsf) 0 (soils are granular)

Soil-Climate Support Index (1-C) 0.04 Minimum Beam Depth 10 in.

Minimum Beam Width 12 in.

During mass grading to achieve subgrade levels, the geotechnical engineer should examine the subgrade to determine if excessively organic, root-laden, or soft soils are present. If found, the organic or soft soils should be over-excavated and replaced with compacted fill.

The net allowable soil bearing pressure refers to that pressure which may be transmitted to the foundation bearing soils in excess of the final minimum surrounding overburden pressure. The final footing and/or grade beam elevation should be evaluated by competent geotechnical engineering personnel to verify that the bearing soils are capable of supporting the recommended net allowable bearing pressure and suitable for foundation construction. These evaluations should include visual observations and prudent use of the DCP. Probing with reinforcing steel or other tools not nationally recognized or otherwise calibrated is not considered a suitable alternative to the DCP. Evaluations should be performed at intervals not greater than 50 feet in continuous footing and grade beam excavations.

DCP testing should extend at least four feet below the final foundation subgrade.

The settlement of a structure is a function of the compressibility of the bearing materials, bearing pressure, actual structural loads, fill depths, and the bearing elevation of footings with respect to the final ground surface elevation. Estimates of settlement for foundations bearing on engineered or non-engineered fills are strongly dependent on the quality of fill placed. Factors that may affect the quality of fill include maximum loose lift thickness of the fills placed and the amount of compactive effort placed on each lift. If the recommendations outlined in this report are followed, we expect total settlements for the proposed construction to be in the range of 1½ inches or less, while the differential settlement will be approximately one-half of the anticipated total settlement. This evaluation is based on our engineering experience and the anticipated loadings for this type of structure and is intended to aid the structural engineer with his/her design.

It is recommended that the floor slab bearing soils be covered with an impervious membrane to reduce moisture entry and floor dampness. A six-mil-thick plastic membrane is commonly used for this purpose.

Care should be exercised not to tear large sections of the membrane during placement of reinforcing steel and concrete. In addition, we recommend that a minimum separation of three feet be maintained

ECS Project No. 24:7571 Page 10 between the finished floor levels and the estimated normal seasonal high groundwater level. We also recommend that densities of at least 98 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D1557) should be obtained within the upper one foot of the materials immediately below the PT slabs.

4.2 SLABS ON GRADE

Provided subgrades and engineered fills are prepared as discussed herein, the proposed floor slabs can be constructed as Ground Supported Slabs (or Slab-On-Grade). Based on an assumed lowest finished floor elevation within approximately 4 feet of existing grades, it appears that the slabs will bear on Stratum II - SAND (SP), or SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM) or engineered fill soil. The following graphic depicts our soil-supported slab recommendations:

Figure 4.3.1

1. Drainage Layer Material: SAND (SP, SP-SC, and SW) Thickness of Four Inches

2. Subgrade compacted to 98% maximum dry density per ASTM D1557

Soft or yielding soils may be encountered in some areas. Those soils should be removed and replaced with compacted Engineered Fill in accordance with the recommendations included in this report.

Subgrade Modulus: Provided the Engineered Fill and Granular Drainage Layer are constructed in accordance with our recommendations, the slab may be designed assuming a modulus of subgrade reaction, k1 of 150 pci (lbs./cu. inch). The modulus of subgrade reaction value is estimated on a 1 ft by 1 ft equivalent plate load test basis.

Vapor Barrier: Before the placement of concrete, a vapor barrier may be placed on top of the granular drainage layer to provide additional protection against moisture penetration through the floor slab. When a vapor barrier is used, special attention should be given to surface curing of the slab to reduce the potential for uneven drying, curling and/or cracking of the slab. Depending on proposed flooring material types, the structural engineer and/or the architect may choose to eliminate the vapor barrier.

Slab Isolation: Soil-supported slabs should be isolated from the foundations and foundation-supported elements of the structure so that differential movement between the foundations and slab will not induce excessive shear and bending stresses in the floor slab. Where the structural configuration prevents the use of a free-floating slab such as in a drop down footing/monolithic slab configuration, the slab should be designed with suitable reinforcement and load transfer devices to preclude overstressing of the slab.

Concrete Slab Vapor Barrier

Granular Capillary Break/Drainage Layer

Compacted Subgrade

ECS Project No. 24:7571 Page 11

4.3 PAVEMENTS

Subgrade Characteristics: Based on the results of our borings, it appears that the pavement subgrades in will bear in material consisting mainly of SAND (SP), SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), or engineered fill.

Our scope of services did not include extensive sampling and Limerock Bearing Ratio (LBR) testing of existing subgrade or potential sources of imported fill for the specific purpose of a detailed pavement analysis. Instead, we have assumed pavement-related design parameters that are considered to be typical for the area soil and roadway types as per the “FDOT Standards & Specifications”. The recommended pavement thicknesses presented in this report section are considered typical and minimum for the assumed parameters in the general site area. We understand that budgetary considerations sometimes dictate thinner pavement sections than those presented. However, the client, the owner, and the project designers should be aware that thinner pavement sections may result in increased maintenance costs and lower than anticipated pavement life.

The preliminary pavement sections below are guidelines that may or may not comply with local jurisdictional minimums.

PROPOSED PAVEMENT SECTIONS

Asphalt Concrete Component Standard Heavy Standard Heavy

Stabilized Subgrade (LBR>40) 12” 12” 12” 12” Base Course (LBR> 100) 6” 8” N/A N/A

Surface Course 1.5” 2” 5” 6”

In general, heavy-duty sections are areas that will be subjected to trucks and main access routes for the proposed re-development. Light duty sections are appropriate for vehicular parking areas only.

Large, front loading trash dumpsters frequently impose concentrated front wheel loads on pavements during loading. This type of loading typically results in rutting of asphalt pavement and ultimately pavement failures. For preliminary design purposes, we recommend that the pavement in trash pickup areas consist of a 6-inch thick, 4,000 psi, reinforced concrete slab over 6-inches of dense graded aggregate.

When traffic loading becomes available, ECS or the project Civil Engineer can design the pavements.

Prior to subbase placement and paving, LBR testing of the subgrade soils (both natural and fill soils) should be performed to determine the soil engineering properties for final pavement design.

In areas where Portland cement concrete pavement is planned, the concrete should be placed upon a minimum of 12 inches of compacted, free draining material and compacted to 98 percent of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D1557).

In areas where asphaltic concrete pavements are used, we suggest stabilizing the subgrade materials to a minimum Limerock Bearing Ratio (LBR) LBR of 40 percent. All stabilized subgrade materials should be compacted to 98 percent of the Modified Proctor (ASTM D-1557) maximum dry density and meet specification requirements for Type B or Type C Stabilized Subgrade by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). The stabilized subgrade may consist of imported material or a blend of on-site

ECS Project No. 24:7571 Page 12 soils and imported materials. If a blend is proposed, we recommend that the contractor performs a mix design to find the optimum mix proportions.

Base Course: Based on the groundwater conditions encountered at the subject property, it is our professional opinion that crushed concrete is more appropriate than limerock which can degrade due to the shallow groundwater condition are likely to be the economical and feasible base course options for this project.

Crushed concrete should follow the FDOT specification for material qualifications and placement. Place crushed concrete base in maximum 6-inch lifts and compact to a minimum density of 95 percent of the Modified Proctor (ASTM D-1557) maximum dry density according to their specification. Perform compliance testing for the base course to a depth of one foot at a frequency of one test per 5,000 square feet, or at a minimum of two test locations, whichever is greater.

Limerock can be used if the site elevations are raised. Limerock should follow a minimum LBR of 100 percent and should be mined from an FDOT approved source. Place limerock in maximum six-inch lifts and compact each lift to a minimum density of 95 percent of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density

(ASTM D-1557).

Effects of Groundwater: One of the most critical influences on the pavement performance in Central Florida is the relationship between the pavement subgrade and the seasonal high groundwater level.

Roadways and parking areas that have not considered these effects typically exhibit signs of deterioration due to degradation of the base and the base/surface…