Surface Geotechnical Exploration Report

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report

CHURCH OF THE LIVING GOD – FELLOWSHIP HALL 3010 South 54 Th Street Tampa, Florida 33619

Prepared for:

Rafael Blanco RDG Design and Builders, Inc.

Prepared By:

Post Office Box 76006 Tampa, Florida 33675-1006 (813) 248-4720

FGE Project No. 200932

August 2017

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Scope of Work ...... 1 1.2 Site Description ...... 1 1.3 Planned Construction ...... 1 1.4 Soil Survey ...... 2 1.5 Seismicity ...... 2 1.6 Sinkholes ...... 3 2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION ...... 4 2.1 Subsurface Conditions ...... 6 2.2 Groundwater Conditions ...... 6 2.3 Water Infiltration Testing...... 7 3.0 DISCUSSION ...... 9 4.0 SITE DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 10 4.1 General Considerations ...... 10 4.2 Fill and Compaction Requirements ...... 11 4.3 Temporary Groundwater Control (Dewatering) ...... 12 4.4 Pavement Consideration ...... 12 5.0 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 13 5.1 FOUNDATION OPTION-1 ...... 13 5.2 FOUNDATION OPTION-2 ...... 14 5.3 FOUNDATION OPTION-3 ...... 15 5.4 SETTLEMENT ...... 15 6.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 16 6.1 Parking Lot ...... 16 6.2 General ...... 16 6.3 Layer Components ...... 17 6.4 Stabilized Subgrade Course ...... 18 6.5 Base Course ...... 18 6.6 Flexible Surface Course ...... 19 7.0 CLOSING AND LIMITATIONS ...... 20

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | ii

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

FIGURES Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Soil Boring Locations

TABLES Table 1 Encountered Soil Stratums Table 2 Infiltration Rate of Inner Ring Table 3 Flexible Pavement Component Recommendations

ATTACHMENTS Attachment A Soil Survey Attachment B Standard Penetration Test Boring Logs Attachment C Double Ring Infiltration Test Report

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | ii Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. (FGE) performed a subsurface geotechnical exploration to characterize subsurface and groundwater conditions in order to provide foundation and site development recommendations for the proposed construction of the new fellowship hall located at 3010 South 54 th Street in Tampa, Florida.

1.1 Scope of Work

The following tasks were performed as part of the subsurface geotechnical exploration: • Review of published regional information regarding the project site; • Three (3) Hand Auger (HA) borings with Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) Soundings within the boundaries of the proposed driveway and parking areas; • Three (3) Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings within the footprint of the proposed building; • One (1) Double Ring Infiltration (DRI) test within the proposed retention pond; and • Report preparation of findings based upon the exploration with recommendations for foundation design and earthworks.

1.2 Site Description

The property is located at 3010 South 54 th Street in Tampa, Florida, which lies in Section 34, Township 29 South, and Range 19 East in Hillsborough County. Based on the USGS topographic map of the area, the site elevation is approximately 10 feet above the National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD). The proposed construction site is a relatively flat, previously developed lot that, according to the Hillsborough County Property Appraiser records, is occupied by a single-family residential structure that was built in 1966; however the existence of the structure was not visually verified during the testing. The front of the lot faces west and abuts South 54 th Street. Vegetation present at the time of investigation included multiple medium and large sized trees that generally outline the property with mixed grass groundcover throughout. Figure 1 shows the location and portion of the topographic quadrangle map for the project site.

1.3 Planned Construction

Based on the information provided to FGE, it is our understanding that the proposed construction will consist of a one-story masonry fellowship hall with associated driveway and parking areas. As the exact

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 1

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

building design loads were not provided to FGE, based on typical design loads for this type of construction FGE anticipates the maximum wall loads will not exceed 3,500 pounds per linear foot (plf) and point loads to be transmitted to the foundation will not exceed 50,000 pounds.

1.4 Soil Survey

The United States Department of Agriculture – Natural Resources Conservation Services (USDA-NRCS 2016) – Soil Survey of Sarasota County Florida shows that the soils in the vicinity of the proposed subject site include Myakka fine sand (map unit 29) and Myakka fine sand, frequently flooded (map unit 30). Myakka fine sands at this location generally consist of fine sandy soils relic of flatwoods on marine terraces with a minimal slope of 0 to 2 percent. Myakka fine sands are considered poorly drained with a water table generally located between 6 and 18 inches below grade. Myakka fine sand, frequently flooded at this location generally consists of fine sandy soils relic of tidal marshes on marine terraces with a minimal slope of 0 to 1 percent. Myakka fine sands, frequently flooded are considered very poorly drained with a water table generally located between the land surface and 6 inches below grade. See Attachment A for more detailed information about the soil conditions for this site.

The soil classifications listed in the USDA-NRCS Soil Survey are based on aerial photographs and shallow soil borings. While the published data is compared to the actual soil data collected as part of this subsurface geotechnical exploration, it should be recognized that the soil type boundaries in the USDA- NRCS Soil Survey are approximate and are presented on a scale that is not highly accurate for areas the size of small commercial lots when compared to site specific data. However, the information is useful and must be reviewed to assist the evaluation of predevelopment earth-moving activities that could facilitate the proper interpretation of the investigative data.

1.5 Seismicity

The site is located in the central region of Florida. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the International Building Code (IBC) classify areas by Seismic Design Category (SDC), which reflect the likelihood of experiencing earthquake shaking of various intensities. Based on the location of the site, the area has a SDC ‘A’ classification, which is considered to have a very small seismic vulnerability. According to the United States Geologic Survey (USGS) in accordance with ASCE

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 2

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

7-10 Standard, the peak ground acceleration (PGA) for Site Class A in this area is 0.029 with a 1 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years. The probability of an earthquake occurring in the vicinity of the project site of magnitude great enough to cause structural damage is considered extremely low.

1.6 Sinkholes

The site is located in the central region of Florida, an area known for historic sinkhole activity. According to our review of available data from the Florida Geologic Survey (FGS) and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), there is one (1) confirmed sinkhole incident reported within a one mile radius of the site, and one-hundred ten (110) within a ten mile radius of the site as of January 2017. Based on the available information, the probability of a sinkhole developing in the vicinity of the project site is considered moderate to high.

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 3

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION

FGE performed field investigations at the proposed construction site on July 14 and July 19, 2017. The field investigations consisted of three (3) shallow hand auger (HA) soil borings with associated dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) soundings, three (3) Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings, and one (1) double ring infiltration (DRI) test. Figure 2 illustrates the layout of the property and also identifies the locations of various tests completed by FGE during this investigation. The SPT boring logs are included in Attachment B and the DRI report is presented in Attachment C .

The HA borings were performed within the vicinity of the proposed parking and driveway areas to characterize the shallow subsurface and assess the relative density/consistency of the shallow soils to a depth of 5 ft-bls. The hand auger borings were completed in general accordance with ASTM D-1452, using a stainless steel bucket type auger that allows samples to be collected and visually classified at approximate 12-inch intervals. The single mass dynamic cone penetrometer consists of a measuring instrument, a probing rod and a cone tip. The penetrometer is pushed perpendicular into the soil and provides a method of assessing soil strength via relative density. The penetrometer is equipped with a 45 degree conical tip and a 15-lb slide hammer that free falls 20-inches. Dynamic cone penetrometer readings were collected during the hand auger borings to estimate the relative density and/or consistency of the surficial soils. The relative density designations are calculated based on soil type and the graph below.

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 4

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

DCP to SPT Curve (E - Coastal Plain Soils) 20

15

10 SPT 'N' 'N' Value SPT (blows (blows perfoot) 5

0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Cone Penetrometer Resistance (blows per increment)

Source: Humboldt Mfg. Co. Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Manual H-4202A Graph 1. DCP to SPT Curve

Three (3) SPT borings were advanced within the vicinity of the proposed building to characterize the subsurface conditions and assess the relative density/consistency of the deeper subsurface to a depth of 25 ft-bls. The SPT borings were completed in general accordance with ASTM D-1586, using the mud rotary drilling method and a track-mounted rig. The penetration resistance testing and soil sample collection were accomplished with the use of a 1.4-inch inside diameter sampler seated 6 inches into the bottom of the borehole and advanced an additional 12 inches under the effort of an l40-pound hammer falling freely 30 inches. The number of blows required for the hammer to advance the sampler two (2) six-inch intervals into undisturbed soil is recorded as the blow count (or 'N' value) of the tested interval.

SANDY SOILS CLAYEY & SILTY SOILS 'N' Value 'N' Value Relative Density Relative Consistency (Blows per foot) (Blows per foot) 0 – 4 Very Loose 0 – 2 Very Soft 4 – 10 Loose 2 – 4 Soft 10 – 30 Medium Dense 4 – 8 Firm 30 – 50 Dense 8 – 15 Stiff 50+ Very Dense 15 – 30 Very Stiff 30+ Hard

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 5

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

An FGE representative familiar with the drilling/testing techniques, soil sample classification method and field evaluations logged the borings in the field and secured representative soil samples. Each soil sample recovered was field-classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) method, and a representative portion of each sample was placed in a moisture-proof container and returned for visual verification of the field classification. The SPT borings were advanced using a rotary drill utilizing a circulating drill fluid to maintain the borehole annulus in non-cohesive soils and to remove cuttings created by the drill bit. Upon completion, the deep borings were grouted/sealed in accordance with local requirements. The reported depths of the soil layers and SPT test location are sufficiently accurate for their intended purposes, although the depths should be considered approximate based on the field measurement methods used.

2.1 Subsurface Conditions

The geology at the site is illustrated in the boring logs provided in Attachment B , and represents FGE’s interpretation of the geotechnical conditions based on the soil borings completed at the site and visual re- examination of the samples by a geologist in our laboratory. The lines designating the interface between various strata on the boring profile represents the approximate interface location. It should be noted that the actual transition between strata may be gradual. The computer generated boring logs should imply no increased accuracy. Two (2) generalized strata were identified within the range of the SPT borings and are summarized below:

Table 1. Encountered Soil Stratums Stratum No. Depth Range Soil Type Relative Density/Consistency 0-23.5 ft (SPT-1) SAND, SILTY SAND, 1 0-18.5 ft (SPT-2) CLAYEY SAND (SP, Loose to Medium Dense 0-18.5 ft (SPT-3) SM, SC) 23.5-25 ft (SPT-1) SANDY CLAY, CLAY 2 18.5-25 ft (SPT-2) Stiff (CL, CH) 18.5-25 ft (SPT-3)

2.2 Groundwater Conditions

The USDA-NRCS Soil Survey states that the anticipated depth to groundwater is between the land surface and 18 inches below grade. At the time of the HA and SPT borings, groundwater was

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 6

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

encountered at approximately 2 ft-bls (or at an elevation of approximately 8 feet NGVD). Based on historical data, Florida’s rainy season is typically between June and September. Given that the collective soil borings were conducted during the rainy season (mid-July), the seasonal high groundwater table would likely be similar to the measured water table. Based on the data above, FGE estimates that the seasonal high groundwater table lies at a depth of approximately 2 ft-bls.

2.3 Water Infiltration Testing

To investigate the infiltration rate of the shallow soils within the proposed retention pond, a double-ring infiltration test was performed in general accordance with ASTM D-3385. The approximate location of the test is illustrated on Figure 2 . The tests were performed at a depth of 18 inches below grade and the soil type encountered at the depth of the test was poorly sorted, slightly silty silica sand, USCS classification ‘SP’. The results of the inner ring tests for DRI-1 are provided in Table 2 below with the information displayed in graphical form on Graph 2. The complete test results are provided in Attachment C .

Table 2. Infiltration Rate of Inner Ring

Trial No. Elapsed DRI-1 (hr) (in/hr) 1 0.25 19.65 2 0.50 9.38 3 0.75 16.52 4 1.00 19.65 5 1.50 13.06 6 2.00 8.54 7 3.00 13.68 8 4.00 11.22

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 7

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

Graph 2. Infiltration Rate for DRI-1

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 8

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

3.0 DISCUSSION

The collective soil borings encountered subsurface conditions which were relatively consistent throughout the investigation area and show that the location of the proposed construction is generally underlain by loose to medium dense sandy soils with varying silt and clay content to a depth of at least 18.5 ft-bls followed by stiff sandy clay and clay to the final boring termination depth of 25 feet. These subsurface conditions are primarily characteristic of a low-energy depositional environment consistent with the natural development of coastal regions.

FGE noted that a shallow layer of minor organic content was observed near the northwest corner of the proposed structure (SPT-1) from 2 to 4 ft-bls. As organics in the soils decay, the soil structure, soil compressibility, and shear strength are affected. Generally, organic material is not ideal for supporting a building foundation and should be removed; however, the relative minor content of the organics encountered in the SPT boring are not considered significant and likely not detrimental to the proposed structure. The shallow subsurface conditions encountered are generally not suitable for supporting typical structures without modification.

Aside from the aforementioned area, FGE did not observe any other significant deleterious soil conditions such as shallow shrink/swell clays, buried debris, or obvious karst activity within the scope of the borings and general influence zone of the proposed construction which are considered to pose potential problems in regard to adequate bearing capacity or differential settlement. General site development and foundation recommendations are provided below.

The vertical infiltration rate of Test DRI-1 was found to be 13.97 in/hr or 27.94 ft/day. In regards to horizontal permeability, within an anisotropic geological formation, the horizontal component of the saturated hydraulic conductivity is usually larger (one order of magnitude) than the vertical component. For these site conditions it would be reasonable to assume 139.7 in/hr or 279.4 ft/day. The Effective Porosity for the soil type tested would be estimated at 0.2. The infiltration test results indicated the infiltration rate of DRI-1 appears adequate for an effective retention pond.

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 9

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

4.0 SITE DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 General Considerations

The proposed construction site is relatively flat and currently developed. If the existing structure is to be demolished, all existing construction materials and/or debris should be removed from the site and be free from new fill materials. In addition, there is some vegetation present at the ground surface and the topsoil layer is relatively thin, typically less than 6 inches deep from the surface. Stripping and grubbing will be required to an estimated depth of 0.5 ft-bls to remove any debris or vegetation growth and roots found within the topsoil layer at the proposed construction areas. Assuming the debris is sieved from the spoils, the stripped material will likely be suitable for re-use as topsoil for landscaped areas. With the exception of the first few inches of topsoil, in general, the surficial sandy soils at the site are suitable for general fill in grading operations. As stated above, no unsuitable materials (decomposing organic matter, shrink/swell clayey soils, buried debris, etc.) were encountered within the influence zone of the proposed foundation.

Stripping should be conducted within the limits of excavations, borrow areas, and any ground which will become the foundation of the proposed construction. In areas of proposed buildings/foundations and hardscape areas such as parking and/or driveway areas we also recommend implementing a minimum additional margin of three (3) feet. Stripping should include removal of all organic matter, roots, debris, and any other unsuitable, perishable or highly compressible materials as determined by the Engineer. Unsuitable materials should be removed and disposed of or stockpiled at locations specified by the property owner.

After all the unsuitable materials have been removed, clean and uniform structural fill should be placed in maximum lifts of 1 foot and compacted to the Engineer of Record’s specified density and specifications as indicated below.

The Contractor should survey the site at all times during construction in order to determine cut and fill quantities and to verify lift thickness. The contractor should be attentive to storm water runoff and should grade the site to prevent and control erosion and water pollution per Hillsborough County and/or Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) regulations and permit conditions.

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 10

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

4.2 Fill and Compaction Requirements

General Fill should consist of mixed soils with USCS classification: SP, SP-SM, SP-SC, SM, and/or SC with organic contents less than 5% and a fines content of less than 15%. Structural Fill should consist of clean, durable, well-graded granular soil with USCS classification: GW or SW with less than 1% organic content.

Fill underlying foundations should be mixed such that the soil lifts will be free from lenses, pockets, or layers of material differing in texture, gradation, or moisture from the surrounding material. Each soil lift should be spread and leveled by graders or dozers prior to compaction. The compacted surface of each lift should be scarified by light disking or by an equivalent method approved by the Engineer, before subsequent lifts are placed. In addition, soils should be moistened to optimum moisture content between lifts to ensure proper bonding between compacted lifts, prevent bridging of the material, and ensure maximum compaction.

Ruts in the surface of any soil lift should be scarified before placing and compacting additional soil lifts. Soil lifts should be placed in maximum 12-inch thick (loose) lifts for machine placed fill and maximum 6- inch thick (loose) lifts for hand-placed fill. In addition, fill lifts shall not be greater than the vertical reach of the soil mixing equipment. Compaction of the existing native soils and reworked existing fill materials is recommended prior to placement of soil lifts for the foundation design sections. Any slopes should be cut at 4:1 prior to compaction.

Modified Proctor Test Method (ASTM D 1557) compaction curves should be developed for the chosen fill materials and the curves should be on site during construction. Fill underlying foundations, structural loads, and paved areas should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the Modified Proctor Maximum Dry Density. Areas not utilized to support a structure or pavement should be compacted to a minimum of 92% of the Modified Proctor Maximum Dry Density. Moisture contents of fill materials shall be controlled to achieve the minimum dry density at time of testing. Material that is not within these limits at the time of testing should be cut and replaced.

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 11

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

4.3 Temporary Groundwater Control (Dewatering)

Groundwater was encountered at approximately 2 ft-bls during our investigation. Based on the depth to water and the estimated seasonal high water table, dewatering may be required to permit excavations greater than 2 feet deep from existing grade or to facilitate the compaction of soil lifts.

If dewatering is deemed necessary due to excavation requirements, the dewatering method should be chosen by the contractor; however, the following are commonly utilized dewatering techniques in Florida sandy soils. Dewatering in sandy soils can be performed using a single stage of fully sanded vacuum well-points. Well-points can be installed by jetting or drilling. A coarse sand or fine gravel filter should be installed around each well-point and riser pipe to provide a positive drainage connection between all soil layers being dewatered. Some supplemental sump pumping may be required; however, dewatering should not be performed by utilizing sumps alone. If deemed necessary, any sump inlets should be located outside the bearing areas to avoid loosening of the surficial sandy bearing soils and prevent side- slope stability problems. The groundwater level should be maintained at least one foot below the bottom of the excavation to provide a stable working platform for fill placement and/or foundation construction.

Given the potential for a high seasonal groundwater water table, we recommend performing as much grading as possible (grubbing, loading soil, spreading/moving fill) with track-mounted equipment. If heavy rubber tire equipment is utilized to grade the site, the exposed subgrade will likely rut and may become soft and “pump”. If rubber tire equipment is utilized, trafficking the site should be minimized.

4.4 Pavement Consideration

Based on the results of the borings, we consider the shallow subsurface conditions at the site generally adequate to support a flexible pavement when constructed on properly prepared subgrade soils as outlined above. Satisfactory pavement life is dependent on dry/strong pavement support provided by the base and subgrade courses. Accordingly, a minimum clearance of two (2) feet must be maintained between the normal groundwater table and the bottom of the base layer. After completing the stripping activities in pavement areas, structural backfill and fill required to achieve the finish pavement grades can then be placed and compacted as described above. Recommendations for pavement are provided in Section 6.

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 12

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

5.0 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS

Due to the very shallow groundwater encountered at a depth of 2-feet below grade, the allowable bearing pressure is considered to be only 1,000 psf for a conventional shallow foundation. The shallow groundwater prevents conventional mechanical compaction as the process would cause groundwater to ‘pump’ through the shallow sandy soils lensing the surficial aquifer nearly to existing grade. Based on the current site conditions, three options are available for the planned structure foundation, 1) over excavation of the footings and replacement with gravel, 2) raise the building pad approximately 2-feet above existing grade with structural fill atop a biaxial geogrid, and 3) utilize a structural mat/raft foundation.

5.1 FOUNDATION OPTION-1

Considering the provided civil site plan, which indicates the design finished floor elevation (FFE) of 13.6- feet, we recommend over excavating the footing trenches a minimum of 36-inches below the bottom footing elevation and replacing the material with a base coarse aggregate layer of crushed concrete gravel (FDOT #57 size). This material should be placed in lifts not exceeding 12 inches loose, and compacted to a minimum 95% modified proctor (ASTM D1557 or AASHTO T-180). We also recommend an additional horizontal margin of 1-6 foot in each direction beyond the width of the footing to ensure proper geometry of the gravel bed is achieved. The minimum width of the strip footing shall be 2 ‘-0. Assuming the above recommendations are implemented, design bearing pressure will satisfy allowable soil bearing pressure of 1,000 psf. This value is based upon utilization of shallow strip footing. For spread and strip footings we recommend bearing pressure that shall not exceed 1000psf. Embedment depths of the spread footing shall be at least 24 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. Based on our understanding of the planned structure, we assume the wall loading will not exceed 3,500 plf. Implementing our recommendation, we estimate the load on the soil will not exceed 700 psf utilizing a minimum footing with of 24-inches as effective bearing area is increased by an estimated 100 percent; Thus design (service level) bearing pressure will be well below the estimated allowable bearing pressure of 1,000 psf.

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 13

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

5.2 FOUNDATION OPTION-2

Considering the shallow groundwater conditions, another option is to utilize a shallow footing design is to elevate the building pad an estimated 2-feet above adjacent grade. The elevated building pad sequence would consist of initially stripping and grubbing all organic material from the building footprint and an additional horizontal margin of 6-feet beyond the perimeter of the building footprint. Following grubbing and clearing operations, we recommend carefully proof-roll the area with a minimum 5-ton vibratory roller that has a minimum drum diameter of 3-feet. The compactor should be operated at a slow walking pace and for at least a total of four (4) overlapping passes in perpendicular directions. Careful observations should be made during the proof-rolling to help identify areas of loose and/or soft yielding soils that may require over-excavation and replacement. It should be noted that careful monitoring of groundwater levels should be conducted during the proof-rolling activities and if groundwater levels rise to a point where soil pumping is observed, site preparation activities shall be halted for a minimum 48 hour period to allow the shallow soils to drain.

Following completion of the proof-rolling activities, a Tensar Triax Geogrid should be placed throughout the building pad preparation area with a sufficient amount of additional material to overlap the grid back under the extent of the perimeter footing. Initial layer of the base material atop the Geogrid shall be at least 8-inches of stabilized base material that should be in general compliance with FDOT specification 911-5.2.2 with a minimum LBR of 100 and compacted to minimum 95% modified proctor ASTM D- 1557 or AASHTO T180. After completing the initial 8-inch lift, the Geogrid edges shall be folded back across the top of the lift extending under the perimeter footings. An additional 10-inch lift of stabilized base material shall be placed and compacted in accordance with the above specifications. Following placement of the two base material lifts, a final lift of structural fill shall be placed as necessary to achieve final grade. The structural fill course shall be a minimum of 12 inches thick and shall be in accordance with Section 4.2.

Based on our understanding of the planned structure, we assume the wall loading will not exceed 3,500 plf. Implementing our recommendation, we estimate the load on the soil will not exceed 700 psf utilizing a minimum footing with of 24-inches as effective bearing area is increased by an estimated 100 percent; Thus design (service level) bearing pressure will be well below the estimated allowable bearing pressure of 1,000 psf.

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 14

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

5.3 FOUNDATION OPTION-3

Considering the shallow groundwater conditions, another option is to utilize a mat/raft style foundation with a thickened monolithic edge bearing on approved native materials and/or properly compacted fill. We recommend a maximum net allowable design soil bearing pressure of 1,000 psf for proportioning the mat foundation. Based on the collected soil data, a modulus of subgrade reaction value of 30 pci may be considered for slab/mat design. The subgrade modulus (ks) is not a fundamental soil property and depends on many other factors including the width, shape, and depth below the ground surface of the loaded area, position under the foundation, and time (Coduto 2001). Because it is difficult to develop accurate ks values, the provided value was derived from a correlation between relative density and subgrade modulus for cohesionless soil (Bowles). We recommend the monolithic thickened edge elevation be a minimum depth of 12 inches below the finished exterior grade or in accordance with the local building code requirements. Based on the planned construction type and expected loads, we would recommend the entire structure footprint plus an additional 1 foot in all directions be stripped to a minimum 2 feet below grade and backfilled to bearing elevation (minimum 18-inch layer) with stabilized limerock base. The base material should be in general accordance with FDOT specification 911-5.2.2 with a minimum LBR of 100 and compacted to minimum 95% modified proctor ASTM D-1557 or AASHTO T180. In addition a 2-inch layer of coarse graded sand should be placed atop the stabilized base, separated by a vapor barrier, to allow unrestrained shrinkage of the slab during curing.

5.4 SETTLEMENT

The settlement of a structure is a function of the compressibility of the bearing materials, bearing pressure, actual structural loads, fill depths, and the bearing elevation of footings with respect to the final ground surface elevation. Estimates of settlement for foundations bearing on engineered or non- engineered fill soils are strongly dependent on the quality of fill placement. Based on the load case scenario of a single-story masonry structure utilizing any of the three above foundation recommendations, the anticipated short term total settlement is less than 1 inch with the long term total settlement estimated to be less than 1.5 inches.

It should be noted that exposure to the environment may weaken the soils at the foundation bearing elevation if the foundation excavations remain exposed during periods of inclement weather such as rain- fall. Therefore, foundation concrete should be placed the same day the proper excavation is achieved and

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 15

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

the design bearing pressure verified. If the bearing soils area becomes softened by surface water absorption or exposure to the environment, the softened soils must be removed from the foundation excavation bottom immediately prior to placement of concrete. If the excavation must remain open overnight, or if inclement weather becomes imminent while the bearing soils are exposed, we recommend that a 2-to-3-inch thick “mud-mat” of “lean” concrete be placed over the exposed bearing soils before the placement of reinforcing steel.

6.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Parking Lot

FGE anticipates that a shallow flexible pavement will be appropriate to support a 2.5 ksf load in the parking lot areas. However, foundation subgrade preparation will be necessary prior to construction. Foundation subgrade preparation should include a program of stripping and grubbing the existing ground surface as described above followed by a program of compacting the loose surficial sands and/or soil lifts underlying the proposed foundation with a relatively large (10 to 20 ton) vibrating drum roller.

Once the sandy or granular subgrade is properly compacted, FGE recommends using a design friction angle of 30º. Utilizing this friction angle range, the ultimate bearing pressure for the subgrade would be on the order of 7.5 ksf to 10 ksf depending on embedment depth. Using a Factor of Safety (FS) of 3, an allowable bearing pressure of 2.5 ksf for static loading is considered appropriate for preliminary design. An allowable bearing pressure of 5 ksf for dynamic loading (wind, construction, and/or moving vehicle load) is considered acceptable for short-term live loading conditions. Given a long-term static applied load of 2.5 ksf, FGE estimates that total and differential settlement would be less than 1 inch and 1/2 inch, respectively. However, due to the sandy nature of the near-surface soils, we expect the majority of settlement to occur in an elastic manner and fairly rapidly during and immediately following construction.

6.2 General

We recommend using a flexible pavement section on this project. Flexible pavements utilize the strength and durability of several layer components to distribute load elastically to the soil. Generally, flexible

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 16

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

pavements are constructed with a bituminous-treated surface, concrete, or a relatively thin surface of hot- mix asphalt or asphalt concrete over one or more unbound base courses overlying subgrade.

6.3 Layer Components

For preliminary pavement designs, we recommend using a three-layer pavement section placed atop compacted native soils or compacted fill soils. The flexible pavement section should consist of stabilized subgrade, a base course, and a surface course.

We recommend that light duty pavement sections have a minimum of 6 inches of stabilized subgrade, 6 inches of base course, and a minimum of 1.5 inches of surface course, and that medium duty pavement sections have 8 inches of stabilized subgrade, 8 inches of base course, and 2 inches of surface course. For heavy duty sections, we recommend a 10 inch stabilized subgrade, 10 inch base course and 2 inch surface course.

The minimum recommended thicknesses may lead to more than normal periodic maintenance and may not meet typical life expectancies for some pavements. If projected traffic loads become available, we recommend that an appropriate pavement design be used and the component thicknesses be adjusted accordingly.

Because traffic loadings are commonly unavailable, we have generalized our pavement design into three groups. The group descriptions and the recommended component thicknesses are presented in Table 3: Flexible Pavement Component Recommendations. The structural numbers in Table 2 are based on a structural number analysis with the stated estimated daily traffic volume for a 15-year design lifespan. For loading conditions greater than those presented in Table 2, we recommend that you have a complete pavement design performed based on projected traffic data.

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 17

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

Table 3. Flexible Pavement Component Recommendations

Required Provided Component Thickness (inches) Traffic Group Structural Structural Stabilized Base Surface Number Number Subgrade Course Course Light-Duty* 1.9 2.1 6 6 3.0 Medium-Duty** 2.4 2.8 8 8 3.0 Heavy-Duty*** 3.0 3.2 10 10 3.0

* Light-duty: Auto parking areas; over eighty cars; light panel and pickup trucks; average gross weight of 4,000 pounds, total equivalent 18-kip single axle loads (ESALs) equals 30,000. ** Medium-duty: Commercial driveways, small roadways; twenty trucks or less per day; average gross vehicle weight of 25,000 pounds, total ESALs equals 150,000. *** Heavy-duty: Occasional heavy truck traffic, total ESALs equals 750,000.

6.4 Stabilized Subgrade Course

We recommend that subgrade materials be compacted to at least 98 percent of Modified Proctor Maximum Dry Density (ASTM 01557) according to the requirements in the "Site Preparation" section of this report. Further, stabilized subgrade materials should satisfy a minimum Limerock Bearing Ratio (LBR) of 40 as specified by Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) requirements for Type B or Type C Stabilized Subgrade. The stabilized subgrade should be "free draining" when overlain by crushed concrete base.

The stabilized subgrade can be imported material or a blend of on-site soils and imported materials. If a blend is proposed, we recommend that the contractor perform a mix design to find the optimum mix proportions.

6.5 Base Course

We recommend using either limerock* or a crushed concrete base course material. Soil-cement may also be used, but may not be economical. The base utilized should have a minimum LBR of 100, and should meet current FDOT requirements for graded aggregate base. Place the base in maximum 6-inch lifts and compact each lift to a minimum density of 98 percent of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density.

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 18

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

Perform compliance base density testing to a depth of 1-foot at a frequency of one test per 10,000 square feet, or at a minimum of two test locations, whichever is greater.

*Note: If limerock base material is to be used, adequate separation between groundwater and the base must be maintained. Limerock is highly moisture sensitive and becomes unstable when saturated. Therefore, if a minimum 18-inch separation between the groundwater and the base course cannot be met, the use of limerock base on this project is not recommended.

6.6 Flexible Surface Course

In light duty areas where there is occasional truck traffic, but primarily passenger cars, we recommend using an asphaltic concrete, FDOT Type S-111, which has a minimum stability of 1,000 pounds. In heavy duty pavement areas, we recommend FDOT Type S-1 asphaltic concrete, which has a minimum stability of 1500 pounds.

Asphaltic concrete mixes should be a current FDOT approved design of the materials actually used. Test samples of the materials delivered to the project to verify that the aggregate gradation and asphalt content satisfies the mix design requirements. Compact the asphalt to a minimum of 95 percent of the Marshall design density.

After placement and field compaction, core the wearing surface to evaluate material thickness and to perform laboratory densities. Obtain cores at frequencies of at least one core per 3,000 square feet of placed pavement or a minimum of two cores per day's production.

In parking lots, for extended life expectancy of the surface course, we recommend applying a coal tar emulsion sealer at least six months after placement of the surface course. The seal coat will help to patch cracks and voids, and protect the surface from damaging ultraviolet light and automobile liquid spillage. Please note that applying the seal coat prior to six months after placement may hinder the "curing" of the surface course, leading to its early deterioration.

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 19

Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall Florida Geotechnical Engineering, Inc.

7.0 CLOSING AND LIMITATIONS

The findings and recommendations presented herein are based on the soil borings performed at the subject site at the specific test locations/depths at the time of the investigation and FGE’s professional judgment. The subsurface conditions at other locations/depths may differ, and no warranty as to the subsurface conditions elsewhere is neither expressed nor implied by the data presented herein. Furthermore, the soil depths on the boring logs designating the interface between the various soils may only be approximate boundaries where the transition is gradual or could not be detected by the boring operations. In addition, the depth of the groundwater table is only indicative of the conditions at the time of the investigation as groundwater level may fluctuate significantly because of various factors.

The recommendations provided in this report are based on the subsurface and groundwater conditions observed and anticipated loading conditions provided to or estimated by FGE. In addition, this investigation and report does not reflect or interpret soil conditions below the tested depth(s). This report should not be used without the guidance of the geotechnical engineer who prepared this report. FGE is not responsible for improper use of this information, which could lead to erroneous assumptions, faulty conclusions, or other problems.

FGE reserves the right to modify the information presented in this report as new data is collected or if subsurface and groundwater conditions are encountered during construction that differ from the conditions that are presented in this report.

Subsurface Geotechnical Exploration Report August 2017 FGE Project No. 200932 Page | 20

FIGURES 0 2,000 Ft c 2017 Google Maps A Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall (3010 South 54th Street, Tampa, Florida 33619)

FIGURE 1 SITE LOCATION MAP CHURCH OF THE LIVING GOD - FELLOWSHIP HALL 3010 SOUTH 54TH STREET, TAMPA, FLORIDA 33619 Florida Geotechnical FGE Project No. 200932 Engineering, Inc. STOP N DRI-1 0 40

APPROXIMATE SCALE (FEET) HA-1 CP-1

FIRE LANE NO PARKING

STOP STOP SPT-1

SPT-2 HA-2 CP-2

SPT-3

STOP FH STOP ONE LEGEND WAY - Standard Penetration Test Boring Location - Hand Auger/ Cone Penetrometer Location STOP

- Double Ring Infiltrometer Location cu./yd. 6 DUMPSTER HA-3 CP-3

FIGURE 2 SITE PLAN AND TESTING LOCATIONS CHURCH OF THE LIVING GOD - FELLOWSHIP HALL 3010 SOUTH 54TH STREET, TAMPA, FLORIDA 33619 Florida Geotechnical FGE Project No. 200932 Engineering, Inc.

SIGNAGE ATTACHMENT A United States A product of the National Custom Soil Resource Department of Cooperative Soil Survey, Agriculture a joint effort of the United Report for States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State Hillsborough Natural agencies including the Resources Agricultural Experiment Conservation Stations, and local County, Florida Service participants Church of the Living God - Fellowship Hall

July 29, 2017 Preface

Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require

2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

3 Contents

Preface...... 2 How Soil Surveys Are Made...... 5 Soil Map...... 8 Soil Map...... 9 Legend...... 10 Map Unit Legend...... 11 Map Unit Descriptions...... 11 Hillsborough County, Florida...... 13 29—Myakka fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes...... 13 30—Myakka fine sand, frequently flooded...... 14 References...... 16

4 How Soil Surveys Are Made

Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil

5 Custom Soil Resource Report scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and

6 Custom Soil Resource Report identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.

7 Soil Map

The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.

8 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 82° 23' 35'' W 82° 23' 27'' W

362910 362930 362950 362970 362990 363010 363030 363050 363070 363090 363110 27° 55' 15'' N 27° 55' 15'' N 3089240 3089240 3089220 3089220 3089200 3089200 3089180 3089180 3089160 3089160 3089140 3089140 3089120 3089120

Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

27° 55' 11'' N 27° 55' 11'' N 3089100 362910 362930 362950 362970 362990 363010 363030 363050 363070 363090 363110

Map Scale: 1:1,000 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Meters

82° 23' 35'' W N 0 10 20 40 60 82° 23' 27'' W Feet 0 45 90 180 270 Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 17N WGS84 9 Custom Soil Resource Report

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION

Area of Interest (AOI) Spoil Area The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at Area of Interest (AOI) 1:20,000. Stony Spot Soils Very Stony Spot Soil Map Unit Polygons Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Wet Spot Soil Map Unit Lines Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause Other Soil Map Unit Points misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil Special Line Features line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of Special Point Features contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed Blowout Political Features scale. PLSS Township and Borrow Pit Range PLSS Section Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map Clay Spot measurements. Closed Depression Water Features Streams and Canals Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Gravel Pit Web Soil Survey URL: Transportation Gravelly Spot Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Rails Landfill Interstate Highways Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator Lava Flow projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts US Routes distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Marsh or swamp Major Roads Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more Mine or Quarry accurate calculations of distance or area are required. Local Roads Miscellaneous Water Background This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as Perennial Water Aerial Photography of the version date(s) listed below.

Rock Outcrop Soil Survey Area: Hillsborough County, Florida Saline Spot Survey Area Data: Version 15, Sep 16, 2016

Sandy Spot Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales Severely Eroded Spot 1:50,000 or larger.

Sinkhole Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Dec 19, 2013—Jan Slide or Slip 17, 2014

Sodic Spot The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

10 Custom Soil Resource Report

Map Unit Legend

Hillsborough County, Florida (FL057)

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 29 Myakka fine sand, 0 to 2 3.7 74.1% percent slopes 30 Myakka fine sand, frequently 1.3 25.9% flooded Totals for Area of Interest 4.9 100.0%

Map Unit Descriptions

The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the

11 Custom Soil Resource Report

development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.

12 Custom Soil Resource Report

Hillsborough County, Florida

29—Myakka fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2s3lg Elevation: 10 to 130 feet Mean annual precipitation: 38 to 62 inches Mean annual air temperature: 64 to 77 degrees F Frost-free period: 300 to 365 days Farmland classification: Farmland of unique importance

Map Unit Composition Myakka and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Myakka Setting Landform: Flatwoods on marine terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread, talf Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Sandy marine deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 6 inches: fine sand E - 6 to 20 inches: fine sand Bh - 20 to 36 inches: fine sand C - 36 to 80 inches: fine sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 6 to 18 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 4.0 Available water storage in profile: Low (about 3.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w Hydrologic Soil Group: A/D Other vegetative classification: South Florida Flatwoods (R155XY003FL), Sandy soils on flats of mesic or hydric lowlands (G155XB141FL) Hydric soil rating: No

13 Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Basinger Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Drainageways on marine terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread, dip Down-slope shape: Convex, concave Across-slope shape: Linear, concave Other vegetative classification: Slough (R155XY011FL), Sandy soils on flats of mesic or hydric lowlands (G155XB141FL) Hydric soil rating: Yes Eaugallie Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: — error in exists on — Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread, talf Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: South Florida Flatwoods (R155XY003FL) Other vegetative classification: South Florida Flatwoods (R155XY003FL), Sandy soils on flats of mesic or hydric lowlands (G155XB141FL) Hydric soil rating: No Placid, depressional Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Depressions on marine terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip Down-slope shape: Concave, convex Across-slope shape: Concave, linear Other vegetative classification: Sandy soils on stream terraces, flood plains, or in depressions (G155XB145FL) Hydric soil rating: Yes

30—Myakka fine sand, frequently flooded

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 1j72h Mean annual precipitation: 48 to 56 inches Mean annual air temperature: 70 to 77 degrees F Frost-free period: 324 to 354 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Myakka, frequently flooded, and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

14 Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Myakka, Frequently Flooded Setting Landform: Tidal marshes on marine terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Sandy marine deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: fine sand E - 5 to 22 inches: fine sand Bh - 22 to 40 inches: fine sand C - 40 to 80 inches: fine sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 1 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Very poorly drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 0 to 6 inches Frequency of flooding: Frequent Frequency of ponding: None Salinity, maximum in profile: Strongly saline (16.0 to 32.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 4.0 Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8 Hydrologic Soil Group: A/D Other vegetative classification: Salt Marsh (R155XY009FL), Sandy soils on stream terraces, flood plains, or in depressions (G155XB145FL) Hydric soil rating: Yes

Minor Components Samsula Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Depressions on marine terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Other vegetative classification: Freshwater Marshes and Ponds (R155XY010FL), Organic soils in depressions and on flood plains (G155XB645FL) Hydric soil rating: Yes

15 References

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084

16 Custom Soil Resource Report

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf

17 ATTACHMENT B BORING HA-1 PAGE 1 OF 1 P.O. Box 76006 Tampa, Florida 33675 Telephone: 813-248-4720 Fax: 813-248-4835

CLIENT Rafael Blanco - RDG Design and Builders, Inc. PROJECT NAME Blanco PROJECT NUMBER 200932 PROJECT LOCATION 3010 South 54th Street, Tampa, Florida 33619 DATE 7/14/17 GROUND ELEVATION 10 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR FGE DRILLING METHOD ASTM D-1452 GROUND WATER LEVEL: 2.00 ft / Elev 8.00 ft BORING LOCATION: See Map LOGGED BY C. Rouzer EQUIVALENT SPT N VALUE 5 10 15

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION (ft) (ft) LOG GWT BLOW DEPTH COUNTS NUMBER GRAPHIC (N VALUE) ELEVATION SAMPLE TYPE SAMPLE 10 0 SAND (SP) Loose, slightly silty, fine grained, gray.

HA 4

9 1

HA 6

8 2 SILTY SAND (SM) Loose, fine grained, dark brown.

HA 6

7 3 SAND (SP) Loose, slightly silty, fine grained, brown.

HA 8

6 4

HA 6

5 Bottom of borehole at 5.0 feet. FGE HA/DCP - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 8/7/17 09:25 - X:\PROJECT - FGE HA/DCP09:25 FOLDERS STD US LAB.GDT FGE\BORING - GINT - 8/7/17 LOG DATABASE FILES\PROJECTS\200932 BLANCO.GPJ BORING HA-2 PAGE 1 OF 1 P.O. Box 76006 Tampa, Florida 33675 Telephone: 813-248-4720 Fax: 813-248-4835

CLIENT Rafael Blanco - RDG Design and Builders, Inc. PROJECT NAME Blanco PROJECT NUMBER 200932 PROJECT LOCATION 3010 South 54th Street, Tampa, Florida 33619 DATE 7/14/17 GROUND ELEVATION 10 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR FGE DRILLING METHOD ASTM D-1452 GROUND WATER LEVEL: 2.00 ft / Elev 8.00 ft BORING LOCATION: See Map LOGGED BY C. Rouzer EQUIVALENT SPT N VALUE 5 10 15

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION (ft) (ft) LOG GWT BLOW DEPTH COUNTS NUMBER GRAPHIC (N VALUE) ELEVATION SAMPLE TYPE SAMPLE 10 0 SAND (SP) Loose to medium dense, slightly silty, fine grained, gray to brown.

HA 5

9 1

HA 5

8 2

HA 6

7 3

HA 9

6 4

HA 12

5 Bottom of borehole at 5.0 feet. FGE HA/DCP - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 8/7/17 09:26 - X:\PROJECT - FGE HA/DCP09:26 FOLDERS STD US LAB.GDT FGE\BORING - GINT - 8/7/17 LOG DATABASE FILES\PROJECTS\200932 BLANCO.GPJ BORING HA-3 PAGE 1 OF 1 P.O. Box 76006 Tampa, Florida 33675 Telephone: 813-248-4720 Fax: 813-248-4835

CLIENT Rafael Blanco - RDG Design and Builders, Inc. PROJECT NAME Blanco PROJECT NUMBER 200932 PROJECT LOCATION 3010 South 54th Street, Tampa, Florida 33619 DATE 7/14/17 GROUND ELEVATION 10 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR FGE DRILLING METHOD ASTM D-1452 GROUND WATER LEVEL: 2.00 ft / Elev 8.00 ft BORING LOCATION: See Map LOGGED BY C. Rouzer EQUIVALENT SPT N VALUE 5 10 15

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION (ft) (ft) LOG GWT BLOW DEPTH COUNTS NUMBER GRAPHIC (N VALUE) ELEVATION SAMPLE TYPE SAMPLE 10 0 SAND (SP) Very loose to loose, slightly silty, fine grained, gray to brown.

HA 3

9 1

HA 8

8 2

HA 6

7 3

HA 6

6 4

HA 6

5 Bottom of borehole at 5.0 feet. FGE HA/DCP - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 8/7/17 09:26 - X:\PROJECT - FGE HA/DCP09:26 FOLDERS STD US LAB.GDT FGE\BORING - GINT - 8/7/17 LOG DATABASE FILES\PROJECTS\200932 BLANCO.GPJ BORING SPT-1 PAGE 1 OF 1 P.O. Box 76006 Tampa, Florida 33675 Telephone: 813-248-4720 Fax: 813-248-4835

CLIENT Rafael Blanco - RDG Design and Builders, Inc. PROJECT NAME Blanco PROJECT NUMBER 200932 PROJECT LOCATION 3010 South 54th Street, Tampa, Florida 33619 DATE 7/14/17 GROUND ELEVATION 10 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR DPS DRILLING METHOD ASTM D-1586 GROUND WATER LEVEL: 2.00 ft / Elev 8.00 ft BORING LOCATION: See Map LOGGED BY C. Rouzer

SPT N VALUE 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90100

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION (ft) (ft) LOG GWT BLOW DEPTH COUNTS NUMBER GRAPHIC (N VALUE) ELEVATION SAMPLE TYPE SAMPLE 10 0 SAND (SP) Loose, slightly silty, fine grained, gray. 2-2-2-4 SS (4)

SILTY SAND (SM) Medium dense, fine grained, dark brown. Minor organic content from 2 to 4 ft-bls. 3-6-6-10 SS (12)

CLAYEY SAND (SC) Loose to medium dense, fine grained, brown to 5 gray. 7-10-8-10 5 SS (18)

6-6-6-5 SS (12)

Moderate shell content from 8 to 18.5 ft-bls. 2-3-3-4 SS (6) 0 10

4-4-4 SS (8) -5 15

6-7-6 SS (13) -10 20

SANDY CLAY (CL) Stiff, gray. 6-5-7 SS (12) 25 Bottom of borehole at 25.0 feet. FGE GEOTECH - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 8/7/17 09:26 - X:\PROJECT - FGE GEOTECH STD US 09:26 FOLDERS - GINT FGE\BORING 8/7/17 LAB.GDT LOG DATABASE - FILES\PROJECTS\200932BLANCO.GPJ BORING SPT-2 PAGE 1 OF 1 P.O. Box 76006 Tampa, Florida 33675 Telephone: 813-248-4720 Fax: 813-248-4835

CLIENT Rafael Blanco - RDG Design and Builders, Inc. PROJECT NAME Blanco PROJECT NUMBER 200932 PROJECT LOCATION 3010 South 54th Street, Tampa, Florida 33619 DATE 7/14/17 GROUND ELEVATION 10 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR DPS DRILLING METHOD ASTM D-1586 GROUND WATER LEVEL: 2.00 ft / Elev 8.00 ft BORING LOCATION: See Map LOGGED BY C. Rouzer

SPT N VALUE 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90100

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION (ft) (ft) LOG GWT BLOW DEPTH COUNTS NUMBER GRAPHIC (N VALUE) ELEVATION SAMPLE TYPE SAMPLE 10 0 SAND (SP) Loose, slightly silty, fine grained, brown. 2-3-4-5 SS (7)

SILTY SAND (SM) Loose, fine grained, dark brown. 1-4-2-1 SS (6)

CLAYEY SAND (SC) Loose, fine grained, brown. 5 1-2-6-7 5 SS (8)

3-3-3-2 SS (6)

Moderate shell content from 8 to 18.5 ft-bls. 4-4-3-4 SS (7) 0 10

4-3-4 SS (7) -5 15

SANDY CLAY (CL) Stiff, gray. 5-4-5 Minor shell content from 18.5 to 25 ft-bls. SS (9) -10 20

8-7-6 SS (13) 25 Bottom of borehole at 25.0 feet. FGE GEOTECH - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 8/7/17 09:26 - X:\PROJECT - FGE GEOTECH STD US 09:26 FOLDERS - GINT FGE\BORING 8/7/17 LAB.GDT LOG DATABASE - FILES\PROJECTS\200932BLANCO.GPJ BORING SPT-3 PAGE 1 OF 1 P.O. Box 76006 Tampa, Florida 33675 Telephone: 813-248-4720 Fax: 813-248-4835

CLIENT Rafael Blanco - RDG Design and Builders, Inc. PROJECT NAME Blanco PROJECT NUMBER 200932 PROJECT LOCATION 3010 South 54th Street, Tampa, Florida 33619 DATE 7/14/17 GROUND ELEVATION 10 ft DRILLING CONTRACTOR DPS DRILLING METHOD ASTM D-1586 GROUND WATER LEVEL: 2.00 ft / Elev 8.00 ft BORING LOCATION: See Map LOGGED BY C. Rouzer

SPT N VALUE 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90100

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION (ft) (ft) LOG GWT BLOW DEPTH COUNTS NUMBER GRAPHIC (N VALUE) ELEVATION SAMPLE TYPE SAMPLE 10 0 SAND (SP) Loose, slightly silty, fine grained, brown. 2-3-5-6 SS (8)

SILTY SAND (SM) Medium dense, fine grained, dark brown. 5-7-6-7 SS (13)

CLAYEY SAND (SC) Loose to medium dense, fine grained, brown to 5 gray. 3-4-6-9 5 SS (10)

5-3-2-2 SS (5)

Moderate shell content from 8 to 13.5 ft-bls. 6-4-5-5 SS (9) 0 10

4-2-3 Minor shell content from 13.5 to 18.5 ft-bls. SS (5) -5 15

SANDY CLAY (CL) Stiff, gray. 4-4-5 SS (9) -10 20

CLAY (CH) Stiff, light brown. 4-5-6 SS (11) 25 Bottom of borehole at 25.0 feet. FGE GEOTECH - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 8/7/17 09:26 - X:\PROJECT - FGE GEOTECH STD US 09:26 FOLDERS - GINT FGE\BORING 8/7/17 LAB.GDT LOG DATABASE - FILES\PROJECTS\200932BLANCO.GPJ ATTACHMENT C PO Box 76006 Tampa, Florida 33675 Tel: (813) 248-4720 Fax: (813) 384-2294 www.flgeotech.com

DOUBLE RING INFILTRATION TEST ASTM D-3385

Project Name: Blanco Client: Rafael Blanco ProjectLocation: 3010 S. 54th Street, Tampa, Florida 33619 Date Tested: 7/19/2017 Project Number: 200932 Tested By: C. Rouzer Test ID: DRI-1 Test Location: Proposed Retention Pond Soil Description: Sand, fine grained, gray USCS Classification: SP

Elapsed Time ∆t ∆V ∆V V V Trial No. IR A IR A (min) (hr) (hr) (mL) (mL) (in/hr) (in/hr) 1 15 0.25 0.25 9,103.4 40,344.8 19.65 29.03 2 30 0.50 0.25 4,344.8 30,344.8 9.38 21.83 3 45 0.75 0.25 7,655.2 22,931.0 16.52 16.50 4 60 1.00 0.25 9,103.4 40,344.8 19.65 29.03 5 90 1.50 0.50 12,103.4 48,965.5 13.06 17.61 6 120 2.00 0.50 7,913.8 50,344.8 8.54 18.11 7 180 3.00 1.00 12,672.4 66,896.6 13.68 24.06 8 240 4.00 1.00 10,396.6 53,103.4 11.22 19.10

SOIL INFILTRATION RATE: 13.97 in/hr

Infiltration Rate vs. Elapsed Time 35.0

30.0 Inner (in/hr) Annular (in/hr) 25.0

20.0

(in/hr) 15.0 Infiltration Rate Infiltration 10.0

5.0

0.0 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 Elapsed Time (hr)

Report DRI-1 Page 1 of 1 7/20/2017