Loading...
CC-11-1143Inspection Worksheet Miami Shores Village 10050 N.E. 2nd Avenue Miami Shores, FL Phone: (305)795 -2204 Fax: (305)756 -8972 Inspection Number: INSP - 167792 Permit Number: CC -6 -11 -1143 Scheduled Inspection Date: December 28, 2011 Inspector: Bruhn, Norman Owner: SCHOOL INC, MIAMI COUNTRY DAY Job Address: 107 ST AND 6 AVE STREET IIIZDCA\ /COdCAMT Q+.....i Miami Shores, FL 33138 -0000 Project: <NONE> Contractor: SUFFOLK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC Permit Type: Commercial Construction Inspection Type: Final Building Work Classification: New Phone Number (305)759 -2843 Parcel NUMDIROVEMENT PROJECT Phone: (561)723 -2967 Building Department Comments NEW FRONT ENTRY WALL WITH FENCING AND LANDSCAPING ALONG NE 6TH AVE AND 107 STREET Passe Failed Correction Needed Re- Inspection Fee No Additional Inspections can be scheduled until re- inspection fee is paid. Inspector Comments CREATED AS REINSPECTION FOR INSP- 161311. WALL OK EXCEPT SIGN NOT COMPLETE PROVIDE LETERING. NB eC- December 28, 2011 For Inspections please call: (305)762 -4949 Page 17 of 28 Inspection Worksheet Miami Shores Village 10050 N.E. 2nd Avenue Miami Shores, FL Phone: (305)795 -2204 Fax: (305)756 -8972 Inspection Number: INSP - 164365 Scheduled Inspection Date: September 15, 2011 Inspector: Bruhn, Norman Owner: SCHOOL INC, MIAMI COUNTRY DAY Job Address: 107 ST AND 6 AVE STREET Ineoon I RueM T cf...s Miami Shores, FL 33138 -0000 Project <NONE> Permit Number: CC -6 -11 -1143 Contractor: SUFFOLK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC Permit Type: Commercial Construction Inspection Type: Tie Beam Work Classification: New Phone Number (305)759 -2843 Parcel NUMPROVEMENT PROJECT Phone: (561)723 -2967 Building Department Comments NEW FRONT ENTRY WALL WITH FENCING AND LANDSCAPING ALONG NE 6TH AVE AND 107 STREET Passed' 7 Failed Correction Needed Re- Inspection Fee No Additional Inspections can be scheduled until re- inspection fee is paid. Inspector Comments CREATED AS REINSPECTION FOR INSP- 163927. CREATED AS REINSPECTION FOR INSP- 163834. CREATED AS REINSPECTION FOR INSP- 161294. First lift OK NB September 14, 2011 For Inspections please call: (305)762 -4949 Page 11 of 16 SL. 1/8" 8" CONC. SLAB WITH 34*5 E.W. AT MID - DEPTH MAX. 8" MASONRY PIER EXIST'G CONC. SLAB 1*5 VERTICAL EACH CORNER DRILL 4 EPDXY USING 'HILTI HIT' 1-1Y -150 PROVIDE 5" (MIN.) EMBEDMENT. EXIST'G MASONRY PIER • • • •• i'C ••, F L 0 �,: v� i�ZoIci\ •• �ONP D.D.A. ENGINEERS P.A. CONSULTING ENGINEERS REF -SHT RFI ROC 4939 S.W. 74th CT. MIAMI, FLORIDA 33155 (305) 666 -0711 FAX 666 -5259 STATE OF FLORIDA - AUTHORIZATION No. 1308 Miami Country Day school Job number date 09- 01-2011 designed DDA drawn DDA sheet no. *`1\reAv Ca& 91$itt Miami Shores Village Building Department 10050 N.E.2nd Avenue, Miami Shores, Florida 33138 Tel: (305) 795.2204 Fax: (305) 756.8972 INSPECTION'S PHONE NUMBER: (305) 762.4949 BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION FBC 20 Permit Type: ADJNG ROOFING OWNER: Name (Fee Simple Titleholder): I`r 111 jj,,(>4r hone #: .35.5 -Tact - -Tao 0 �^ Address: �I E, ((`�15-1-6'"QQk°' ,;\ Cc3 7 7711 JUN 2 3 1011 BY Permit NoCC 1 ! 3 Master Permit No. City: Tenant/Lessee Name: State: �'( . Zip: 331 �a ( Phone #: c 779, -1 O3 Email: JOB ADDRESS: City: I (-253 hit 61 °e . Miami Shores County: Miami Dade Zip: Folio/Parcel #: NO 1f Flood Zone: Is the Building Historically Designated: Yes CONTRACTOR: Company Name: , ) C� j; QC Phone #: Address: 1 keurvarrk, City: T at State: R(®.. Zip: Qualifier Name: I 1 5VeA-\ l (tea Phone #: State Certification or Registration #: " Certificate of Competency #: Contact Phone #: j3 1(,1 Email Address: DESIGNER: Architect/Engineer: Z•gcZ f i & ACC_ . Phone #: 305 377.5 L - Value of Work for this Permit: $ `"jr5� d(0 Square/Linear Footage of Work: Type of Work: OAdditi on OAlteration Athew ❑Repair/Replace ODemolition { Description of Work: AC-Aki En\-CLJ t _ ® 1( tkCth �Q�'�,ts- am &, l z� (1 1011 Ave _ *a *** *********** ** * * * ** * * * ***** ** **** xFees ** * *** * ****** **** x***: *** * * * ***** ** * * *** **** Submittal Fee $ Permit Fee $ 4Si7 ©d CCF $ CO /CC $ Scanning Fee $ Radon Fee $ DBPR $ Bond $ Notary $ Training/Education Fee $ Technology Fee $ Double Fee $ Structural Review $ 4`s r ` ~ TOTAL FEE NOW DUE $� L� Bonding Company's Name (if applicable) Bonding Company's Address City State Zip Mortgage Lender's Name (if applicable) Mortgage Lender's Address City State Zip Application is hereby made to obtain a permit to do the work and installations as indicated. I certify that no work or installation has commenced prior to the issuance of a permit and that all work will be performed to meet the standards of all laws regulating construction in this jurisdiction. I understand that a separate permit must be secured for ELECTRICAL WORK, PLUMBING, SIGNS, WELLS, POOLS, FURNACES, BOILERS, HEATERS, TANKS and AIR CONDITIONERS, ETC OWNER'S AFFIDAVIT: I certify that all the foregoing information is accurate and that all work will be done in compliance with all applicable laws regulating construction and zoning. "WARNING TO OWNER: YOUR FAILURE TO RECORD A NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT MAY RESULT IN YOUR PAYING TWICE FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO YOUR PROPERTY. IF YOU INTEND TO OBTAIN FINANCING, CONSULT WITH YOUR LENDER OR AN ATTORNEY BEFORE RECORDING YOUR NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT." Notice to Applicant: As a condition to the issuance of a building permit with an estimated value exceeding $2500, the applicant must promise in good faith that a copy of the notice of commencement and construction lien law brochure will be delivered to the person whose property is subject to attachment. Also, a certified copy of the recorded notice of commencement must be posted at the job site for the first inspection which occurs seven (7) days after the building permit is issued. In the absence of such Posted notice, the inspection will not be approved and a reinspection fee will be charged. Owner or Agent The fore oing instrument was acknowledged before me this L4-3 day of, , 20L I , by 6;14f7 who is personate known to me or who has produced As identification and who did take an oath. NOTARY PUBLIC: Sign: Print: Shen,._ My Commission Expires: UC 'OTATS OP FLORIDA ShelliC L. N'ulfor4 Commission #DD850330 �''••.,,,S Expires: FEB. 28, 2013 BONDED TanU ATLANTIC BONDING CO., INC. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * n ********* *** ** * * **** ** * *** ** ** * * * ***** ** APPROVED BY Contractor _ The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this at J '. day of �J� , 20 �, by 119 F-Ae-rAlcri who is personally known to me or who has produced as identification and who did take an oath. NOTARY PUBLIC: Sign: (i4:15 Print:�� My Commission Expire, U & Plans Examiner (Revised 07 /10 /07)(Revised 06 /10/2009)(Revised 3/15/09) Structural Review BROOKE CAM MY COMMISSION #EE078811 EXPIRES: MAR 31, 2015 Bonded through 1st State Wane Zoning Clerk ACG7►Ri, �- CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE(MM/DD/WY1� 09/01/2011 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(les) must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). PRODUCER Aon Risk Services Northeast, Inc. Boston MA Office One Federal Street Boston MA 02110 USA CO ACT T PHONE (866) 283 -7122 FAX (847) 953 -5390 (AIC. No. Ext): (A/C. No.): E -MAIL ADDRESS: INSURERS) AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC # INSURED Suffolk Construction Company, Inc and Suffolk Florida LLC 1 Harvard Circle West Palm Beach FL 33409 USA INSURER A: American Guarantee & Liability Ins Co 26247 INSURER B: National Union Fire Ins Co of Pittsburgh 19445 INSURER C: Insurance company of the State of PA 19429 INSURER D: PERSONAL &ADVINJURY INSURER E: INSURER F: $4,000,000 CERTIFICATE NUMBER: 570043674841 MBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. Limits shown are as requested INSRR 8 TYPE OF INSURANCE .t INSR -I:- ` - WVD POLICY NUMBER GL4871146 POLICY EFF (MMIDDIYYYI') 0$731/2011 POQZY hXH (MMIDD/YYVY) 08/31/2012 LIMITS GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $2,000,000 X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS -MADE X OCCUR DAMAGE TO RENTED PREMISES (Ea occurrence) $100,000 MED EXP (My one person) $10,000 PERSONAL &ADVINJURY $2,000,000 GENERAL AGGREGATE $4,000,000 GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMB APPLIES POLICY n ECT n PER: LOC PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGO $4,000,000 0 AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY CA 170 -73 -73 08/31 /2011 08/31/2012 COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT (Ea accident) $1,000,000 X X X ANY AUTO BODILY INJURY ( Per person) ALL OWNED AUTOS HIRED AUTOS — _ X _ SCHEDULED AUTOS NON -OWNED AUTOS BODILY INJURY (Per accident) PROPERTY DAMAGE (Per accident) A X UMBRELLA LIAB EXCESS L!AB X OCCUR CLAIMS -MADE AEC937613708 08/31 /2011 08/31/2012 EACH OCCURRENCE $5,000,000 AGGREGATE $5,000,000 DED I (RETENTION C WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY Y N 1 A WCO20635659 08/31/2011 08/31/2012 X I WC sTATU- 1 IoTH TORY LIMITS ER / N ANY PROPRIETOR / PARTNER / EXECUTIVE OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? N (Mandatory in NH) If yes, escribe under E.L. EACH ACCIDENT $1,000,000 E.L. DISEASE -EA EMPLOYEE $1,000,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below EL DISEASE- POLICY LIMIT $1,000,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (Attach ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, H more space is required) ■ I 1 CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION Miami Shores village Bldg Dept. Attn: Building Department 10050 NE 2nd Ave Miami Shores FL 33138 USA SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ©1988 -2010 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. ACORD 25 (2010/05) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD Holder Identifier : Certificate No : 570043674841 god • Geotechnical Engineering • Foundation Engineering • Construction Materials Testing • Soil Borings /Monitor Wells Thomas J. Kaderabek, P.E. Barry R. Goldstein, P.E. March 2, 2010 AUG r c; 21)11 Mr. Michael Caban Miami Country Day School BY" " ° ° °"' °' °""' ° °" "° 601 NE 107 Avenue Miami, Florida 33161 9565 NW 40th Street Rd. Phone: 305/666 -3563 Miami, Florida 33178 Fax: 305/666 -3069 Re: Report of Subsurface Exploration, Borehole Drainage Testing and Asphalt Thickness Along 107th Street Miami Country Day School - 601 NE 107th Avenue Miami shores, Florida KACO Project No.10118 Mr. Caban: We submit this Report in fulfillment of a scope of services described in our Proposal No. 10 -128 dated February 11, 2010. The work on this project was authorized by acceptance of our Professional Services Agreements. This Report describes our understanding of the project, presents our evaluation, and provides foundation recommendations. PROJECT INFORMATION Information about this project was provided by Mr. Michael Caban with Miami Country Day School. The school is located at 610 NE 107th Avenue in Miami Shores, Florida. We were not been provided any documents to aid in the preparation of this Report. We were provided with a description of the portion of roadway that the work was to encompass. We understand that four (4) borehole drainage tests are needed. The tests will be performed along 107th Avenue, between 6th Avenue and the point where the road ends to the east of 6th Avenue. The road length is approximately 950 feet. All testing was performed along the road due to the presence of overhead power lines along the north side of requested us to obtain information regarding the shallow soil conditions and phalt and road base material along the existing road. Mr. Michael Caban Miami Country Day School March 2, 2010 Page 2 PURPOSE The purpose of our services on this project was to perform in -situ drainage tests, determine the thickness of the asphalt and road base and explore the shallow subsurface conditions along a portion of NW 107th Street. FIELD TESTS The subsurface conditions were explored using soil test borings and borehole constant head drainage tests. KACO was provided with the general locations of where to perform the soil borings and the drainage test. We have located the approximate test locations on the appended Drawing No. 2. Drainage Tests — Four (4) drainage tests were performed for this project. The borehole drainage tests were performed by rotating a roller bit and casing to the test depths of 15 feet below grade. A slotted PVC pipe (minimum diameter of 6 ") was installed within the full hole. Next, with the borehole open, water was pumped into the borehole to develop a test hydraulic head. Once the hydraulic head was stabilized, the average flow rate into the borehole was recorded. A formula developed by the South Florida Water Management District was used to estimate hydraulic conductivity. The results of the borehole percolation tests are summarized in the table below, and appended on the sheets entitled Results of Constant Head Field Borehole Drainage Test. Included with the results are descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered at each test location. Test Number P -1 Test Depth ($e at) 15 Hydraulic Conductivity (K) (cis p r square foot per f • , t of head) 0.00050 P -2 15 0.00042 P -3 15 0.00049 P-4 15 0.00032 Soil Test Borings e Three (3) soil test borings were performed as part of our work scope. Borings were extended to a depth of approximately 15 feet below the existing roadway ground surface. The standard penetration test was used as the investigative tool within the borings. Penetration tests were performed in substantial accordance with ASTM Procedure D -1586, "Penetration Test and Split- Barrel Sampling of Soils." This test procedure drives a 1.4 -inch I.D. split -tube sampler into the soil profile using a 140- pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the second and third 6 -inch increments is the soil N- value, in blows per foot, and is an indication of soil strength. The soil samples recovered from the soil borings were classified and stratified by a Geotechnical Engineer. The results of the classification and stratification are shown in the appended Records of Test Boring. It should be noted that soil conditions may vary between the strata interfaces which are shown. The soil boring dat reflects information from a specific test location only. Mr. Michael Caban Miami Country Day School March 2, 2010 Page 3 It should be noted that subsurface conditions may vary between the test locations. The test data reflects information from a specific test location only. LOCAL GEOLOGY /SUBSURF CE CONDITI 1 NS Miami -Dade County is located on the southern flank of a stable carbonate platform on which thick deposits of limestones, dolomites and evaporites have accumulated. The upper two hundred feet of the soil profile is composed predominantly of limestone and quartz sand. These sediments were deposited during several glacial and interglacial stages when the ocean was at elevations higher than present. In many portions of Miami -Dade County, surface sand deposits of the Pamlico Formation are encountered. The Pamlico sands have a thickness of 2 to 5 feet and overlie the Miami Limestone. In western Miami -Dade County, portions of the Everglades Region interfinger with the Pamlico sand. The Everglades soil consist of peat and calcareous silt (marl). The Miami Limestone is a soft to moderately hard, white, porous to very porous, sometimes sandy, oolitic calcareous cemented grainstone. The Miami Limestone outcrops in portions of Miami -Dade County. The Miami Limestone has a maximum thickness of about 35 feet along the Atlantic Coastal Ridge and thins sharply near the coastline and more gradually in a westerly direction. The Miami Limestone was formed about 130,000 years ago at a time when the sea level was twenty -five feet higher than it is today. This environment facilitated formation of concentrically layered sand sized carbonate grains called oolites. These grains formed by repeated precipitation of calcium carbonate around the nucleus of a sand or shell grain. The Miami Limestone can be separated into two facies: the barrier bar oolitic facies nd the tidal shoal limestone facies. The barrier bar facies is characterized by lenses of oolitic limestone separated by intermittent, 1 -inch thick or less, uncemented sand layers (cross - bedded limestone). Zones of higher porosity are characteristic and parallel the bedding planes of the cross - bedded limestone. The tidal shoal limestone facies is characterized by a distinct lack of bedding planes. In addition, burrowing organisms have churned previously deposited sediments, which has resulted in high porosity channels in the rock. These ancient channels give the rock an appearance of a hardened sponge in some areas. The field tests performed for this project disclose subsurface conditions which are consistent with the geology described above. Generally, a surficial layer of fill overlies a sand or silt or a limestone formation. A limestone formation was encountered in all test borings at a depth of between 3 to 11 feet from grade. The detailed subsurface conditions are presented graphically in the attached Generalized Subsurface Profile and in more detail on the Records of Test Boring. Mr. Michael Caban Miami Country Day School March 2, 2010 Page 4 GROUNDWATER HYDROLOGY Two principal aquifer systems have been defined in Miami -Dade County, the Floridian Aquifer and the Biscayne Aquifer. The depth of the top of the Floridian Aquifer, locally, is approximately 1,000 feet with the base occurring at approximately 3,700 feet. The Biscayne Aquifer varies in thickness and is the primary source of potable water in Miami -Dade County. The maximum aquifer thickness of approximately 200 feet occurs along the Atlantic Coast in northeast Miami -Dade County. Primarily, the aquifer is recharged by local rainfall. Aquifer discharge occurs principally by evapotranspiration, pumping for public water supply, and general unrestricted flow into the ocean. The aquifer, however, is regulated by the South Florida Water Management District through a network of natural rivers and man -made canals to maintain a degree of consistency in the groundwater level. Unusual conditions, such as hurricanes and extended drought periods, may result in uncontrolled large scale fluctuations of the groundwater level. Over the past thirty years, variations in water levels in the general vicinity of the project, on an average basis, have ranged from elevation 0 to +4 feet NGVD. These elevations are consistent with the groundwater levels researched for this geotechnical study. Groundwater was observed at a depth of about 2.6 to 3.8 feet below the existing site grades or at about elevation +1 to +2 feet NGVD at the time our field tests were performed. Groundwater measurements were taken at the time of drilling and may not represent actual static conditions. ENGINEERING PA " METERS We have used information from our field tests, our past experience, and correlation's to published literature to estimate engineering properties for the various soil /rock strata encountered on this project. We have subdivided the subsurface profile into a variety of strata for the purpose of our evaluation. Engineering properties are estimated in the table below. SU Y OF SUBSURFACE C NDITI NS Layer 1 Description: Average Thickness: Thickness Range: Range SPT N- Value: Modulus Value: Laver 2 Description: Thickness Range: Range SPT N- Value: Modulus Value: Limestone Fragments & Sand (possible Fill) 21A foot 2 to 3 foot 5 to 11 blows /foot 250 to 350 ksf (Reference 2) Sand /Silt* 0 to 7 feet 1 to 11 blows /foot <200 to 350 ksf (Reference 2) Mr. Michael Caban Miami Country Day School Laver 3 Description: Thickness Range: Range SPT N-Value: Modulus Value: *Layer 2 not identified in Test Boring ASP -3 EXISTING ROAD March 2, 2010 Page 5 Limestone 10+ feet 5 to 21 blows /foot 4,000 to 10,000 ksf (Reference 7) You also requested us to obtain information regarding the as -built condition of the existing road. You requested measurements of the thickness of the asphalt and an estimate of the thickness of the fill materials utilized for construction of the road base. The information based on our field observations is as follows: Test Location ASP -1 ASP -2 ASP -3 REPORT LIMITATIONS Asphalt Thickness 3/- inches 2-14-inches 2 -Y2- inches Road Base Thickness 9 -'/ - inches 8 -Y2 - inches 9- inches This consulting Report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the current project owners and other members of the project design team for the specific application to this project. This Report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted local geotechnical engineering practices, no other warranty is expressed or implied. The scope of services did not include any environmental assessment or investigation for the presence or absence of wetlands, chemically hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, surface water, groundwater or air, on or below or around the site. 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. If KACO is not afforded the opportunity to participate in construction related aspects of foundation installation as recommended in this Report, we can accept no responsibility for the interpretation of our recommendations made in this Report or for foundation performance. Mr. Michael Caban Miami Country Day School March 2, 2010 Page 6 REFERENCES 1. "Guidelines for Use in the Soils Investigation and Design of Foundations for Bridge Structures in the State of Florida," by John Schmertmann, Florida State Road Department, September 14, 1967. 2. Webb, D.L., Settlement of Structures on Sandy Sediments in Durban, South Africa, Conference on In -situ Behavior of Soil and Rock, Institute of Civil Engineers, 1969. 3. Tall Silos on Soft Limestone, by T.J. Kaderabek, Symposium on Engineering Geology and Soil Engineering, Pocatello, Idaho, March 1982. 4. Geotechnical Engineering for 3,200 Acre Development, ASCE, South Florida Section Annual Meeting, 1983, Cape Coral, Florida, prepared by T.J. Kaderabek. 5. Settlements Beneath Preload Test Fill, by Kaderabek and Reynolds, ASCE Volume 105, No. GT6, June 1979. 6. Foundation Engineering and Soil Mechanics by George Sowers, McMillan Publishing Co., New York, New York, 1979. 7. Miami Limestone Foundation Design and Construction, by Kaderabek and Reynolds, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Volume 107, No. GT7, July 1981. 8. Kaderabek, T.J., Geotechnical Design Miami -Dade County Administration Building, ASCE South Florida Section Annual Meeting, October 1981. Mr. Michael Caban Miami Country Day School CLOSURE March 2, 2010 Page 7 If you have questions about information contained in this Report, please contact the writer at 305/666 -3563. Sincerely, E c r -rn, P EQ3-v3 /° Pr •' ct Manager Florida License No. 57604 fez- ,.\GENs .8 • No. 51641 STATE OF 0 1 ry R. ds ein, .E. e Pres den orida License No. 51641 Attachments: Drawing No. 1- Vicinity Map (A -1) Drawing No. 2 -Test Location Plan (A -2) Drawing No. 3- Generalized Subsurface Profiles (A -3) Key to Symbols (A-4) Notes Related to Test Borings (A -5) Records of Test Boring (A -6 to A -8) Results of Borehole Drainage Test (A -9 to A -12) Distribution: Original & 4 Copies to Addressee Via U.S. Mail Copy via Email Copy to KACO File F:1DOCIKACO Reports110118 -Miami Country Day School -NE 107th Ave - Miaml -Geo Rpt- 03- 02- 10.doc Approximate_ `` roject Vicinity- g Notes: Aerial photograph is courtesy of Miami -Dade County, 2009. : ..;North Miami.': i 922; im 19L GaDi 19221 fi „cayne 7ark J. ..a 11 asry iF_0.0, Nlaiai SFiures rn acti r! .. BISCAYNE AQUAT.0 PAESEAVE ".nlss Creak 6 KACO KADERABEK COMPANY Geotechnical Engineering Construction Materials Testing Soil Borings/Monitor Wells DWG TITLE: Vicinity Map DWN BY: Y,2 PROJ NAME: Miami Country Day School CKD BY. ' 8 ,7,V PROJ. NO: 10118 DATE: 02/18/10 DWG NO: 1 APD BY Legend - Soil Boring Test Location ASP -1 ♦ - Drainage Test Location P -1 Notes: 1. Test locations are shown as approximate. 2. Test location symbols are not to scale. 3. Aerial Photograph - Courtesy of Google- Earth, 2009 KACO KADERABEK COMPANY Geotechnical Engineering Construction Materials Testing Soil Borings/Monitor Wells DWG TITLE: Test Location Plan DWN BY: PROJ NAME: Miami Country Day School CKD BY: egY PROJ. NO: 10118 DATE: 02/18/10 DWG NO: 2 APD BY -® 0 z O :31NVN road 0 0 0 0 31111 DM ellyoad eoepnsgns pezyweue 0 0 z w 0 5 - 10 - 15 10 20 30 ASP -1 10 20 30 ASP -2 10 20 30 ASP -3 7i4%1Y • 2 • °fPa' 2 1 1 7 5 4 5 6 5 6 9 4 4 Strata symbols LIMESTONE FRAGMENTS & SAND (POSSIBLE FILL) SAND I LIMESTONE SILT 1111 10 15 Oa Note: Refer to the appended Record of Test Boring log(s) for a complete description of the stratum(s) shown above. Symbol Descr9 pti Strata symbols XEY SY L n LIMESTONE FRAGMENTS & SAND (POSSIBLE FILL) SAND LIMESTONE SILT Misc. Symbols T Groundwater level measured at boring completion. The date checked is indicated. Drill rejection Soil Samplers Standard penetration test. 140 lb. hammer dropped 30" Notes: 1. Exploratory borings were drilled on 02/15/10 using a 4 -inch diameter continuous flight power auger. 2. No free water was encountered at the time of drilling or when re- checked the following day. 3. Boring locations were taped from existing features and elevations extrapolated from the final design schematic plan. 4. These logs are subject to the limitations, conclusions, and recommendations in this report. 5. Results of tests conducted on samples recovered are reported on the logs. 1. Ge on NOTES RELATED TO RECORDS DS OF TEST QOR.11NG AND • GENE ° ALLOZED SUBSURFACE PQOFDUCE KA,DEPAC C G3 COMPANY, NOAH, FLORODA undwater level was encountered and recorded (if shown) f 11 wing the c*mpleti • n of the soli test boring e date indicated. Fluctuations in ground water levels are commc•)n; consult report teat for a discussion. a 01, 2. The b ring location was identified in the field by offsetting fir tape and survey wheel. 3. The b:+ rehole was backffiiled to site grade foil • wing boring c mix when pavement was encountered. 4. The Rec ff the s (6) rd ff Test III samples. 5. Th Record c ff Test tent. ring represents <.)ur interpretata • m existing reference marks and using a cic,th mpietion, and patched with asphalt c n of field conditions bas oring is subject t,• limitations, conclusions and rec 6, id patch n engineering i aminati:•,n mmendations presented in the reps it 6. "Field Test Data" shown on the Record of Test r),oring indicated as 11/6 refers t the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) and means 11 hammer blows drove the sampler 6 inches. SPT uses a 140 -p Land hammer hailing 30 inches. 7. The N -value from the SPT is the sum of !,e hammer ws required t 6 -inch increments. drive the sampler the sec nd and third 8. The soil/rock strata interfaces shown >n the r=;ecord of Test = oring are approximate and may va; y from those shown. The soillrock conditi;•,ns shr.wn on the ';ec • rd of Test Boring refer to conditi:• ns at the specific location tested; soil/us cis conditions may vary between test locations. 9. Relative density for sands/gravels and c • nsistency for silts /clays and limestone are described as follows: Limestone Relative Consistency SPT MOWS/ Foot Sand/Gravels Relative Density SPT Blows/ Foot Slit/Clay Relative Consistency SPT Riows/ Foot 0-4 5 -10 Very Loose Loose 0 -2 Very Soft 0 -20 Very Soft 3-4 Soft 21 -30 Soft 11-30 Medium dense 5-8 Firm 31-45 Medium Hard 31-50 Dense 9 -15 Stiff 46-60 Moderately Hard • ver 50 Very Dense 16-30 Very St 61 -5012" Hard ver 30 Hard ver 5012" Very Hard 10. Grain size descriptions are as follows: 11. NAME milder Cobbles Coarse Gravel Fine Gravel Coarse Sand Medium Sand Fine Sand Fines • effinition related t PROPORTION About 10% About 25% About 50% SIZE LIMITS 12 inches or more 3 t. 12 inches 3/4 to 3 inches No. 4 siev - to 3/4 inch No. 10 to No. 4 sieve No. 40 to No. 10 sieve No. 200 to No. 40 sieve Smaller than No. 200 sieve adjectives used in soil/rock descriptions: APPROXIMATE ROOT ` A IETE..,, A DJECTIVE Less than 1132" Fin roots 1/32" to 114" Small roots 1/4" to 1" Medium roo Greater than 1" Large roots ADJECTIVE with a trace with some and A -5 KADERABEK COMPANY RD OF TEST WANG PROJECT/LOCATION: Miami Country Day School ORING NO: ASP-1 PROJECT NO: 10118 START: 02/15/10 FINIS : : 02/15/10 WEATHER: Sunny BORING LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan DRILLER: J.Johnson/H.F DRILL: Mobile B-80 DRILL CONTRACTO Kaderabek Company ELEVATION (EST.):+ 5 FEET NGVD GROUNDWATER: 3.2 feet (depth) DATE CBECICED: 02/15/10 ORING METHOD: otary drill with wash, mud, & casing FLUID LOSS: None ELEV./ DEPTH SOIL SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA MAJOR SOIL COMPONENT OTHER COMPONENTS STANDARD PENETRATION TEST N CURVE DEPTH \"7 02/1i210 T 6 4 LIMESTONE FRAGMENTS SAND (POSSI Tg LE FILL) SAND Medium dense, brown, silty, 3/4" asphalt Very loose, brown, silty LIMESTONE Loose, brown, with thin limestone layers Loose, brown Top of rock Very soft, gray, shells, with some sand 3'-5' 6'-8' W-10' 13'-15' 11 9 9 5 10 30 50 9 • Refer to Notes and Legend on separate sheet for additional information. This Record of Test Boring is part of the project Geotechnical Report It should not be assumed that changes in the "N-Value" are a linear function. Soil and rock samples recovered usmg a ASTM ID-1586 test proceedures. A-6 RECORD O PROJECT/LOCATION: Miami Country Day School PROJECT NO: 10118 ORING LOCATION: DRILL: Mobile B -80 ELEVATION (EST.):+ ORING METHOD: T BORING 0 ORING NO: ASP -2 START: 02/15/10 FINISH: 02/15/10 WEATHER: Sunny Refer to Test Location Plan DRILLER: JJJohnson/H.F DRILL C NTRACTO!' : Kaderabek Company 5 FEET NGVD G • OUNDWATE : 3,4 feet (depth) DATE CHECKED: 02/15/10 otary drill with wash, mud, & casing FLUID LOSS: None ELEV./ DEPTH SOIL SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA MAJOR SOIL COMPONENT OTHER COMPONENTS STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DEPTH N 5-r0 0-x--5 - 5-1-10 - 10-i -15 -15 -1- 20 -20 -I-- 25 -25 -1- 30 -30 -+- 35 LIMESTINE Loose, brown, silty, 2 -1/4" F H GME \TS & SAND asphalt SSIBLE FILL) (P SAN SILT LIMIEST 'NE Very loose, brown Very soft, tan Very soft, tan Very soft, gray, shells 0' -2' 8' -8' 8' -10' 13' -15' 5 2 9 11 8 CURVE 10 30 50 Refer to Notes and Legend on separate sheet for additional information. This Record of Test Boring is part of the project Geotechnical Report It should not be assumed that changes in the 'N-Value" are a linear function. Soil and rock samples recovered usma a ASTM D -1586 test proceedures. A -9 KADERABEK COMPANY RECORD O L- -J aon PROJECT/LOCATION: Miami Country Day School B`rRING NO: ASP -3 PROJECT NO: 10118 START: 02/15/10 FINISH: 02/15/10 WEATHER: Sunny BORING LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan DRILLER: JJJohnson/H.F DRILL: Mobile B-80 DRILL CONTRACT R: Kaderabek Company ELEVATION (EST,):+ 5 I+'EET NGVD G OUNDWATE o 2.6 feet (depth) DATE CHECKED: 02/15/10 ORING METHOD: Rotary drill with wash, mud, casing FL III LOSS: None ELEV./ DEPTH SOIL SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA MAJOR SOIL COMPONENT OTHER COMPONENTS STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DEPTH N CURVE 5 -s- 0 0 -i-- 5 - 5-+-10 -10 -1-15 -15 20 -20 -i- 25 -25 -1-- 30 -30 -1- 35 LIMESTONE F .MEWS S ND (POSSI LE FILL) L ESTONE Medium dense, brown, silty, 2-1/2" asphalt Very soft, tan, with some sand Very soft, tan Soft, tan Very soft, tan, shells, with some sand 0' -2' 6' -8' 13' -15' 11 12 11 21 13 10 30 50 Refer to Notes and Legend on separate sheet for additional information. This Record of Test Boring is part of the project Geotechnical Report. It should not be assumed that changes in the "N- Value" are a linear function. Soil and rock samoles recover' usm' a ASTM D-1586 test .roceedures. A -8 RESULTS OF CONSTANT HEAD FIELD 1OREH #LE DRAMA GE TEST KADERABEK COMPANY, MIN MI, FLORIDA TACO PROJECT NO. 10118 PROJECT NAME: Miami Country Day School LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan TEST NO.: P -1 TEST DATE: 15- Feb -10 TEST PERFORMED BY: J.Johnson /H.F APPROXIMATE GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION, FEET, NGVD: + 5.0 DEPTH TO STABILIZED GROUNDWATER, FEET: 2.7 DEPTH TO WATER SURFACE DURING TEST, FEET: Surface HEAD, TEST HEAD, TEST HYDRAULIC HEAD, (H), FEET: 2.7 DEPTH OF OPEN HOLE AFTER DRILLING, FEET: 15.0 PERFORATED CASING LENGTH, FEET: 15.0 PERFORATED CASING DIAMETER, OR HOLE DIAMETER, (D), FEET: 0.5 LENGTH OF BOREHOLE BELOW STABILIZED GROUNDWATER, (S), FEET: 12.3 TIME TO STABILIZE TEST HEAD, MINUTES: 1.0 AVERAGE FLOW RATE AT CONSTANT HEAD, (Q), CFS: 0.0290 HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY, (K) CFS /SQ. FT. - FOOT HEAD: 0.00050 FORMULA USED: SFWMD SFWMD USUAL OPEN _ 4Q HOLE FORMULA K 3.14(D)[2(H)(H) +4(H)(S) +(H)(D)] TIME, WATER METER WATER METER FLOW RATE (Q) MINUTES READING, READING, END GALLONS/MINUTE 1 40 53 13 2 53 66 13 3 66 79 13 4 79 92 13 5 92 105 13 6 105 118 13 7 118 131 13 8 131 144 13 9 144 157 13 10 157 170 13 Average (Q) a 13 GPM x 0.00223 a 0.0290 CFS DEPTH BELOW GROUND SURFACE, (ft) 0.0 to 3.5 3.5 to 12.0 12.0 to 15.0 SOIL/ROCK DESCRIPTION Brown LIMESTONE FRAGMENT and 5 Tan LIMESTONE with some sand Gray SAND A -9 ND (POSSIBLE FILL) ESULTS F CONSTANT HEAD FIELD BOREHOLE DRAINAGE TEST KADERABEK C,• IVIPANY, IliilA11iII, FLORIDA CO PROJECT NO. 10118 PROJECT NAME: Miami Country Day School LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan TEST NO.: P -2 TEST DATE: 15- Feb -10 TEST PERFORMED BY: J.Johnson /H.F APPROXIMATE GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION, FEET, NGVD: + 5.0 DEPTH TO STABILIZED GROUNDWATER, FEET: 3.2 DEPTH TO WATER SURFACE DURING TEST, FEET: Surface HEAD, TEST HEAD, TEST HYDRAULIC HEAD, (H), FEET: 3.2 DEPTH OF OPEN HOLE AFTER DRILLING, FEET: 15.0 PERFORATED CASING LENGTH, FEET: 15.0 PERFORATED CASING DIAMETER, OR HOLE DIAMETER, (D), FEET: 0.5 LENGTH OF BOREHOLE BELOW STABILIZED GROUNDWATER, (S), FEET: 11.8 TIME TO STABILIZE TEST HEAD, MINUTES: 1.0 AVERAGE FLOW RATE AT CONSTANT HEAD, (Q), CFS: 0.0285 HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY, (K) CFS /SQ. FT. - FOOT HEAD: 0.00042 FORMULA USED: SFWMD SFWMD USUAL OPEN - HOLE FORMULA K 3.14(D)[2(H)(H)+4(H)(S)+(H)(D)] TIME, WATER METER WATER METER FLOW RATE (Q) MINUTES READING, READING, END GALLONS /MINUTE 1 50 62 12 2 62 74 12 3 74 87 13 4 87 99 12 5 99 113 14 6 113 126 13 7 126 139 13 8 139 151 12 9 151 165 14 10 165 178 13 Average (Q) = 13 GPM x 0.00223 = 0.0285 CFS DEPTH BELOW GROUND SURFACE, (ft) 0.0 to 2.5 2.5 to 11.5 11.5 to 15.0 SOIL/ROCK DESCRIPTION Brown LIMESTONE FRAGMENT and SAND (POSSIBLE FILL) Tan LIMESTONE with some sand Gray SAND A -10 RESULTS OF C NSTANT HAD FIELD OREHOLE DRAINAGE TEST DERABEK COMPANY, MIAMI, FLORIDA KACO PR JECT N . 10118 PROJECT NAME: Miami Country Day School LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan TEST NO.: P -3 TEST DATE: 15- Feb -10 TEST PERFORMED BY: J.Johnson /H.F APPROXIMATE GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION, FEET, NGVD: + 5.0 DEPTH TO STABILIZED GROUNDWATER, FEET: 3.5 DEPTH TO WATER SURFACE DURING TEST, FEET: Surface HEAD, TEST HEAD, TEST HYDRAULIC HEAD, (H), FEET: 3.5 DEPTH OF OPEN HOLE AFTER DRILLING, FEET: 15.0 PERFORATED CASING LENGTH, FEET: 15.0 PERFORATED CASING DIAMETER, OR HOLE DIAMETER, (D), FEET: 0.5 LENGTH OF BOREHOLE BELOW STABILIZED GROUNDWATER, (S), FEET: 11.5 TIME TO STABILIZE TEST HEAD, MINUTES: 1.0 AVERAGE FLOW RATE AT CONSTANT HEAD, (Q), CFS: 0.0357 HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY, (K) CFS /SQ. FT. - FOOT HEAD: 0.00049 FORMULA USED: SFWMD SFWMD USUAL OPEN 4Q HOLE FORMULA s 3.14(D)[2(H)(H) +4(H)(S) +(H)(D)] TIME, WATER METER WATER METER FLOW RATE (Q) MINUTES READING, READING, END GALLONS/MINUTE 1 60 76 16 2 76 92 16 3 92 108 16 4 108 124 16 5 124 140 16 6 140 156 16 7 156 172 16 8 172 188 16 9 188 204 16 10 204 220 16 Average (Q) = 16 GPM x 0.00223 = 0.0357 CFS DEPTH BELOW GROUND SURFACE, (ft) 0.0 to 2.5 2.5 to 11.5 11.5 to 15.0 SOIL/ROCK DESCRIPTION Brown LIMESTe NE FRAGMENT and SAND (POSSIBLE FILL) Brown SAND Gray SAND with thin layers of limestone A -11 RESULTS • F C INSTANT HEAD FIELD BOREHOLE DRAINAGE TEST DERABEK COMPANY, °IAMI, FLORIDA KACI PROJECT NO. 10118 PROJECT NAME: Miami Country Day School LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan TEST NO.: P-4 TEST DATE: 15- Feb -10 TEST PERFORMED BY: J.Johnson /H.F APPROXIMATE GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION, FEET, NGVD: + 5.0 DEPTH TO STABILIZED GROUNDWATER, FEET: 3.8 DEPTH TO WATER SURFACE DURING TEST, FEET: Surface HEAD, TEST HEAD, TEST HYDRAULIC HEAD, (H), FEET: 3.8 DEPTH OF OPEN HOLE AFTER DRILLING, FEET: 15.0 PERFORATED CASING LENGTH, FEET: 15.0 PERFORATED CASING DIAMETER, OR HOLE DIAMETER, (D), FEET: 0.5 LENGTH OF BOREHOLE BELOW STABILIZED GROUNDWATER, (S), FEET: 11.2 TIME TO STABILIZE TEST HEAD, MINUTES: 1.0 AVERAGE FLOW RATE AT CONSTANT HEAD, (Q), CFS: 0.0256 HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY, (K) CFS /SQ. FT. - FOOT HEAD: 0.00032 FORMULA USED: SFWMD SFWMD USUAL OPEN - HOLE FORMULA K 3.14(D)[2(H)(H) +4(H)(S) +(H)(D)] TIME, MINUTES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 WATER METER READING, 10 21 33 44 56 68 79 91 103 114 WATER METER FLOW RATE (Q) READING, END GALLONS/MINUTE 21 33 44 56 68 79 91 103 114 125 Average (Q) = 12 GPM x 0.00223 = 0.0256 CFS DEPTH BELOW GROUND SURFACE, (ft) 0.0 to 1.5 1.5 to 6.5 6.5 to 11.0 11.0 to 12.5 12.5 to 15.0 11 12 11 12 12 11 12 12 11 11 SOIUROCK DESCRIPTION Brown LIMESTONE FRAGMENT and SAND (POSSIBLE FILL) Brown silty SAND with some organics Brown SAND Gray SAND with thin layers of limestone Gray SAND A -12 • Geotechnical Engineering • Foundation Engineering • Construction Materials Testing • Soil Borings /Monitor Wells Thomas J. Kaderabek, P.E. Barry R. Goldstein, P.E. March 2, 2010 Mr. Michael Caban Miami Country Day School 601 NE 107th Avenue Miami, Florida 33161 9565 NW 40th Street Rd. Phone: 305/666 -3563 Miami, Florida 33178 Fax: 305/666 -3069 Re: Report of Subsurface Exploration, Borehole Drainage Testing and Asphalt Thickness Along 107th Street Miami Country Day School - 601 NE 107th Avenue Miami shores, Florida KACO Project No.10118 Mr. Caban: We submit this Report in fulfillment of a scope of services described in our Proposal No. 10 -128 dated February 11, 2010. The work on this project was authorized by acceptance of our Professional Services Agreements. This Report describes our understanding of the project, presents our evaluation, and provides foundation recommendations. PROJECT INFORMATION Information about this project was provided by Mr. Michael Caban with Miami Country Day School. The school is located at 610 NE 107th Avenue in Miami Shores, Florida. We were not been provided any documents to aid in the preparation of this Report. We were provided with a description of the portion of roadway that the work was to encompass. We understand that four (4) borehole drainage tests are needed. The tests will be performed along 107t" Avenue, between 6th Avenue and the point where the road ends to the east of 6th Avenue. The road length is approximately 950 feet. All testing was performed along the south side of the road due to the presence of overhead power lines along the north side of the road. You also requested us to obtain information regarding the shallow soil conditions and thickness of the asphalt and road base material along the existing road. Mr. Michael Caban Miami Country Day School PU = POSE March 2, 2010 Page 2 The purpose of our services on this project was to perform in -situ drainage tests, determine the thickness of the asphalt and road base and explore the shallow subsurface conditions along a portion of NW 107th Street. FIELD TESTS The subsurface conditions were explored using soil test borings and borehole constant head drainage tests. KACO was provided with the general locations of where to perform the soil borings and the drainage test. We have located the approximate test locations on the appended Drawing No. 2. Drainage Tests — Four (4) drainage tests were performed for this project. The borehole drainage tests were performed by rotating a roller bit and casing to the test depths of 15 feet below grade. A slotted PVC pipe (minimum diameter of 6 ") was installed within the full hole. Next, with the borehole open, water was pumped into the borehole to develop a test hydraulic head. Once the hydraulic head was stabilized, the average flow rate into the borehole was recorded. A formula developed by the South Florida Water Management District was used to estimate hydraulic conductivity. The results of the borehole percolation tests are summarized in the table below, and appended on the sheets entitled Results of Constant Head Field Borehole Drainage Test. Included with the results are descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered at each test location. Test Number Te t Depth (feet) Hydr auiic Conductivity (K) (cfe per eglu = re f ct per f • of f h d) P -1 15 0.00050 P -2 15 0.00042 P -3 15 0.00049 P-4 15 0.00032 Soil Test Borings — Three (3) soil test borings were performed as part of our work scope. Borings were extended to a depth of approximately 15 feet below the existing roadway ground surface. The standard penetration test was used as the investigative tool within the borings. Penetration tests were performed in substantial accordance with ASTM Procedure D -1586, "Penetration Test and Split - Barrel Sampling of Soils." This test procedure drives a 1.4 -inch 1.0. split -tube sampler into the soil profile using a 140 -pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the second and third 6 -inch increments is the soil N- value, in blows per foot, and is an indication of soil strength. The soil samples recovered from the soil borings were classified and stratified by a Geotechnical Engineer. The results of the classification and stratification are shown in the appended Records of Test Boring. It should be noted that soil conditions may vary between the strata interfaces which are shown. The soil boring data reflects information from a specific test location only. Mr. Michael Caban Miami Country Day School March 2, 2010 Page 3 It should be noted that subsurface conditions may vary between the test locations. The test data reflects information from a specific test location only. LOCAL GEOLOGY/SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Miami -Dade County is located on the southern flank of a stable carbonate platform on which thick deposits of limestones, dolomites and evaporites have accumulated. The upper two hundred feet of the soil profile is composed predominantly of limestone and quartz sand. These sediments were deposited during several glacial and interglacial stages when the ocean was at elevations higher than present. In many portions of Miami -Dade County, surface sand deposits of the Pamlico Formation are encountered. The Pamlico sands have a thickness of 2 to 5 feet and overlie the Miami Limestone. In western Miami -Dade County, portions of the Everglades Region interfinger with the Pamlico sand. The Everglades soil consist of peat and calcareous silt (marl). The Miami Limestone is a soft to moderately hard, white, porous to very porous, sometimes sandy, oolitic calcareous cemented grainstone. The Miami Limestone outcrops in portions of Miami -Dade County. The Miami Limestone has a maximum thickness of about 35 feet along the Atlantic Coastal Ridge and thins sharply near the coastline and more gradually in a westerly direction. The Miami Limestone was formed about 130,000 years ago at a time when the sea level was twenty -five feet higher than it is today. This environment facilitated formation of concentrically layered sand sized carbonate grains called oolites. These grains formed by repeated precipitation of calcium carbonate around the nucleus of a sand or shell grain. The Miami Limestone can be separated into two facies: the barrier bar oolitic facies and the tidal shoal limestone facies. The barrier bar facies is characterized by lenses of oolitic limestone separated by intermittent, 1 -inch thick or Tess, uncemented s-nd layers (cross - bedded limestone). Zones of higher porosity are characteristic and parallel the bedding planes of the cross - bedded limestone. The tidal shoal limestone facies is characterized by a distinct lack of bedding planes. In addition, burrowing organisms have churned previously deposited sediments, which has resulted in high porosity channels in the rock. These ancient channels give the rock an appearance of a hardened sponge in some areas. The field tests performed for this project disclose subsurface conditions which are consistent with the geology described above. Generally, a surficial layer of fill overlies a sand or silt or a limestone formation. A limestone formation was encountered in all test borings at a depth of between 3 to 11 feet from grade. The detailed subsurface conditions are presented graphically in the attached Generalized Subsurface Profile and in more detail on the Records of Test Boring. Mr. Michael Caban Miami Country Day School GROUNDWY.TER HYDP LOGY March 2, 2010 Page 4 Two principal aquifer systems have been defined in Miami -Dade County, the Floridian Aquifer and the Biscayne Aquifer. The depth of the top of the Floridian Aquifer, locally, is approximately 1,000 feet with the base occurring at approximately 3,700 feet. The Biscayne Aquifer varies in thickness and is the primary source of potable water in Miami -Dade County. The maximum aquifer thickness of approximately 200 feet occurs along the Atlantic Coast in northeast Miami -Dade County. Primarily, the aquifer is recharged by local rainfall. Aquifer discharge occurs principally by evapotranspiration, pumping for public water supply, and general unrestricted flow into the ocean. The aquifer, however, is regulated by the South Florida Water Management District through a network of natural rivers and man -made canals to maintain a degree of consistency in the groundwater level. Unusual conditions, such as hurricanes and extended drought periods, may result in uncontrolled large scale fluctuations of the groundwater level. Over the past thirty years, variations in water levels in the general vicinity of the project, on an average basis, have ranged from elevation 0 to +4 feet NGVD. These elevations are consistent with the groundwater levels researched for this geotechnical study. Groundwater was observed at a depth of about 2.6 to 3.8 feet below the existing site grades or at about elevation +1 to +2 feet NGVD at the time our field tests were performed. Groundwater measurements were taken at the time of drilling and may not represent actual static conditions. ENGINEERING PA METERS We have used information from our field tests, our past experience, and correlation's to published literature to estimate engineering properties for the various soil /rock strata encountered on this project. We have subdivided the subsurface profile into a variety of strata for the purpose of our evaluation. Engineering properties are estimated in the table below. SUMMARY F SUBSURFACE COIiWITI Layer 1 Description: Average Thickness: Thickness Range: Range SPT N- Value: Modulus Value: Layer 2 Description: Thickness Range: Range SPT N-Value: Modulus Value: • Limestone Fragments & Sand ( ossible Fill 2'/2 foot 2 to 3 foot 5 to 11 blows /foot 250 to 350 ksf (Reference 2) Sand /Silt* 0 to 7 feet 1 to 11 blows /foot <200 to 350 ksf (Reference 2) Mr. Michael Caban Miami Country Day School Laver 3 Description: Thickness Range: Range SPT N- Value: Modulus Value: *Layer 2 not identified in Test Boring ASP -3 EXISTING ROAD March 2, 2010 Page 5 Limestone 10+ feet 5 to 21 blows /foot 4,000 to 10,000 ksf (Reference 7) You also requested us to obtain information regarding the as -built condition of the existing road. You requested measurements of the thickness of the asphalt and an estimate of the thickness of the fill materials utilized for construction of the road base. The information based on our field observations is as follows: Test Location ASP -1 ASP -2 ASP -3 Asphalt Thickness %- inches 2%-inches 2 -'/- inches Road Base Thickness 94 - inches 8 -1/ - inches 9- inches REPORT LIMITATIONS This consulting Report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the current project owners and other members of the project design team for the specific application to this project. This Report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted local geotechnical engineering practices, no other warranty is expressed or implied. The scope of services did not include any environmental assessment or investigation for the presence or absence of wetlands, chemically hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, surface water, groundwater or air, on or below or around the site. 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. If KACO is not afforded the opportunity to participate in construction related aspects of foundation installation as recommended in this Report, we can accept no responsibility for the interpretation of our recommendations made in this Report or for foundation performance. Mr. Michael Caban Miami Country Day School REFERENCES March 2, 2010 Page 6 1. "Guidelines for Use in the Soils Investigation and Design of Foundations for Bridge Structures in the State of Florida," by John Schmertmann, Florida State Road Department, September 14, 1967. 2. Webb, D.L., Settlement of Structures on Sandy Sediments in Durban, South Africa, Conference on In -situ Behavior of Soil and Rock, Institute of Civil Engineers, 1969. 3. Tall Silos on Soft Limestone, by T.J. Kaderabek, Symposium on Engineering Geology and Soil Engineering, Pocatello, Idaho, March 1982. 4. Geotechnical Engineering for 3,200 Acre Development, ASCE, South Florida Section Annual Meeting, 1983, Cape Coral, Florida, prepared by T.J. Kaderabek. 5. Settlements Beneath Preload Test Fill, by Kaderabek and Reynolds, ASCE Volume 105, No. GT6, June 1979. 6. Foundation Engineering and Soil Mechanics by George Sowers, McMillan Publishing Co., New York, New York, 1979. 7. Miami Limestone Foundation Design and Construction, by Kaderabek and Reynolds, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Volume 107, No. GT7, July 1981. 8. Kaderabek, T.J., Geotechnical Design Miami -Dade County Administration Building, ASCE South Florida Section Annual Meeting, October 1981. Mr. Michael Caban Miami Country Day School CLOSURE March 2, 2010 Page 7 If you have questions about information contained in this Report, please contact the writer at 305/666 -3563. Sincerely, KADE CO . PANY E is ; -rn, P.E. Pr • -ct Manager Florida License No. 57604 a s �' .. \GENO I - : No. 5164 �*: * STATE OF Ba ?5 '•.•� IVjc ' es9dent It% ' �:Z��'' �;�' tag License No. 51641 �"% SSIO Attachments: Drawing No. 1- Vicinity Map (A -1) Drawing No. 2 -Test Location Plan (A -2) Drawing No. 3- Generalized Subsurface Profiles (A -3) Key to Symbols (A-4) Notes Related to Test Borings (A -5) Records of Test Boring (A -6 to A -8) Results of Borehole Drainage Test (A -9 to A -12) Distribution: Original & 4 Copies to Addressee Via U.S. Mail Copy via Email Copy to KACO File F :\DOC\KACO Reports \10118-Miaml Country Day School -NE 107th Ave - Miami -Geo Rpt- 03- 02- 10.doc KADERABEK COMPANY Approximate Eroject Vicinity- Br. Notes: Aerial photograph is courtesy of Miami -Dade County, 2009. 13 17:1,1=-1 _ ?22' 11'4'i:it icrlh Miami. Biscayne Park N., t i :4, a 0 P termed Paffs MI ai SFiores rn �: • El Portal RISQAYNE AQUATIC PRESERVE 411 :33 Cot ek G KACO KADERABEK COMPANY Geotechnical Engineering Construction Materials Testing Soil Borings/Monitor Wells DWG TITLE: Vicinity Map DWN BY. ' 312 PROJ NAME: Miami Country Day School CKD BY: Sayep PROJ. NO: 10118 DATE: 02/18/10 DWG NO: 1 APD BY Legend - Soil Boring Test Location ASP -1 A - Drainage Test Location P -1 Notes: 1. Test locations are shown as approximate. 2. Test location symbols are not to scale. 3. Aerial Photograph - Courtesy of Google- Earth, 2009 KACO KADERABEK COMPANY Geotechnical Engineering Construction Materials Testing Soil Borings/Monitor Wells DWG TITLE: Test Location Plan DWN BY: 57.53 PROJ NAME: Miami Country Day School CKD BY: SYY PROJ. NO: 10118 [4TE: 02/18/10 DWG NO: 2 APD BY 0 6.. z ►d z :3wyN road 31111 oma avid eoapnsgns pezgaieuao w 0 m GNa 10 20 30 10 20 30 10 6 5 4 WOH /18 ASP -2 10 20 30 ASP -3 3 2 1 1 Q 6 5 2 4 8 12 -10 6 4 7 5 4 5 6 5 6 5 6 5 15 10 11 11 3 2 3 4 9 4 4 86 7 7 Strata symbols LIMESTONE FRAGMENTS & SAND (POSSIBLE FILL) SAND LIMESTONE 11111 SILT 10 15 Note: Refer to the appended Record of Test Boring log(s) for a complete description of the stratum(s) shown above. Symbol Descripti Strata symbols 9P :i p. 1111 c n KEY TO ON LS LIMESTONE FRAGMENTS SAND (POSSIBLE FILL) SAND LIMESTONE SILT Misc . Symbols T Groundwater level measured at boring completion. The date checked is indicated. Drill rejection Soil Samplers Standard penetration test. 140 lb. hammer dropped 30" Notes: 1. Exploratory borings were drilled on 02/15/10 using a 4 -inch diameter continuous flight power auger. 2. No free water was encountered at the time of drilling or when re- checked the following day. 3. Boring locations were taped from existing features and elevations extrapolated from the final design schematic plan. 4. These logs are subject to the limitations, conclusions, and recommendations in this report. 5. Results of tests conducted on samples recovered are reported on the logs. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. NOTES RELATED TO RECORDS OF TEST BORING AM GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE PROFILE KADEPABEK CCOREPANY, IMAM, FLORIDA, Groundw .ter level was enc mitered and recorded (f shown) ff ll wing the completion ,+off the soli test b *ring n the date indicated. Fluctuati,•,ns in gr,•>und water levels are comet •n; c • nsult report text fora iscussion. The boring location was Identified in the field by ffffsetting from existing reference marks and .:sin a cl:•;th tape and survey wheel. The borehole was backfilled to site grade f ill wing boring c mpietion, and patched with asphalt cold witch mix when pavement was encountered. The Record of Test oring represents our interpretation of field conditi f the soil samples. Th - Record ., f Test oring is subject ti limitations, c nclusions and rec:• mmendations presented in the report text. "Field Test Data" sh tarn on the 'record of Test Boring indicated as 1116 refers to the Standard Penetration Test QS "T) and means 11 hammer blows drove the sampler 6 inches. SPT uses a 140 -pound hammer bilging 30 inches. ns based n engineering examination 7. The N -value from th - SPT is the sum • f 6 -inch increments. t., e hammer blows required to drive the sampler the second and third 8. The soil/rock strata Interfaces shown n the 'record of Test •,ring are approximate and may vary/ from th I)se shown. The soillrock conditions sh . wn on the Record of Test = oring refer t conditions at the spec , c iocati • n tested; soil/rock c;• nditions may vary between test locations. 9. Relative densi for sands /gravels and consistenc for silts /cia s and limestone are described as follows: SPT SandlGravels Blows/ Relative Foot Density SPT Blows/ Foot Slit/Clay Relative Consistency SPT • Blows/ Foot Limestone Relative Consistency 0-4 5 -10 Ve Loose Loose 0 -2 Ve Soft 0 -20 3-4 Soft 21 -30 Ve Soft Soft 11 -30 Medium dense 5-8 Firm 31-45 31-50 Dense 9 -15 Stiff 46 -60 Medium Hard Moderately Hard Over 50 Very Dense 16 -30 er 30 Very Stiff Hard 61- 5012" Hard ver 5012" Very Hard 10. Grain sine descriptions ar NA E Boulder Cobbles Coarse Gravel Fine Gravel Coarse Sand Medium Sand Fine Sand Fines as follows: SIDE LIMITS 12 inches or more 3 to 12 inches 3/4 to 3 inches No. 4 sieve to 314 inch No. 10 to No. 4 sieve No. 40 to No. 10 sieve No. 200 to No. 40 sieve Smaller than No. 200 sieve 11. Definition related to adjectives used in soil/rock descriptions: PROPORTION ADJECTIVE <PPROXIIi1ATE ROOT DIAMETER About 10% with a trace Less than 1/32" About 25% with some 1/32" to 114" About 50% and 1/4" to 1" Greater than 1" A -5 ADJECTIVE Fine roots Small roots Medium roots Large roots [1014.14 KADERABEK COMPANY KADERABEK COMPANY CO OF TES` DORIKO OJECT/LOCATION: Miami Country ay School : DRYING NS: ASP -1 PROJECT NO: 10118 START: 02/15/10 FINISH: 02/15/10 WEATHER: Sunny ORING LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan DRILLE " : J.Joh son/H.F DRILL: Mobile B -80 DRILL CONTRACTO : I{aderabek Company ELEVATION (EST.):+ 5 FEET NGVD GROUNDWATER: 3.2 feet (depth) DATE CB[ECIKED: 02/15/10 FLUID LOSS: None ORING METHOD: Rotary drill with wash, mud, & casing ELEV./ DEPTH SOIL SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA MAJOR SOIL COMPONENT OTHER COMPONENTS STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DEPTH N 5-r0 02/15/10 0-+-5 -5 -1- 10 -10 f 15 -15 -1- 20 -20 -1- 25 -25 -1- 30 -30 $ 35 MEW NE FRAGMENTS a SAND (POSSI LE FILL) SAND Medium dense, brown, silty, 3/4" asphalt Very loose, brown, silty Loose, brown, with thin limestone layers Loose, brown LIMESTONE Top of rock Very soft, gray, shells, with some sand 0' -2' 3' -5, 6' -8' 8' -10' 13' -15' 11 2 9 9 5 CURVE 10 30 50 Refer to Notes and Legend on separate sheet for additional information. This Record of Test Boring is part of the project Geotechnical Report It should not be assumed that changes in the "N- Value" are a linear function. Soil and rock samples recovered using a ASTM D -1586 test 12roceedures. A- RECORD O TEST BOR PROJECT/LOCATION: Miami Country Day School PROJECT NO: 10110 START: 02/15/10 ORING LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan DRILL CONTRACTOR: DRILL: Mobile B-80 ELEVATION (EST.):+ ORIN G METHOD: FINISH: 02/15/10 5 FEET NGVD GROUNDWATE otary drill with wash, mud & casing BORING NO: ASP-2 WEATHER: Sunny RILLER: J,Johnson/H.F Kaderabek Company : 3.4 feet (depth) DATE CHECKED: 02/15/10 ¥LUID LOSS: None ELEV./ DEPTH SOIL SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA MAJOR SOIL COMPONENT OTHER COMPONENTS STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DEPTH N 10 -10 15 -15 20 -20 25 -25 30 -30 35 LIMESTONE GMENTS SAND SSIBLE FILL) (P SAN SILT LIMESTONE Loose, brown, silty, 2-1/4" asphalt Very loose, brown Very soft, tan Very soft, tan Very soft, gray, shells 8'-10' 13'-15' 5 2 9 11 8 CURVE 10 30 50 Refer to Notes and Legend on separate sheet for additional information. This Record of Test Boring is part of the project Geotechnical Report. It should not be assumed that changes in the "N-Value" are a linear function. Soil and rock samples recovered using a ASTM D-1586 test nroceedures. A-9 RECORD O `fErr BORMIG PROJECT/LOCATION: Miami Country Day School ORING NO: ASP -3 PROJECT NO: 10118 START: 02/15/10 FINISH: 02/15/10 WEATHER: Sunny BORING LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan DRILLER: J.Johnson/H.F DRILL: Mobile B -80 DRILL C NT.RACTOR: Kaderabek Company ELEVATION (EST.):+ 5 FEET NGVD G UNDWATER: 16 feet (depth) DATE CHECKED: 02/15/10 BORING METHOD: Rotary drill with wash, Iu,ud, casing FLUID LOSS: None ELEV./ DEPTH 5-,-0 SOIL SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA MAJOR SOIL COMPONENT OTHER COMPONENTS STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DEPTH N 0-+-5 - 5-1-1.0 - 10-1 -15 -15 -1-20 -20 $ 25 -25 -1-30 -30-1- 35 LIIVIEST"GCE F r MEWS & S D (POSSIBLE FILL) LI iu ESTONE Medium dense, brown, silty, 2-1/2" asphalt Very soft, tan, with some sand Very soft, tan Soft, tan Very soft, tan, shells, with some sand 0' -2' 6' -8' 8' -10' 13' -15' 11 12 11 21 13 CURVE 10 30 50 Refer to Notes and Legend on separate sheet for additional information. This Record of Test Boring is part of the project Geotechnical Report. It should not be assumed that changes in the "N- Value" are a linear function. Soil and rock samples recovered usm a ASTM D -1586 test. roceedures._ ._ A -8 RESULTS OF CONSTANT HEAD FIELD BOREHOLE DRAINAGE TEST KADERABEK COMPANY, MIAMI, FL I RIDA KACO PROJECT NO. 10118 PROJECT NAME: Miami Country Day School LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan TEST NO.: P -1 TEST DATE: 15- Feb -10 TEST PERFORMED BY: J.Johnson /H.F APPROXIMATE GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION, FEET, NGVD: + 5.0 DEPTH TO STABILIZED GROUNDWATER, FEET: 2.7 DEPTH TO WATER SURFACE DURING TEST, FEET: Surface HEAD, TEST HEAD, TEST HYDRAULIC HEAD, (H), FEET: 2.7 DEPTH OF OPEN HOLE AFTER DRILLING, FEET: 15.0 PERFORATED CASING LENGTH, FEET: 15.0 PERFORATED CASING DIAMETER, OR HOLE DIAMETER, (D), FEET: 0.5 LENGTH OF BOREHOLE BELOW STABILIZED GROUNDWATER, (S), FEET: 12.3 TIME TO STABILIZE TEST HEAD, MINUTES: 1.0 AVERAGE FLOW RATE AT CONSTANT HEAD, (Q), CFS: 0.0290 HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY, (K) CFS /SQ. FT. - FOOT HEAD: 0.00050 FORMULA USED: SFWMD SFWMD USUAL OPEN - HOLE FORMULA K 3.14(D)[2(H)(H) +4(H)(S) +(H)(D)] TIME, WATER METER WATER METER FLOW RATE (Q) MINUTES READING, READING, END GALLONS/MINUTE 1 40 53 13 2 53 66 13 3 66 79 13 4 79 92 13 5 92 105 13 6 105 118 13 7 118 131 13 8 131 144 13 9 144 157 13 10 157 170 13 Average (Q) = 13 GPM x 0.00223 = 0.0290 CFS DEPTH BELOW GROUND SURFACE, (ft) 0.0 to 3.5 3.5 to 12.0 12.0 to 15.0 SOIIJROCK DESCRIPTION Brown LIMESTONE FRAGMENT and S ,ND POSSI Tan LIMESTONE with some sand Gray SAND A -9 LE FILL RESULTS OF CONSTANT HAD FIELD BOREHOLE DRAINAGE TEST KADERABEK COMPANY, MIAMI, FLORIDA KACO PROJECT MO. 10118 PROJECT NAME: Miami Country Day School LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan TEST NO.: P -2 TEST DATE: 15-Feb-10 TEST PERFORMED BY: J.Johnson /H.F APPROXIMATE GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION, FEET, NGVD: + 5.0 DEPTH TO STABILIZED GROUNDWATER, FEET: 3.2 DEPTH TO WATER SURFACE DURING TEST, FEET: Surface HEAD, TEST HEAD, TEST HYDRAULIC HEAD, (H), FEET: 3.2 DEPTH OF OPEN HOLE AFTER DRILLING, FEET: 15.0 PERFORATED CASING LENGTH, FEET: 15.0 PERFORATED CASING DIAMETER, OR HOLE DIAMETER, (D), FEET: 0.5 LENGTH OF BOREHOLE BELOW STABILIZED GROUNDWATER, (S), FEET: 11.8 TIME TO STABILIZE TEST HEAD, MINUTES: 1.0 AVERAGE FLOW RATE AT CONSTANT HEAD, (Q), CFS: 0.0285 HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY, (K) CFS /SQ. FT. - FOOT HEAD: 0.00042 FORMULA USED: SFWMD SFWMD USUAL OPEN - HOLE FORMULA 3.14(D)[2(H)(H)+4(H)(S) +(H)(D)] TIME, WATER METER WATER METER FLOW RATE (Q) MINUTES READING, READING, END GALLONS /MINUTE 1 50 62 12 2 62 74 12 3 74 87 13 4 87 99 12 5 99 113 14 6 113 126 13 7 126 139 13 8 139 151 12 9 151 165 14 10 165 178 13 Average (Q) = 13 GPM x 0.00223 = 0.0285 CFS DEPTH BELOW GROUND SURFACE, (ft) 0.0 to 2.5 2.5 to 11.5 11.5 to 15.0 SOIL/ROCK DESCRIPTION Brown LIMESTONE FRAGMENT and SAN (POSSIBLE FILL) Tan LIMESTONE with some sand Gray SAND A -10 15A. KADERABEK COMPANY RESULTS OF CONSTANT HAD FIELD BOREHOLE DRAINAGE TEST KADERABEK COMPANY, IAMI, FLARIDA KACO PROJECT NO. 10118 PROJECT NAME: Miami Country Day School LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan TEST NO.: P -3 TEST DATE: 15- Feb -10 TEST PERFORMED BY: J.Johnson/H.F APPROXIMATE GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION, FEET, NGVD: + 5.0 DEPTH TO STABILIZED GROUNDWATER, FEET: 3.5 DEPTH TO WATER SURFACE DURING TEST, FEET: Surface HEAD, TEST HEAD, TEST HYDRAULIC HEAD, (H), FEET: 3.5 DEPTH OF OPEN HOLE AFTER DRILLING, FEET: 15.0 PERFORATED CASING LENGTH, FEET: 15.0 PERFORATED CASING DIAMETER, OR HOLE DIAMETER, (D), FEET: 0.5 LENGTH OF BOREHOLE BELOW STABILIZED GROUNDWATER, (S), FEET: 11.5 TIME TO STABILIZE TEST HEAD, MINUTES: 1.0 AVERAGE FLOW RATE AT CONSTANT HEAD, (Q), CFS: 0.0357 HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY, (K) CFS /SQ. FT. - FOOT HEAD: 0.00049 FORMULA USED: SFWMD SFWMD USUAL OPEN - HOLE FORMULA 3.14(D)[2(H)(H) +4(H)(S) +(H)(D)] TIME, WATER METER WATER METER FLOW RATE (Q) MINUTES READING, READING, END GALLONS/MINUTE 1 60 76 16 2 76 92 16 3 92 108 16 4 108 124 16 5 124 140 16 6 140 156 16 7 156 172 16 8 172 188 16 9 188 204 16 10 204 220 16 Average (Q) = 16 GPM x 0.00223 = 0.0357 CFS DEPTH BELOW GROUND SURFACE, (ft) 0.0 to 2.5 2.5 to 11.5 11.5 to 15.0 SOIL/ROCK DESCRIPTION Brown LIMESTONE FRAGMENT and SAND (POSSIBLE FILL) Brown SAND Gray SAND with thin layers of limestone A -11 RESULTS OF CONSTANT HEAD FIELD B REH LE DRAINAGE TEST KADE= r.BEK COMPANY, MIAMI, FLORIDA KACO PROJECT NO. 10118 PROJECT NAME: Miami Country Day School LOCATION: Refer to Test Location Plan TEST NO.: P-4 TEST DATE: 15- Feb -10 TEST PERFORMED BY: J.Johnson /H.F APPROXIMATE GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION, FEET, NGVD: + 5.0 DEPTH TO STABILIZED GROUNDWATER, FEET: 3.8 DEPTH TO WATER SURFACE DURING TEST, FEET: Surface HEAD, TEST HEAD, TEST HYDRAULIC HEAD, (H), FEET: 3.8 DEPTH OF OPEN HOLE AFTER DRILLING, FEET: 15.0 PERFORATED CASING LENGTH, FEET: 15.0 PERFORATED CASING DIAMETER, OR HOLE DIAMETER, (D), FEET: 0.5 LENGTH OF BOREHOLE BELOW STABILIZED GROUNDWATER, (S), FEET: 11.2 TIME TO STABILIZE TEST HEAD, MINUTES: 1.0 AVERAGE FLOW RATE AT CONSTANT HEAD, (Q), CFS: 0.0256 HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY, (K) CFS /SQ. FT. - FOOT HEAD: 0.00032 FORMULA USED: SFWMD SFWMD USUAL OPEN - HOLE FORMULA K 3.14(D)[2(H)(H) +4(H)(S) +(H)(D)] TIME, MINUTES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 WATER METER READING, 10 21 33 44 56 68 79 91 103 114 Average (Q) = 12 GPM x 0.00223 = DEPTH BELOW GROUND SURFACE, (ft) 0.0 to 1.5 1.5 to 6.5 6.5 to 11.0 11.0 to 12.5 12.5 to 15.0 WATER METER FLOW RATE (Q) READING, END GALLONS/MINUTE 21 33 44 56 68 79 91 103 114 125 0.0256 CFS 11 12 11 12 12 11 12 12 11 11 SOIL/ROCK DESCRIPTION Brown LIMESTONE FRAGMENT and SAND (POSSIBLE FILL) Brown silty SAND with some organics Brown SAND Gray SAND with thin layers of limestone Gray SAND A -12 Miami COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL August 18, 2011 Miami Shores Village Building Department RE: 601 NE 107th Street, Miami, FL 33161 To Whom It May Concern: Mr. Gary Butts, Chief Operations Officer, is an authorized signer on behalf of the corporation, Miami Country Day School, Inc., owner of the above addressed property. Sincerely, Anne Paulk, President Board of Trustees Miami Country Day School, Inc. NOTARY PuBsifirgiiiTeATIE,. °;:uFifo7 A ,th si Commission # DD850330 0../ Expires: FEB. 28, 2013 BOND.ED THRU ATLANTIC BONDING CO., INC. 601 Northeast 107 Street 1 Miami, Florida 33161 1 305.759.2843 1 Fax 305.759.4871 1 www.miamicountryday.org Every Student. Every Day. REPORT OF FIELD DENSITY TEST KADERABEK COMPANY 9565 NW 40 STREET ROAD, MIAMI, FL 33178 TELEPHONE NO.: 305/666 -3563 FAX NO.: 305/666 -3069 PROJECT NAME: MIAMI COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL CLIENT: SKYLINE MANAGEMENT, INC. CONTRACTOR: LIBERTY CONSTRUCTION % COMPACTION SPECIFIED: 95% ASTM D -1557 REFERENCE ELEVATION: BOTTOM OF FOOTINGS A1I PROJECT NO.: 10118 TEST DATE: 08 -12 -2011 TECHNICIAN: J. ALBELO NUCLEAR DEVICE NO.: 28828 DESCRIPTION OF AREA TESTED: LOOP DROP OFF AREA ENTRANCE AND EXIT FOOTINGS DISTANCE LABORATORY ABOVE OR MOISTURE/ BELOW PROBE FIELD DRY FIELD DENSITY REF. ELEV. DEPTH DENSITY MOISTURE RELATIONSHIP % (FEET) (INCHES) (PCF) (%) NUMBER COMPACTION TEST NUMBER 77 0 12 114.6 15.2 3 98.2 78 0 12 114.1 14.0 3 97.7 79 0 12 113.7 14.2 3 97.4 80 0 12 114.3 14.5 3 97.9 TEST NUMBER TEST LOCATION 77 BOTTOM OF FOOTING AT ENTRANCE LOOP DROP OFF AREA, EAST SIDE 78 BOTTOM OF FOOTING AT ENTRANCE LOOP DROP OFF AREA, WEST SIDE 79 BOTTOM OF FOOTING AT EXIT LOOP DROP OFF AREA, EAST SIDE 80 BOTTOM OF FOOTING AT EXIT LOOP DROP OFF AREA, WEST SIDE LABORATORY MOISTURE /DENSITY RELATIONSHIP DATA MAX. DRY OPTIMUM LAB DENSITY MOISTURE NUMBER SOIL DESCRIPTION (PCF) % DARK BROWN SAND WITH A TRACE OF LIMESTONE FRAGMENTS AND SILT .0 *= TEST DOES NOT MEET PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: RIC . ST A UST 16, 2011 FILE: KACO DATA TEST REPORTS 10118 FDT MIAMI COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL ••w14 6.7 G O4bs • ENS••• 9.0 1171 No. 5 1641 • STA°IE OF a ION I. KADERABEK COMPANY REPORT OF FIELD DENSITY TEST KADERABEK COMPANY 9565 NW 40 STREET ROAD, MIAMI, FL 33178 TELEPHONE NO.: 305/666 -3563 FAX NO.: 305/666 -3069 PROJECT NAME: MIAMI COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL CLIENT: SKYLINE MANAGEMENT, INC. CONTRACTOR: LIBERTY CONSTRUCTION % COMPACTION SPECIFIED: 95% ASTM D -1557 REFERENCE ELEVATION: BOTTOM OF FOOTINGS DESCRIPTION OF AREA TESTED: RADIUS WALL FOOTING N.E. AND S.E. CORNERS PROJECT NO.: 10118 TEST DATE: 08 -11 -2011 TECHNICIAN: J. ALBELO NUCLEAR DEVICE NO.: 28828 TEST NUMBER DISTANCE LABORATORY ABOVE OR MOISTURE/ BELOW PROBE FIELD DRY FIELD DENSITY REF. ELEV. DEPTH DENSITY MOISTURE RELATIONSHIP % (FEET) (INCHES) (PCF) (%) NUMBER COMPACTION 72 0 12 112.3 12.4 3 96.2 73 0 12 112.8 11.9 3 96.6 74 0 12 111.4 10.6 3 95.4 75 0 12 112.5 12.1 3 96.4 76 0 12 113.7 12.0 3 97.4 TEST NUMBER TEST LOCATION 72 RADIUS WALL FOOTING N.E. CORNER 73 RADIUS WALL FOOTING S.E. CORNER 74 ISOLATED FOOTING AT N.E. CORNER, NORTH SIDE 75 ISOLATED FOOTING AT N.E. CORNER, CENTER 76 ISOLATED FOOTING AT N.E. CORNER, SOUTH SIDE LABORATORY MOISTURE /DENSITY RELATIONSHIP DATA LAB NUMBER SOIL DESCRIPTION MAX. DRY OPTIMUM DENSITY MOISTURE (PCF) 3 DARK BROWN SAND WITH A TRACE OF LIMESTOF . FRAGMENTS AND SILT Q�'t ••• • GOV "'••061 '.. ',1% 9.0 ifq- %OEN* *= TEST DOES NOT MEET PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS. .' RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: AI ER • J. : RN, AUGUST 16, 2011 FILE: KACO DATA TEST REPORTS 10118 FDT MIAMI COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL • STATE OF • °A4, •; 07/13/2011 10:30 FAX 1 800 685 7530 DATA SCAN FIELD SERVICES 81001 $$$ TX REPORT $$$ TRANSMISSION OK TX /R% NO 1567 RECIPIENT ADDRESS 93055732620 DESTINATION ID ST. TIME 07/13 10:30 TIME USE 00'26 PAGES SENT 1 RESULT OK Permit No: 11 -1143 Job Name: July 13, 2011 Miami Shores Viiiage Building Department 10050 N.E.2nd Avenue Miami Shores, Florida 33138 Tel: (305) 795.2204 Fax: (305) 756.8972 Page 1 of 1 Building Critique Sheet ,-,1) Plans must be approved by Miami dade DERM. -2) Plans must be approved by Miami Dade County WASD. �) All permit applications must be submitted prior to any further review.(Electrical, Plumbing, sign, ect.) ) Note 2 on A -110 requires a geotechnical report.- - 5) The notes on A -110 do not pertain to this job and exceed the scope of work on this rmit. 'Note 14 refers to repairing road or sidewalk. All damaged sidewalk or asphalt must be /replaced and all asphalt repairs are required curb to curb. 7r Provide a shoring detail showing how existing walks will not be undermined by excavation of foundation or replace walks. Plan review is not complete, when all items above are corrected, we will doa complete plan review. If any sheets are voided, remove them from the plans and replace with new revised sheets and include one set of voided sheets in the re- submittal drawings. Norman Bruhn CB0 305 - 795 -2204 beto-TO -.26940 Miami Shores Viiiage Building Department 10050 N.E.2nd Avenue Miami Shores, Florida 33138 Tel: (305) 795.2204 Fax: (305) 756.8972 RECEIPT PERMIT #: Ct—/1 - /7V-Y DATE: ?-79;" i4k.( 1,e,e_\ e c_e_r Contractor ❑ Owner ❑ Architect Picked up 2 sets of plans and (other) Address: /6) 7fle -&-v `« From the building department on this date in order to have corrections done to plans And /or get County stamps. I understand that the plans need to be brought back to Miami Shores Village Building Depa,ent to continue permitting mess. Acknowledged by: PERMIT CLERK INITIAL: RESUBMITTED DATE: PERMIT CLERK INITIAL: Permit No: 11 -1143 Job Name: July 13, 2011 Miami Shores Village Building Department Building Critique Sheet 10050 N.E.2nd Avenue Miami Shores, Florida 33138 Tel: (305) 795.2204 Fax: (305) 756.8972 Page 1 of 1 1) Plans must be approved by Miami dade DERM. 2) Plans must be approved by Miami Dade County WASD. 3) All permit applications must be submitted prior to any further review.(Electrical, Plumbing, sign, ect.) 4) Note 2 on A-110 requires a geotechnical report. 5) The notes on A -110 do not pertain to this job and exceed the scope of work on this permit. 6) Note 14 refers to repairing road or sidewalk. All damaged sidewalk or asphalt must be replaced and all asphalt repairs are required curb to curb. 7) Provide a shoring detail showing how existing walks will not be undermined by excavation of foundation or replace walks. Plan review is not complete, when all items above are corrected, we will doa complete plan review. If any sheets are voided, remove them from the plans and replace with new revised sheets and include one set of voided sheets in the re- submittal drawings. Norman Bruhn CBO 305 - 795 -2204 bC6.1-5 -0,6940 Planning and Zoning Criteria Miami Shores Village 10050 N.E. 2nd Avenue Miami Shores, FL 33138 -0000 Phone: (305)795 -2204 Fax: (305)756 -8972 Issue Date: Not Issued Folio Number:106 STREET IMPROVEMENT NNW Owner's Name: MIAMI COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL INC Job Address: 106 ST AND 6 AVE STREET IMPROVEMENT Street Miami Shores, FL 33138 -0000 Owner's Phone: (305)759 -2843 Total Square Feet: 0 Total Job Valuation: $ 45,000.00 Contractor(s) SUFFOLK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC Phone (561)723 -2967 Primary Contractor Yes 1 Planning and Zoning Criteria and Comments Approved: Yes Date Approved: 6/29/2011: Yes Comments: APPROVED BY PLANNING BOARD 5/26/2011 q, riI1(-dLri 4 BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION Fsc zo Miami Shores Village '������ Building Department 10050 N.E.2nd Avenue, Miami Shores, Florida 33138 Tel: (305) 795.2204 Fax: (305) 756.8972 INSPECTION'S PHONE NUMBER: (305) 762.4949 Permit T ROOFING Permit No. Master Permit No. 0 e - 6- s !1- // OWNER: Name (Fee Simple Titleholder): AA101- &N Co t ..4 y 1b. )o Sc L 1 Phone #: Address: (0 C.) ( ((J E (O'% 4-1^- 5+- City: la- L State: - t Zip: 3Y/ Ce 1 Tenant/Lessee Name: Phone #: Email: JOB ADDRESS: V° ( wC (0714" 51-- City: Miami Shores County: Miami Dade Zip: 3 3/6 / Folio/Parcel #: Is the Building Historically Designated: Yes Flood Zone: Suffolk Construction Co., Inc. ONTRACTOR: Com p an y Name: Phone#: 561 -832 -1616 Address: 701 Waterford Way, Suite 450 City: Miami Qualifier Name: Dagoberto Diaz State Certification or Registration #: Contact Phone #: 305 - 374 -1107 DESIGNER: Architect/Engineer: Value of Work for this Permit: $ Type of Work: Addition Description of Work: G \kr ("30-.Q State: Florida QB22305 Email Address: Zip: 33126 Phone#: 305 - 374 -1107 Certificate of Competency #: _ CGC1519678 ddiaz @suffolkconstruction.com F YSC 6. t Phone #: 3O 5— 392 - 5-72Z e S ec Le OAlteration Square/Linear Footage of Work: X.New cx1t Co'f L + (C) Submittal Fee $ Permit Fee $ Scanning Fee $ Radon Fee $ Jx*********** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** CCF $ CO /CC $ DBPR $ Bond $ Notary $ Training/Education Fee $ Technology Fee $ Double Fee $ Structural Review $ TOTAL FEE NOW DUE $ •Cc • 410 Bonding Company's Name (if applicable) Bonding Company's Address City State Zip Mortgage Lender's Name (if applicable) Mortgage Lender's Address City State Zip Application is hereby made to obtain a permit to do the work and installations as indicated. I certify that no work or installation has commenced prior to the issuance of a permit and that all work will be performed to meet the standards of all laws regulating construction in this jurisdiction. I understand that a separate permit must be secured for FT.RCTRICAL WORK, PLUMBING, SIGNS, WELLS, POOLS, FURNACES, BOILERS, HEATERS, TANKS and AIR CONDmONERS, ETC OWNER'S AltWAVIT: I certify that all the foregoing information is accurate and that all work will be done in compliance with all applicable laws regulating construction and zoning. "WARNING TO OWNER: YOUR FAILURE TO RECORD A NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT MAY RESULT IN YOUR PAYING TWICE FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO YOUR PROPERTY. IF YOU INTEND TO OBTAIN FINANCING, CONSULT WITH YOUR LENDER OR AN ATTORNEY BEFORE RECORDING YOUR NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT." Notice to Applicant: As a condition to the issuance of a building permit with an estimated value exceeding $2500, the applicant must promise in good faith that a copy of the notice of commencement and construction lien law brochure will be delivered to the person whose property is subject to attachment. Also, a certified copy of the recorded notice of commence t be posted at the job site for the first inspection which occurs seven (7) days after the building permit is issued. I . "e absence o' such posted notice, the inspection will not be approved and a reinspection fee will be charged. Signature Owner or Agent The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,20// ,by 47 134 who is personally known to me or who has produced As identification and who did take an oath. NOTARY PUBLIC: Sign: p ( Print: S heib 6 b, `l PUBLIC,STATR OP PLITIn . ,. Sheltie L. Fulford ;; Commission #DD850330 "'.,,,,,,,,, Expires: FEB. 28, 2013 BONDED THRU ATLANTIC BONDING CO., INC. My Commission Expires: Contractor The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this_ 25th day of _ July , 20.11, by _ Dagoberto Diaz who is personally known to me or who has produced _ N/A as identification and who did take an o tt}h�- NOTARY PUBLIC -STATE OF FLORIDA NOTARY PUBLIC: Janet R. Broughton Commission #DD820979 moires: SEP. 08, 2012 Sign: print: Janet R. Broughton �•• My Commission Expires: September 8, 2012 ** *******sk+ k+ k+ k+ k*+ k**+k**+k**+k+k+k***+k**** *******S•**** ** *+ ridgy **** ********* ****+ k***+ k+ k*** *+ k******+ k*+ k*+k+N+k*+k **+N*****+k**** APPROVED BY 0'1; ti Plans Examiner Structural Review (Revised 07 /10 /07)(Revised 06 /10/2009)(Revised 3/15/09) Zoning Clerk Miami Shores Village Building Department 10050 N.E.2nd Avenue, Miami Shores, Florida 33138 Tel: (305) 795.2204 Fax: (305) 756.8972 INSPECTION'S PHONE NUMBER: (305) 762.4949 BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION FBC 20 Permit Type: BUILDING RECEIVED SEP 2 0 2p,11 Permit No. Master Permit No.eC . - %% - kep OWNER: Name (Fee Simple Titleholder): Miami Country Day School Phone #:_ 305- 779 -7203 Address: 601 NE 107th Street City: Miami Shores State: _ FL Zip: _ 33161 Tenant/Lessee Name: Phone#: Email: JOB ADDRESS: 601 NE 107th Street City: Miami Shores County: Miami Dade Zip: _ 33161 Folio/Parcel #: Is the. Building Historically Designated: Yes NO Flood Zone: CONTRACTOR: Company Name: Suffolk Construction Co., Inc. Phone #: -561 -832 -1616 ( -(or1i 33 Address: 701 Waterford Way, Suite 450 City: Miami State: _ Florida Zip: 33126 Phone#: _ 305 - 374 -1107 State Certification or Registration #: QB22305 Certificate of Competency #: - CGC1519678 Qualifier Name: Daqoberto Diaz Contact Phone#: 305 - 374 -1107 Email Address: ddiaz @suffolkconstruction.com DESIGNER: Architect/Engineer: Zyscovich Architects Phone #: Value of Work for this Permit: $_ $200,000.00 Type of Vork: ❑Addition;. ! ❑Alteration Description of Work: Square/Linear Footage of Work: UNew ❑Repair/Re lace ❑Demolition Ce * * * * * * * * * * ** a�.xa��xx :mix**** *�xa�x�x��xa��x�x *+x*** Fees* �xx�+ �x�a�********* a�a�x�**** �x *a��x****x�x�+a�x****r��x** ** Submittal Fee $ Permit Fee $ CCF $ CO /CC $ Scanning Fee $ Radon Fee $ DBPR $ Bond $ Technology Fee $ Notary $ Training/Education Fee $ Double Fee $ Structural Review $ TOTAL FEE NOW DUE $ Bonding Company's Name (if applicable) Bonding Company's Address City State Zip Mortgage Lender's Name (if applicable) Mortgage Lender's Address City State Zip Application is hereby made to obtain a permit to do the work and installations as indicated. I certify that no work or installation has commenced prior to the issuance of a permit and that all work will be performed to meet the standards of all laws regulating construction in this jurisdiction. I understand that a separate permit must be secured for ELECTRICAL WORK, PLUMBING, SIGNS, WELLS, POOLS, FURNACES, BOILERS, HEATERS, TANKS and AIR CONDITIONERS, ETC OWNER'S AFFIDAVIT: I certify that all the foregoing information is accurate and that all work will be done in compliance with all applicable laws regulating construction and zoning. "WARNING TO OWNER: YOUR FAILURE TO RECORD A NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT MAY RESULT IN YOUR PAYING TWICE FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO YOUR PROPERTY. IF YOU INTEND TO OBTAIN FINANCING, CONSULT WITH YOUR LENDER OR AN ATTORNEY BEFORE RECORDING YOUR NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT." Notice to Applicant: As a condition to the issuance of a building permit with an estimated value exceeding $2500, the applicant must promise in good faith that a copy of the notice of commencement and construction lien law brochure will be delivered to the person whose property is subject to attachment. Also, a certified copy of the recorded notice of commencement must be posted at the job site for the first inspection which occurs seven (7) days after the building permit is issued. In t f such posted notice, the inspection will not be approved and a reinspection fee will be charged. Signature Owner or Agent The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,20,by who is personally known to me or who has produced As identification and who did take an oath. NOTARY PUBLIC: Sign: Print: My Commission Expires: APPROVED BY Signature Contractor The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 25th day of _ July , 20 -11, by _ Dagoberto Diaz who is ona perslly g y i to me or who has produced N/A as identification and who did take an oath. ; Plans Examiner Structural Review (Revised 07 /10 /07)(Revised 06 /10/2009)(Revised 3/15/09) NOTARY PUBLIC: (kg Sign: Print: anet R. Broughton n3 O L My Commission Expires: SepterAIW 2!S :saaldXS °� �D � 6L60NGG .# uotss unuo3 u0a1{2noag 'g lauur yaiio'L3 30 aLv,Ls- Dian A Iii,LON Zoning Clerk • ,, Eastern Engineering Group 3401 NW 82nd Avenue Suite 370, Doral, FL 33122 -1052 T. 305.599.8133 • F. 305.599.8076 • www.easterneg.com 2[)11 U ...... ........ ..... .... Miami Country Day School New Services II Aluminum Fence & Gate Shop Drawings Ne 107th Vehicular Entry STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS Prepared By: ❑ Raissa Lopez, PE Lic. No. 59399 \11 279 Miami Country Day School New Services II RF7 BIW2 Prepared By: 1' Gonzalo Paz , PE Lic. No. 60734 • Project Name :11 279 Miami Country Day School New Services II Date:09 /20111 .151 zg = 900.01 Wind Velocity (mph) Topographic Factor Wind Directionality Factor (see Table 6-4) ASCE -05 Kd =0.85 Importance Factor (see Table 6 -1) ASCE -05 Category. Gust Factor (Flexible Structure) Net Force Coefficients Cf (see Figure 6 -22) Flat -Side Members for c<4.1 for 0.1 to 0.29 for 0.3 to 0.7 2.0 1.8 1.6 Values for Terrain exposure constants a and zg: Exposure B--- Value a =7 , Value zg =1200 Exposure C Value a =9.5 , Value zg =900 Exposure D Value a =11.5 , Value zg =700 Z °25.00 Z = if(Z < 15,15,Z) 2 Z a Kz = 2.01 — zg Height of Sign or Roof Mean Height of a Building (ft) Solidity Ratio of Sign ( %) qz := 0.00256•Kz•K2 .Kci. •I pz := gz.G-Cf s pz.EQ '= (13z 100 Eastem Engineering Group Rounded Members 1.2 0.8 1.3 0.9 1.5 1.1 psf Gross Wind per Actual Solid Area (psf) quivalent Wind in Overall Area (psf) Other Structures — Method 2 Figure 6-22 Force Coefficients, Cf Ail Heights Open Signs Lattice Frameworks e Flat -Sided Members Rounded Members D gz < 2.5 qz 55.3) D gz > 2.5 “FIT >5.3) < 0.1 2.0 1.2 0.8 0.1 to 0.29 1.8 1.3 0.9 0.3 to 0.7 1.6 1.5 1.1 Notes: 1. Signs with openings comprising 30% or more of the gross area are classified as open signs. 2. The calculation of the design wind forces shall be based on the area of all exposed members and elements projected on a plane normal to the wind direction. Forces shall be assumed to act parallel to the wind direction. 3. The area Af consistent with these force coefficients is the solid area projected normal to the wind direction. 4. Notation: E : ratio of solid area to gross area; D: diameter of a typical round member, in feet (meters); qZ: velocity pressure evaluated at height z above ground in pounds per square foot (N /m2). Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures 75 • POST CAP (TYP). ip 6' -0' MAX) 4' 0C (?YF) 1 • i°ICKET FENCE ELEVATION 6GALEs 3/4W-0' Project Name:11 279 Miami Country Day School New Services 11 Date:09 /20/11 Allowable Stresses for Aluminum 6063 -T6 (psi) 6063 -T5 (psi) 6061-T6 .(psi) 6005 -T5 (psi) Fb 15000 9500 1'9000 19000 (Tubes & Shapes) '.< °a.s 'Fb 18000 11500 24000 24000 (Round & Oval) i y `Q ��' olN Fv 8500 5500 12000 12000 Tubes, Shapes & Round el 0 f£ 8 E 10100 ksi 10100 ksi 10100,ksi 10100 ksi White bars apply to nonwelded members and to welded members at loc. fathers than 1.0 in from a weld Shadded bars apply to within 1.0 in of a weld Allowable Stress for Aluminum Welding: Aluminum Filler Alloy 5356 Fv=7000 psi Allowable Stress for Steel Strong and Weak Axis Allowables Stress for Tube Steel Shape: Fb =23760 psi, Fv=14400 psi for Fy =36 ksi E =29000 Ksi Fb =33000 psi, Fv=20000 psi for Fy =50 ksi E =29000 Ks Allowable Stress for Steel Welding: Welding: E -70XX Fv=21000 psi Allowable Stress for Stainless Steel Strong and Weak Axis Allowables Stress for Tube Steel Shape: Fb =16216 psi, Fv=9189 psi for (SS 304) Fy =30 ksi E =28000 Ksi Fb =24325 psi, Fv=13514 psi for (SS 304 1/16 Hard) Fy =45 ksi E =28000 Ksi Fb =40540 psi, Fw22702 psi for (SS 304 1/4 Hard) Fy =75 ksi E =28000 Ksi Fb =59460 psi, Fv=30270 psi for (SS 304 1/2 Hard) Fy =110 ksi E =28000 Ksi Allowable Stress for Steel Welding: Welding: E318 or E309 Fv=19200 psi Allowable Stress for Wood Strong and Weak Axis Allowables Stress for Lumber No.2 Non Dense (2 "-4" thick): Fb =1350 psi, Fv=175 psi for 2 "-4" Wide E =1400 Ksi Fb =1150 psi, Fv=175 psi for 5 "-6" Wide E =1400 Ksi DESIGN INFORMATION: Florida Building Code 2007 AISC Manual of Steel Construction, NDS -ASD for Wood Construction, ASCE 08 -07 Specification for the Design of Cold- Formed Stainless Steel Structural Members, Aluminum Design Manual 2005 Wind Loads, ASCE 7 - 05 DESIGN LOADS: Handrail Design Loads: Concentrated Load = 200 lbs. applied at any point in any direction. Uniform Load = 50 plf applied in any direction (other than dwelling units). Guardrail System Loads: Concentrated Load = 200 lbs. applied at any point in any direction at the top of the guardrail (other than dwelling units include a load of 100 lbs applied vertically downward at the top of guardrail). Concentrated horizontal load of 50 lbs applied on a 1 sq ft. area at any point in the system. • 4.'h'! VUMI bobl -'r, MassPlus (c) CSUI - Component Areas 10000 Area = 1.9375 In ^2 Centroid = 15638.5168, 2613.8943 In Ixx rzY Pxy rxx rYY Sxx Sxx Syy Syy 4.8538 In ^4 4.8538 In ^4 9.7077 In ^4 • 0.0000 in^4 • 15828 In = 15828 M max = min = MAX = r 2.4278 In ^3 2.4260 In ^3 2.4278 In ^3 2.4260 In ^3 Ix'x' = 13237870.8348 In ^4 I y' = 473841178.7979 IM4 Jz' = 487079049.4327 In ^4 Px'y' = 79200019.2910 In ^4 rx'x' = 2613.8955 In ry'y' = 156385162 In Imax = 42538 In ^4 Imin = 4.8538 in ^4 Principal axes angle of rotation = 45.0000 y4741 MassPlus (c) CSUI - Component Arens 10000 Area = 0.6875 In ^2 Centrold = 156391211, 2597.0502 In Ixx y Pxy rxx rYY 0.1051 In ^4 0.3317 In ^4 64368 In ^4 _ - 0.0000 In ^4 • 0.3911 In = 04946 In Sxx max = Sxx min = Syy max Syy nln = Ix'x' bey' Jz' Px'y' rx'x' ry'y, 02103 In ^3 02103 In ^3 0.3317 In ^3 03317 In ^3 = 4636960,5208 In ^4 = 168150199.5717 In ^4 = 172787160.0925 In ^4 = 27923212.8839 In ^4 • 2597.0502 In = 156391211 In 'max = 0.3317 In ^4 'min = 0.1051 In ^4 Principal axes angle of rotation = - 0.0000 II {Cale �xl 1Db 0Clegt Area = 0.23 fn ^2 Centrald = 12902.19, 444.66 In Ixxyx Pxy rxx ryy Sxx Sxx Syy Syy 0,03 In ^4 = 0,03 In ^4 • 0.07 In ^4 = 0.00 In ^4 = 0.38 In • 038 In max = my, _ MIX min = 0,07 In ^3 0.07 In ^3 0.07 In ^3 007 In ^3 Ix'x' = 46341.41 In ^4 Iy y' = 39015590.74 Ini ^4 Jz = 39061932.15 In ^4 Px'y' = 1344632.36 In ^4 rx'x' = 444.66 In ry'y' = 12902.19 In Imax = 0.03 In ^4 Irma = 0.03 In ^4 Principal axes angle of rotation = -0.00 A A A A L L �— L 4.00 Railing Span (in) Post Height (in) 9win i 6.58 P2oo =0.00 = "0.00 P50 Wind Pressure (psf) Single Concentrated Load (Ibs) Railing P= 200.00, Fence P =0.00 Uniform Distributed Load (pif) Railing q= 50.00, Fence q =0.00 Single Concentrated Load (Ibs) Railing P= 50.00, Fence P =0.00 Vertical Load Horizontal Load H.post 1= 900000 100.00 0 .33 0r69 Sys =021 • psi psi Vertical Loads in3 .2 m Horizontal Loads in3 ta -=‘900000 000.00 situ ='0.69 psi psi 3 in .2 m 000:00 -. 000.01 .94 psi psi .3 m .2 m K` = X800.00 0,24 psi psi .3 in .2 m • • Concentrated Load = 200 Ibs. P2oo•(L - 4) MTR200 • 5 Uniform Load = 50 nlf MTR50 := 0.1012. 0J•(L - 4)2 For Wind Pressure MTR.wind := 0.125 1wind') Hpost - 2 (L - 4)2 144 2 M• R := max( MTR2oo,MTR50,MTR.wind) Concentrated Load = 200 Ibs. VTR-200 := P2odbs Uniform Load = 50 pif VTR5o: =� IL For Wind Pressure gwind Hpost VTRwind := 0.6• 144 2 •L VTR := max(VTR2oo, VTR50, VTRwind) Bending Design: Section Modulus Required STR.mm := Fb TR Shear Design: Area Required 1.5•V• R MTR ATRmm Fv' BENDINGtop := if (STR.min min(SxTR, SyTR) , "N.G" , "OK" ) SHEARtop = if (ATR.min Z Ate, "N.G" ,"OK") in — Ib in — lb Ibs Ibs in3 in — Ib in — lb lbs Ibs in2 • • Concentrated Load = 200 Ibs. RPT.200 := P200 Uniform Load = 50 pif RpTS0 = 1.0- ).L For Wind Pressure gwind RPT.wind := 1.0 (""--) 144 HposrL RpT := max( RPT200,RPT.50,RPT.wind) MPT := max max (RPT200,RPT.50)•Hpost,RPT.wind' 111-2—°st 2 VPT := RPT Bending Design: Section Modulus Required: SPT.mm MpT FbPT Shear Design: Area Required: APT.mm FvPT 1.5•VpT BEND1NGpost := if(SpT.min SxpT, "N.G" , "OK" ) SHEARpost if (APT.min z APT, "N.G" , "OK" ) Ibs Ibs Ibs Ibs in - lb Ibs. in3 in2 • Loaded Area 1 ft ^2 111:1111 4.0000 4.0000 hpk H. 2.0000 Assume three pickets acting simultaneously P5o 1 CO picket ' 12 3 gpicket := max(25, gwind) MpK := max 6•hpk•wpicket — w picket' 18, Loaded Area 25 PSF (MIN) gpicket'4•hpk 2 144.8 COpicket'72 gpicket'4hpk VpK = max 12•cupicket hpk , 144.2 Bending Design: Section Modulus Required: SPK.mm 'PK MPK Shear Design: Area Required: APK.mm FVPK 1.5•VpK BENDINGpicket if(SPK.min Z SXpK, "N.G" , "OK" SHEARpicket := if(APK.min Z APK, "N.G" , "OK" hpk := Hpast — 2 lbs in psf in-lb lb in3 in2 post hPF 4.0000 • 4.0000 2.0000 gpicket'4•hpk 2 144.8 COpicket'72 gpicket'4hpk VpK = max 12•cupicket hpk , 144.2 Bending Design: Section Modulus Required: SPK.mm 'PK MPK Shear Design: Area Required: APK.mm FVPK 1.5•VpK BENDINGpicket if(SPK.min Z SXpK, "N.G" , "OK" SHEARpicket := if(APK.min Z APK, "N.G" , "OK" hpk := Hpast — 2 lbs in psf in-lb lb in3 in2 Uniform Load = 50 Of MBT.50 := 0.1012.( — 0}L2 For Wind Pressure C 1H 2 MBT.wind := 0.125. d) pot — (L — 4)2 MBT max(MBT.50,MBT.wind) if Uniform Load = 50 pif 1450 VBT.50 = 0.612 L For Wind Pressure 1 9wind VBT.wind = 2 (144 Hpost .L 2 VBT = max(VBT.50, VBT.wind) Bending Design: Section Modulus Required: SBT.min FbBT MBT Shear Design: Area Required: VBT ABT.min FVBT c BENDINGbottom if (SBT.min > SYBT,'N.G" , "OK" ) SHEARbottom = if(ABT.min > ABT,'N.G" , "OK" ) Ibs Ibs in lb in — lb in — lb lbs in3 in2 • Project Name: 11 279 Miami County Day School New Services II Date :08 /20/11 h := hpost P :- Mbase hpost Pole Height (ft) Base Moment (Ibs*ft) Soil allowable lateral pressure (psf /ft) Diameter of round post or diagonal dimension of square post or footing (ft) d := xE -0.01 2.34.P while 0.5• x• S — •b 3 d.S Si :_ — 3 1+ 1 + 4.36 1 h -2 2.34•P x•S b 3 d l :_ x 4- 0.01 while j4.25 Ph > x d.S.b xE -x +0.1 S3 .= d.S Eastem Engineering Group >x ft lbs psf psf • Concrete Compressive Strength (psi) Mu := 1.7•Mbase Sm.0 .— 32 a•b3 Mn.0 := 5' Sm.C' re 144 FLEXUREC := if (Mu <_ 0.85 •Mn.C, "OK" , "N.G." d3 Sm.S 6 Mn.S 5' Sm.S're' 144 FLEXURES := if (Mu <_ 0.85 •Mn.S, "OK" , "N.G." Eastern Engineering Group ft3 ft 3 lbs — ft lbs — ft lbs — ft Eastern Engineering Group 3401 NW 8200AVE Tel. (308) 809-8133 wwvw.eastemeg.com Suite370 Fax, (305) 69Q -8076 conlaots@eastemeg.com eastemeg.com :Miamii Elorida 33122 PROJECT No. & NAME: DATE: PG: Pjc€ Fitu LoN GTioi i f6 ^ ittwof WIND: ci go P&P 44t,TibAt@ t i 1 U 031,1/14 1-= (o % ti .60 x S, 33 �wMINuM 727 2 lb 2!4112s P Pokcootz tmN(i (2) PGAr l S 1/4 {I Wirt( 2" 3r c, 4 4 ALLoW ir&k • x 003 I2$ J65 >26149s 1),I'] FroouvoN Z„ SN(1 apron' Anchors ANCHOR DIA. In. (mm) 3/16 (4.8) 1/4 (6.4) ANCHOR EMBEDMENT In. (mm) 1 (25,4) 1 (25.4) Ultimate Tension and Shear Values (Lbs /kN) do Holl ,; w Block LIGHTWEIGHT BLOCK TENSION Lbs. (kN) 220 (1.0) 250 (1.1) SHEAR Lbs. (kN) 400 (1.8) 620 (2.8) Sate working loads for single Installation under static loading should not exceed 25% of the ultimate load capacity. NOTE: 3/16° Tapcon requires 5/32° bit, 1/4" Tapcon requites 3/16° bit. MEDIUM WEIGHT BLOCK TENSION Lbs. (kN) 340 (15) 500 (2.2) SHEAR Lbs. (kN) 730 (3.2) 1,000 (4.4) Allowable Edge and Spacing Distances PARAMETER ANCHOR D In. (mm) m) NORMAL WEIGHT CONCRETE CONCRETE MASONRY UNITS (CMU) FULL CAPACITY (Critical Distance Inches) REDUCED CAPACITY (Minimal Distance Inches) LOAD REDUCTION FACTOR FULL CAPACITY (Critical Distance Inches) REDUCED CAPACITY (Minimal Distance Inches) LOAD REDUCTION FACTOR Spacing Between 3/16 3 1 -1/2 0.73 3 1 -1/2 1.00 Anchors - Tension 1/4 4 2 0.66 4 2 0.84 Spacing Between 3/16 3 1 -1/2 0.83 3 1 -1/2 1.00 Anchors - Shear 1/4 4 2 0.82 1 4 2 0.81 Edge Distance- 3/16 1 -7/8 1 0.83 4 2 0.91 Tension 1/4 2 -1/2 1 -1/4 0.82 4 2 0.88 Edge Distance 3/16 2 -1/4 1 -1/8 0.70 4 2 0.93 -Shear 1/4 3 1 -1/2 059 4 2 0.80 For St 1 inch = 25.4 mm Taijcon© Condrive 1000 Tool Ki DESCRIPTION /SUGGESTED SPECIFICATIONS Condrive 7000 installation Tool - SPECIFIED FOR ANCHORAGE INTO CONCRETE, BRICK OR BLOCK • The key to Tapcon's fast and easy installation is the multi - purpose Condrive Installation Tool. The drive sleeve, along with the hex head and phillips sockets provide the installer with the flexibility necessary for the complete variety of Tapcon applications (tool does not include drill bit). Condrive 1000 - A multi- purpose tool designed for installation of Tapcon hex head and Philips flat head anchors up to 3 -3/4" long. If driving hex head Tapcon, driver will automatically disengage. The Condrive 1000 has a reusable plastic case. Condrive Tools are designed to specifically install Tapcon Anchors and to fit standard hammer drills. Part No. C1000 (Does not include drill bit) ® Fast change from drilling to driving ® Eliminates need to change out chucks and bits ® Eliminates need for two tools li Special nut driver is recessed for torque control to reduce head breakage JReld Head' Call our toll free number 800- 899.7890 or vim our web site for the most nmenr product and technical wkurnation at tvww.ktwredhead tom 14 APPLICATIONS The picture shows the Condrive 1000 Installation Kit in action. The kit makes for fast and easy change over from drill bit to driver and controls the driving torque to prevent thread stripping and head snapping in hard base materials. Condrive 1000 Spare Parts QTY/WT PART NO. DESCRIPTION (A) 7901001 Drill Adapter 1/.06 (8) 7901002 Sleeve 1/.01 7901003 Black Band 11.02 7901004 5/32° Ball Bearing 1/.02 (C) 7901006 3/16' Socket 1/.04 (D) 7901007 1/4" Socket 1/.05 7901008 82 Phillips bit for 3/16' anchor 1/.10 7901009 83 Philips bit for 1/4° anchor 1/.12 (E) 7901010 Phillips Socket 1/.44 7902006 Set Screw 1/.02 7902008 1/16' Ball Bearing 1/.02 7902010 1/8" Hex Key 1/.10 FIXED PANELS WIEMOVAIN.E PANEL JECTIGN4_00•e') Wf®D PANELS • 4' -3 4! 04 4YM /4' ,4', 4. 1 IREMOYABLE PICKET FENCE ELEVATION SCALE. 3!4'.e.fr 85 01 • Project Name:11 279 Miami Country Day School New Services 1I Date:09 /20/11 Picket Fence Removable section, connection to concrete footing M.act horizontal h.o :horizon rverticat• , Mad 2718.00 pOSt; post := 60 C l a 4.00 B.grout D.grout B,post ►I D.post Horizontal Load (Ibs) P = 6.58psf * (4'- 10 "/2) * 5'-4" Vertical Load (Ibs) Moment (#-in) M = (85Ibs * 51- 4 "/2) *12 Post Width (in) Post Depth (in) Post Embedment (in) Minimum Edge Distance (in) grout- out'. 8000x00 Equivalent Grout Width (in) Equivalent Grout Depth (in) Grout Strength (psi) f cconcrete := 3000.00 140 = :575 ha := 5.75 Concrete Strength (psi) Hold diameter (Grout Diameter) (in) Concrete Slab Deep (in) a. 2 .hef 2 + 3 • [ Mact Phorizontal hef Mact 3-hef + 6. Phorizontal 2 Phorizo' Me P2 := hof.(2.a hef) P1 := P2 — Phorizontal Mexternal Mact (PhO�flj.a) 2 2 Minternal P2' —3 'a + P1 (hef — 3 Vuhorizontal 1.6*(max(P1 P2)) Vuvertical 1.6'Pvertical ssr Ass,e, 2•P2 f2.grout 1.6 a.Bpost 2.Pi fl .grout := 1.6 (hef — .Bpost 1.--,4'isgssISSF4S,... • Fp grout := [0.65. (0.85 f cgrout)].1.5 Stressgrout := "N.G." "O.K." if max( fl .grout, f2.grout) 5- FPgrout in lbs ;',80?„trze 1,101WV""3 lst* 10 t syl;,;.triea"\• ,p-f4-,;:mt0g1;14r"- .ss•=s5sgs,s • °"... • \ — , 2.concrete 1.6 a'Bgrout 2 . P2 2.Pi fl .concrete := 1.6 (hef — ligrout FPconcrete ..= [0.65. ( 0.85 . f coonorete)]-1.5 Stressoonorete := "O.K." lbs if max( fl .concrete, f2.concrete) FPconcrete egwmg,43 lbs — in lbs — in lbs psi psi psi psi psi psi 44.,p1,••," At; 1M4: AVco 4.5"Cal 2 Ay c := 2. ( 1.5.Cai).ha if ha < 1.5.Cai 2-(1.5.Cal).(1.5.Cal) if ha Modification factor for edge effect ;!A in2 in2 Modification Factor in No cracked concrete at service loads wc.v=1.4 Modification Factor in cracked concrete with wc.vr--1 w/ No supplementary reinforcement. wc.v=1.2 w/ Supplementary reinforcement of a No 4 Bar between the anchor and the edge. wc.v=1.4 w/ Supplementary reinforcement of No 4 Bar and stirm s s aced at not more than 4 in. le := if Old > 8.d0,8.do,hof) in Vb := 7. le )0.2 --do \K.-4f cconcrete. -'''a.11.51 ( AVc Vcb 'Wed.V.Ilic.V*Vb Vco Conditions 0=0.75 w/ Supplementary reinforcement are crossing concrete failure prism. 4:0=0.70 w/ No supplementary reinforcement are crossing concrete failure prism. BREAKOUTaboar := if (Vuhorizontal > O'Vcb,"N.G." Cale := Cal "N/A" if ha < Cal • :7,4" Dgrout grout Aconetotal 11-2.Ca1c.1t. Cale — 2 2 Acone.fmal 2 Acone.total Acone.post Vcone.cb 4.4 feconcreteAcone.final f).7 BURSTOUT h •= if(Vuhorizo tal > (1)'V , "OK" ) s ear • cone.cb, "KG." i....t7AA:146401,4 Ibs. Ibs. lbs „Ait a-6* in .2 in .2 '-'114,A17074.1 „ATAAPAA. 0 .2 lbs lbs Eastern Engineering Group (00 MC" 37 82 "DAVE Tel. (3O 6£9.8133 www.easiernag.com Suite 370 Fax (3055) 589.8078 contobts@easterneg.com ts@eastemag.com Miami-FluHda 33122 PROJECT No. & NAME: DATE: PG: ,FhinvOlt fita flomekrio N D 64 bus w %psi) I (66g x(Y/ItY -1 _ cob lb it (Stt ATTACAMENO • Project Name: 11 279 Miami County Day School New Services!! Date:09120 /11 h := hpost P .- Mbase hpost Pole Height (ft) Base Moment (Ibs*ft) Soil allowable lateral pressure (psflft) Diameter of round post or diagonal dimension of square post or footing (ft) d := x4-0.01 2.34.P while 0.5 x• S — •b 3 d•S S1 : =- 3 1+ 1 + 4.36 2.34•P x•S — b 3 1 -2 d1 x E- 0.01 while 4.25 P h > x d•S•b x <-x +0.1 S3 := d.S Eastem Engineering Group >x ft lbs ft psf psf • • Concrete Compressive Strength (psi) Mu := 1.7•Mbase zr•b3 Sm.0 := 32 Mn.0 5.Sm.C•,J •144 FLEXUREC := if (Mu 5 0.85 •Mn.C, "OK" ,N.G.") d3 Sm.S 6 Mn.S 5'Sm.S \J 144 FLEXURES := if (Mu <— 0.85•Mn.S, "OK" , "N.G." ) Eastem Engineering Group lbs — ft ft3 lbs — it ft3 lbs — ft x =S in MAX TO NEXT PAST 4' LL 4' �.0 ' MAX TO NEXT POST uuuu uuuu 3I -0° TYFICAL CATS 8 -2 • SCALE: 3/4' =V -0' / Eastern Engineering Group ' 3401 Nws2�la Tel. (305) 699 -B133 www.easterfeg.aorn Suite s3o Fax. (306) 598.8076 oantaats@eastemeg.com Ward Florida 3:7122 .! srf b 1 iNO: X1,104 PSI . '61-9" (vi r :, D.src l PROJECT No. & NAME: DATE: PG: ifiviumrzy sly = S' SP . 2$f = I2.s rL V‘IL11): 1001)six 2S ft 1 I3011-om 1 reP FAIL sicIVAI 2' 1 '/q 013309 642AZ 04A i42 MAMA & Fktti : Fe,100oPM �z 5006 • Eastern Engineering Group 3401 Niw132'AVE Suite 370 Miami 'Fioride 33122 Tat. (tom) 599 4)183 www.eastemeg.eam Fax (305) 59943078 contaats@easterneg.com (*MY Mat,Yf (J 11:1115 FiF Sx- 0,21 ry,3 Poo z)= v5112-1'11 PROJECT No. & NAME: DATE: PG: GW: 1- , 3214 igt5 b ✓ g000 cj000 O•y3 I I(.#1 fols."'!"*.1.1.""4 - ''.. Eastern Engineering Group 3401 NW 82NDAVE Tel. ?05) 89£ 133 www.eaetemeg oom Suite 370 F c (305) Sly &076 =eat 4e0 tram Miami Florida 33122 • — /11441 .11 — u VIfl �LYSts MB =cftFx3'x91I,5x12 Mo i..i-':::: b I3co 1 n -fh 5 5 bPsI���[6,6 21'41 IA 14D ANAitySi s i 3 A 9-32- 42b J, .f,9f tottc 2.43in17 'c &Nt 01}? • fi a� b S510 "t 61'4. ;ps1 r0�, U° PROJECT No. & NAME: DATE: PG: J'or S tool ' +p } >' fits Sx = I/ =2.43,4 ofr��- 11i��Y1Z r 3 ! Ls, TEntsko e Nitaka �35o1b-i S Ut( mir4 tric 1194 (- fog s m �� � (4 +1 CAI r Citi.0 • Project Name: 11 279 Miami County Day School New Services II Date:09 /20/11 h := hpost P .— Mbase hpost Pole Height (ft) Base Moment (Ibs*ft) Boil allowable lateral pressure (psf /ft) Diameter of round post or diagonal dimension of square post or footing (ft) d x f— 0.01 2.34.P while 0.5 x•S — •b 3 x4- x +0.1 d•S S1: =- 3 1+ h 1 + 436• 2.34.P x• S — b 3 1 2 d1 .— x 0.01 while 4.25 P h > x d•S•b xE —x +0.1 S3 := d•S Eastern Engineering Group >x ft lbs ft psf psf Concrete Compressive Strength (psi) Mu := 1.7•Mbase 7C •b3 Sm.0 '= 32 Mn.0 •= 5'Sm.0 t'c' 144 FLEXUREC := if (Mu <_ 0.85 -Mn.C, "OK" , "N.G." b3 Sm.S 6 Mn.S = 5'Sm.S'�c'144 FLEXURES = if (Mu 0.85.Mn.S, "OK ", "N.G. ") Eastem Engineering Group lbs — ft ft3 ft3 lbs — ft lbs —ft r. Cr h!.9 112' 24'AY 14fr 049 U2' r 4' 1 1 I 2'-0 24' -0° SWING GATE ELEVATION SCALE. vs'.r -m' 4.0000 --^- -- 4.0000 1 -- -- 0.2500 4 .0000 4.0000 —I l—o.ia5o • FRAME AND POST SECTIONS 4X4X1/4 ALUM. 6061 -T6 AND STEEL Area = 3.7500 In ^2 Centrold = 11728.8682, 14022331 in Ixx = 8,8281 in ^4 Iyy = 8.8281 in ^4 Jz = 17.6563 in ^4 Pxy = 0.0000 in ^4 rxx = 1,5343 In ryy = 1.5343 in Sxx Max = 4.4141 In ^3 Sxx Min = 4,4141 In ^3 Syy Max = 4.4141 in ^3 Syy min = 4.4141 in ^3 FRAME AND POST SECTIONS 4X4X1/8 ALUM. 6061 -T6 Area = 1.9375 inA2 Centrold = 11728.8689, 1384,7785 In Ixx = 4.8538 in ^4 Iyy = 4.8538 in ^4 Jz = 9.7077 In ^4 Pxy = 0,0000 In ^4 rxx = 1.5828 in ryy = 15828 In Sxx max = 2.4278 InA3 Sxx rein = 2.4260 in ^3 Syy Max = 2.4278 In ^3 Syy rein = 2,4260 In ^3 • T5" "J U (goitres — (2 J' fsi G.10 f 1J17oNrn1 irt FPM £ (TP l &fro ) 124Npuzy Ate! y : _ 2,610 got: s Psf Itt PLF wo rs F "Z.10! = I-lb • • Job No 11215 E�9vi1" Nrif 4 J2' 14%12 4, iz .1722.71_041 DL Z 5% 4411113 1' X14 Amin [4'4 I�p (1'x/12.) x 12 1(12)4 s%r`,Ipo x1 11143 - � =3 Igo ^ °=" At-I]/4L ,I�] S tioRr TEAM ECE:ja:14 12 M1 'hill (___ .*113 S1 4.'� -1911" I Calc (l 4) toixt fbi, rb �qa 2 $ 504081 504(1 C itiffKAL 114P #11 rt, Lc* cyfea MOM EA r ON VarrIVIL f124411A . ( I ,Z� 119 ItivoIb -ft �IA Ib- j:it 71Nlit ) 4110 rcl 01000VCI SET +I Fiu 11'`1'` /tb �x. 2.4.3 i n' S = 2og3in3 • IS 8f 1ity : S ti ,'tb)s SIolzr sr flr (1kTE., o $I3F S41L'ws.33 3 1 ,5 Min= 32011)s x. (9.90' = 2) iv Ib "�4 2110x12 lotizunizro s) Fit 4,331 1bs M51- �b- Si 1141 •111 710 fsi ‘Fb {a, • --°-° 1441, Fo9R. 5 IF Mk .= 3201( 6,513' = z Hu fb_ F1 sr ' /if% X33' 4,5bVr3' Mss _ 33611 5,33/2.- m, --Set AnntttngNr) IMP:: Mc /b- ft Project Name: 11 279 Miami County Day School New Services II Date:08/24/11 jb h := hpost Mbase P:- hpost h-Toppost Pole Height (ft) Base Moment (lbs*ft) Soil allowable lateral pressure (psf/ft) Diameter of round post or diagonal dimension of square post or footing (ft) d := x <- 0.01 2.34.P while 0.5- (x-S) b 3 x x + 0.1 d-S S1 := — 1 3 1+ 1 + 4.36 2.34-P (x-S b 3 1 -2 d1 := x4-- 0.01 while 14.25 P.h > x d•S-b XE—X+ 0.1 S 3 • .= d-S Eastem Engineering Group >x ft lbs ft !:-A4VIZaatAit,a, psf psf • Concrete Compressive Strength (psi) Mu := 1.7•Mbase Sm.0 • 32 Mn.c: 5'Sm.C' 7c•144 FLEXUREC := if (Mu 5 0.85 •Mn.C, "OK" , "N.G." ) d3 Sm.S 6 MILS := 5 • Sm.S• / • 144 FLEXURES = if (Mu <_ 0.85 •Mn.S, "OK" , "N.G." ) Eastem Engineering Group lbs — ft lbs —ft ft3 lbs — ft