EAA Bolles L-21 Canal BODR Bolles L-21 Modified Draft BODR

6.0 6.1 6.1.1

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AND CANAL STABILITY Geotechnical Investigations General

In order to determine the subsurface and groundwater conditions for the Bolles L-21 Canal Improvements Project, existing borings were used. The existing borings consisted of five standard penetration test (SPT) borings, designated as CB series and drilled by the USACE during the period of November 8, 2003 to November 24, 2003. 6.1.2 Test Borings

A total of twenty-three borings were performed by the SFWMD in the EAA. Five of these borings, designated CB-23, CB-27, CB-28, CB-29 and CB-30, were performed in or near the Bolles L-21 Canal alignment. The spacing between borings ranges from one to two miles. The ground elevations at the boring locations, ranged from El. 10.0 to 12.7 ft-NAVD. All of the borings were terminated at approximately 40 feet below the existing ground surface. The schedule of these borings is shown in Table 6-1. The borings were advanced using a rotary drilling method using a CME-55 Rig with an automatic hammer. The soil sampling consisted of split spoon samples and SPT was performed at each sampling interval. Rock coring was performed with a rock core barrel and information including percent recovery, RQD, drilling time and applied pressure for each core run was also taken and noted on the logs. The locations of the borings are shown in Figure 2-3. Table 6-1 - Schedule of Borings Coordinates Ground Elevation Northing Easting (ft-NAVD) 709,296 827,441 12.7 722,100 827368 10.0 733,089 827,200 12.5 739,013 827,257 11.9 750,605 827,678 11.1

Boring CB-23 CB-27 CB-28 CB-29 CB-30 Notes: Vertical control is based on NAVD88. Horizontal control is based on NAD83.

Depth of Boring (feet) 40.0 39.5 39.5 39.5 41.0

The logs for the borings listed above are presented in Appendix C Boring Logs.

6-1

EAA Bolles L-21 Canal BODR Bolles L-21 Modified Draft BODR

6.1.3

Laboratory Testing

The boring logs, made available to the Consultant by the SFWMD, do not indicate that laboratory tests were performed on the soil and rock core samples. 6.1.4 Subsurface Stratifications

The subsurface conditions, as revealed by the available test borings, indicate that there are six strata types generally present at the site within the depths explored. The subsurface profile along the alignment of the Bolles L-21 Canal is shown in Figure 6-1. The soil types shown are based on observations made at the boring locations and may not reflect variations between the test locations and beyond the depths explored. A general discussion of these strata, in order of increasing depth and their Unified Soil Classification System symbols, is included below. Stratum 1 - Fill Material (FILL) This is the uppermost stratum, observed at locations along the alignment of the Bolles L-16 Canal, with a thickness varying from 1 foot to 4 feet. This stratum is classified as fill material comprising loose to medium-dense poorly graded sand or silty sand. Stratum 2 - Upper Organic Silt (OL) This stratum is made up of moist, black very soft to soft organic silt. This layer is encountered at all boring locations. The thickness of this layer varies from 1.5 feet to approximately 6 feet. The groundwater table is generally observed near or within this stratum. Stratum 3 - Silty Sand (SM) This stratum is present at the location of Boring CB-34 (outside the project area, along the Bolles L-16 Canal) and is classified as medium dense to dense silty sand. Stratum 4 - Limestone Rock The limestone stratum (which is locally known as caprock) underlies Stratum 2 at all boring locations. The limestone is classified as white/gray to dark gray unweathered to slightly weathered fossiliferous soft to hard rock. The thickness of this stratum is generally 3 feet to 10 feet at all boring locations except in the location of Boring CB-27 where the stratum thickness is about 23 feet. Stratum 5 - Sand/Silt (SP, SP-SM, SM, ML) This stratum underlies Stratum 4 and generally consists of loose to medium-dense fine-grained quartz sands with some carbonate materials. Layers of silt (ML) and limestone are also encountered at various depths at some boring locations. The stratum typically extends to the full depths of the borings. Stratum 6 - Lower Organic Silt (OL) This stratum is encountered only at the location of Boring CB-32 (outside the project area, along the Bolles L-16 Canal). This stratum is classified as medium stiff to hard gray organic silt. The thickness of this stratum is about 9 feet at a depth in excess of 30 feet.

6-2

EAA Bolles L-21 Canal BODR Bolles L-21 Modified Draft BODR

6.2

Groundwater

Groundwater typically occurs at its highest elevation during the wet season (July to October) and declines to its lowest elevation during the dry season of December to April. The groundwater readings were taken in some borings during drilling by the USACE and are summarized in Table 6-2. Table 6-2 - Approximate Groundwater Elevations Groundwater Table Elevation 1 (ft-NAVD) Boring 9.7 CB-23 6.8 CB-27 9.3 CB-28 5.6 CB-29 6.0 CB-30

Groundwater Table Levels were measured during the period from November 4 to November 15, 2003.

6-3

EAA Bolles L-21 Canal BODR Bolles L-21 Modified Draft BODR

Figure 6-1 Subsurface Profile along the Bolles Canal

6-4

EAA Bolles L-21 Canal BODR Bolles L-21 Modified Draft BODR

6.3

Preliminary Geotechnical Design Parameters

The preliminary design parameters used in the slope stability and bearing capacity analysis (and the calculated bearing capacity) are shown in Table 6-3. The parameters presented were developed based on engineering judgment and correlations with SPT values and soil classifications. References to support parameter selection are also presented. Table 6-3 Preliminary Geotechnical Design Parameters 2 Unit Weight Friction Cohesion Ultimate General (pcf) (psf) Bearing Material Blows Angle () Capacity Description Total Eff. Degrees (psf) Material Stockpile/Spoil 120 60 32 N/A 3 N/C 4 NA Embankment Stratum 1, Fill 120 60 32 N/A N/C 2-58 Stratum 2, Upper 90 30 NA 250 1,500 1-50 Organic Silt Stratum 3, Silty 120 60 34 NA 17,000 1-74 Sand Stratum 4, 120 60 NA 2000 N/C 1-87 Limestone Rock Stratum 5, 120 60 28-32 NA N/C 0-55 Sand/Silt Stratum 6, 100 40 NA 500 N/C 2-39 Lower Organic Silt pcf pounds per cubic foot psf pounds per square foot

N-Value

NA 6-36 0-53 2-98 3-103 4-53 5-47

References to the Soil and Rock Parameters: Holtz and Bowles, 1981. An Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering, Prentice Hall. Bowles, 1977, Foundation Analysis and Design, McGraw-Hill. Research Center Final Report BC354-59, FDOT. Geotechnical Properties of Calcareous Rocks of Southern Florida (S. K. Saxena, published in ASTMs STP 777) 3 N/A Not Applicable 4 N/C Not Calculated

6-5

EAA Bolles L-21 Canal BODR Bolles L-21 Modified Draft BODR

Table 6-4 contains a summary of core data from the bore logs of the borings along the L-21 Canal Corridor.

Table 6-4 Core Data for Boring Logs

Core Data for Boring No. CP03-EAARS-CB-0023
Run Number 1 2 3 4 Start EL., ft 6.7 4.7 -23.3 -25.3 End EL., ft 4.7 2.7 -25.3 -27.3 Run Length, ft 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 %REC 60 30 0 0 RQD 20 0 0 0 Drill Time, min 17 4 4 8 Drill Rate, m /ft 8.5 2 2 4

Core Data for Boring No. CP03-EAARS-CB-0027

Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Start EL., ft 5.5 5.0 4.5 1.9 -2.0 -6.0 -9.0 -14.0 End EL., ft 5.0 4.5 1.9 -2.0 -6.0 -9.0 -14.0 -19.0 Run Length, ft 0.5 0.5 2.6 3.9 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 %REC 80 80 54 64 68 50 74 0 RQD 60 60 12 64 20 27 50 0 Drill Time, min 15 37 52 39 23 9 32 5 Drill Rate, m /ft 30 74 20 10 5.8 3 6.4 1

Core Data for Boring No. CP03-EAARS-CB-0028

Run Number 1 2 Start EL., ft 6.5 4.5 End EL., ft 4.5 1.5 Run Length, ft 2.0 3.0 %REC 55 37 RQD 0 33 Drill Time, min 13 8 Drill Rate, m /ft 6.5 2.7

Core Data for Boring No. CP03-EAARS-CB-0029

Run Number 1 Start EL., ft 5.9 End EL., ft 3.9 Run Length, ft 2.0 %REC 80 RQD 0 Drill Time, min 11 Drill Rate, m /ft 5.5

Core Data for Boring No. CP03-EAARS-CB-0030

Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 Start EL., ft 0.6 -0.4 -11.2 -18.4 -21.9 End EL., ft -0.4 -1.7 -13.9 -21.9 -23.9 Run Length, ft 1.0 1.3 2.7 3.5 2.0 %REC 50 100 56 86 60 RQD 0 77 19 43 0 Drill Time, min 5 Not Recorded 15 15 10 Drill Rate, m /ft 5 5.6 4.3 5

6-6

EAA Bolles L-21 Canal BODR Bolles L-21 Modified Draft BODR

6.4 6.4.1

Preliminary Geotechnical Analysis of Canals and Canal Slopes General

The Bolles L-21 Canal cross section is as follows: 2.5H on 1V side slope 10-ft wide bottom at El -8.4 ft-NAVD 40-foot wide maintenance berm (bank) at El. 13.6 ft-NAVD, or higher (up to El. 17.7 ft-NAVD) to match existing road elevation The generalized subsurface profile, in the order of increasing depth, assumed for the slope stability analysis is as follows: Assumed Ground Surface: El. 8 ft-NAVD Stratum 2 (Organic Silt): El. 8 to 6 ft-NAVD Stratum 4 (Limestone): El. 6 to -2 ft-NAVD Stratum 5 (Sand/Silt): Below El. -2 ft-NAVD The canal invert and water surface elevations used in the slope stability analysis are: Mean High Canal Water Surface Elevation = 11.6 feet Mean Low Canal Water Surface Elevation = 8.8 feet Based on the preliminary analysis, the maximum allowable height of this levee/spoil embankment should be restricted to 18 feet. Other considerations for the levee/spoil embankment in this analysis are as follows: Maximum slope = 3H:1V Crest width = 12 feet 6.4.2 Canal Slopes Stability

The slope stability analysis was performed in general accordance with EM 1110-2-1902, using a limit equilibrium method. Using a limit equilibrium analysis, the potential failure mass is divided into a series of vertical slices. For each slice, the resisting and driving forces are determined, including water and earth pressure forces that act on the sides. For this analysis, SLOPE/W Software created by GEOSTUDIO 2004 5 was used. The Spencer Method module was used for this analysis. The Spencer Method assumes that the inter-slice forces are parallel. The angle of the inter-slice forces is varied until both force and moment equilibrium are satisfied. This method is preferred over the commonly used simplified Bishop Method, which ignores inter-slice shear forces (assuming inter-slice forces are horizontal) and is a simpler algorithm than the Morgenstern-Price Method (where the inter-slice forces are assumed to be a product of a specified function and an unknown scaling factor). For this analysis, both local and global failure mechanisms were investigated. Local failure surfaces were assumed to occur in the relatively soft layers overlying the caprock. Global failure surfaces were assumed to extend through the caprock to deeper soil layers. Two different

GEOSTUDIO 2004 by GEO-SLOPE International Ltd, Calgary, Canada T2P 2Y5

6-7

EAA Bolles L-21 Canal BODR Bolles L-21 Modified Draft BODR

canal/groundwater elevations were analyzed to ensure that the effects of groundwater variations were captured. The impacts of earthquake conditions were evaluated as part of this analysis. A review of seismic hazard maps indicates that south Florida has very low potential seismicity. Therefore, a nominal horizontal peak acceleration coefficient of 0.05g was used for analysis. A vertical earthquake coefficient of half the horizontal value (0.025g) was used. The seismic analysis was performed using a pseudo-static representation of earthquake conditions. The results of the analysis using SLOPE/W are summarized in Table 6-5 and are graphically shown in Appendix E. Table 6-5 Canal Slope Stability Safety Factors Canal Water Calculated Minimum Potential Surface Minimum Acceptable Loading Failure Elevation Factor of Factor of Case Mode* (feet-NAVD) Safety Safety Remarks Local 1.7 1.5 Appendix E: Fig. 1 11.6 Global 2.6 1.5 Appendix E: Fig. 2 Static Loading Local 1.6 1.5 Appendix E: Fig. 3 8.8 Global 2.4 1.5 Appendix E: Fig. 4 Local 1.5 1.1 Appendix E: Fig. 5 Seismic 11.6 Global 2.0 1.1 Appendix E: Fig. 6 Loading (ah=0.05g, Local 1.5 1.1 Appendix E: Fig. 7 8.8 av=0.025g) Global 1.9 1.1 Appendix E: Fig. 8 (*) The failure modes investigated are the following: Local (potential instability confined to the side slopes of the canal, typically sloughing-off of slopes) Global (potential deep seated failure which may result in a portion of the levee/spoil embankment to slide into the canal). 6.4.3 Bearing Capacity Analysis

The ability of underlying soils to support embankment construction was investigated. Normally, bearing capacity failures of soils underlying embankments manifest themselves as slope instabilities. A number of simplifying assumptions were made to approximate the shape of the embankment as a footing to enable the use of traditional bearing capacity equations. The assumptions include an embankment height of 8 ft (with a resulting contact pressure of 960 psf), with an applied load in the shape of a 12 ft by 12 ft square (the minimum expected road width) applied at the top of Stratum 2. This shape ignores the side slopes and the length of the embankment, so the resulting bearing capacity is only an approximation of the actual value. The bearing capacity of Strata 2 and 3 was estimated using the general bearing capacity equation with Vesic bearing capacity factors. Stratum 4 (caprock) was assumed to have a bearing

6-8

EAA Bolles L-21 Canal BODR Bolles L-21 Modified Draft BODR

capacity significantly higher than the overlying soils. Therefore, it is expected that the overlying soils would yield in bearing capacity before the caprock. Because of this, the bearing capacity of the caprock was not estimated. Also, the bearing capacity of soils underlying the caprock was not estimated since the caprock is expected to be sufficiently strong to preclude a bearing failure of these soils. Calculated ultimate bearing capacity values are presented in Table 6-3. 6.4.4 Seepage Analysis

At this time, insufficient data exists to perform a meaningful seepage analysis. Therefore, the pore-water pressure distribution within the embankment was assumed to be hydrostatic. This assumption will be revisited when geotechnical data becomes available. Also, a piping analysis will be performed if embankment materials are found to be susceptible to piping. 6.4.5 Use of Excavated Soils for Structural Fill

A preliminary assessment was performed regarding the use of excavated soils for structural fill. Soils are expected to be excavated as a result of deepening the canal to increase the conveyance capacity of the canal. The excavated soils are expected to consist of caprock, silt, organic silt and silty sand. A more detailed assessment should be performed during subsequent geotechnical investigations. Depending upon how the caprock is removed, it might be used for structural fill. Oversized particles would need to be incorporated into the deeper portions of the fill. Silt soils and silty sand soils would likely be acceptable for structural fill if the moisture content can be reduced to acceptable levels. Silts and sands with high silt content may be moisture sensitive. This should be investigated in more detail as part of future activities. Organic soils are not suitable for structural fill and should not be incorporated into berm or road construction. 6.5 Conclusions

The preliminary geotechnical design parameters, furnished in Table 6-3, should be re-evaluated and finalized after completing the additional geotechnical investigations recommended in the preliminary geotechnical report for this project. After the additional SPT borings are completed, if additional geotechnical characterization is required, the use of a cone penetration test (CPT) will be considered. Additional slope stability analyses for final design will be performed based on the finalized geotechnical design parameters. The results of the slope stability analysis indicated that the calculated minimum factors of safety are acceptable for each case analyzed. It should be noted that the geotechnical analysis should be re-evaluated when site specific geotechnical information becomes available. The results of the bearing capacity calculation indicate that Stratum 2, the Upper Organic Silt, is very close to having insufficient safety factors. The other soil layers are not considered to have a problem with bearing capacity. When more detailed geotechnical information is available, the characterization and analysis of this layer will be performed in more detail. If necessary, the canal embankment height may be reduced or, if this is not possible, construction can be staged to enable the silt to consolidate and strengthen prior to final construction.

6-9