GREENLEA EAST-WEST INTERCONNECT RECLAIMED WATER PROJECT - 10-0038-UT - ADDENDUM 1
ADDENDUM NO. 1
for
Greenlea East-West Reclaimed
Water Interconnect
Clearwater, Florida
Project Number 10-0038-UT
DATE: September 16, 2011
SUBJECT: Addendum No. 1
TO: Prospective Bidders and Others Concerned
Bidders on the above project are hereby notified that the following Addenda are made to the
Contract Documents:
1. Mandatory Pre-Bid Meeting:
The Mandatory Pre-Bid Meeting was held on Wednesday, September 14, 2011, at 10:00 A.M,
and a copy of the pre-bid meeting sign-in sheet may be obtained through the City’s Plan House.
2. Pre-Qualification:
Sealed proposals will only be accepted from those Contractors that are currently City pre-
qualified Contractors in the construction category of Water & Forcemains with a minimum pre-
qualification amount of $2,000,000. It is the Contractor’s responsibility to insure that they meet
the pre-qualified minimum limit, and Contractors wanting to pre-qualify to bid this project as a
General Contractor must do so two (2) weeks/ten (10) workdays prior to the bid opening date.
Please contact Alice Eckman of the City’s Construction Services Department at (727) 462-6126
to complete this process. See Section I – Advertisement of Bids & Notice to Contractors for
more information.
3. Request for Information (RFI):
All RFI’s must be submitted in writing either by email (robert.maue@myclearwater.com) or by
fax (727-562-4755) to the attention of Robert Maue, and the RFI needs to include the
company’s name, contact person, and contact information in case clarification is needed on any
The last date to submit a RFI is Monday, September 19, 2011 by 5:00pm Eastern
issues.
Daylight Time (EDT)
. All Addenda issued by the City will be sent via e-mail to all Plan Holders
through the City’s Plan House. All e-mails from the plan house will be from
notice@designbidbuild.net and NOT the City of Clearwater.
4. Bid Proposal Forms:
The Bid Proposal Forms must be complete and all quantities and costs must be filled in. Please
double check your figures. Proposal Bond – must be completely filled out with the 10% bid bond
amount.
Addendum No.1-Greenlea East-West RCW Interconnect_091611.doc Page 1
5. Supplemental and/or Amendments to Contract Documents:
ADD
A. the following items to the Appendix:
1. Final Geotechnical Engineering Service Report dated September 15, 2011
from Tierra, Inc. for Greenlea East/West Interconnect RCW
2. City of Clearwater’s Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) Certification Form
END OF ADDENDUM #1
THE CITY OF CLEARWATER
PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA
By: /s/William B. Horne, II
City Manager
Addendum No.1-Greenlea East-West RCW Interconnect_091611.doc Page 2
T
IERRA
September 15, 2011
URS Corporation
7650 West Courtney Campbell Causeway, Suite 700
Tampa, FL 33607
Attn: Mr. Bozhidar V. Handjiev, P.E.
RE: Final Geotechnical Engineering Services Report
Greenleaf East/West Interconnect RCW
Pinellas County, Florida
Tierra Project No.: 6511-10-317
Mr. Handjiev:
Tierra, Inc. has completed the geotechnical engineering study for the referenced project.
The results of the study completed are provided herein.
Should there be any questions regarding the report, please do not hesitate to contact our
office at (813) 989-1354. Tierra would be pleased to continue providing geotechnical and
materials testing services for URS and the City of Clearwater throughout the
implementation of this project. We look forward to working with you and your organization
on this and future projects.
Respectfully Submitted,
TIERRA, INC.
Erick M. Frederick, P.E. Larry P. Moore, P.E.
Senior Geotechnical Engineer Principal Geotechnical Engineer
Florida License No. 63920 Florida License No. 47673
7351 Temple Terrace Highway Tampa, FL 33637
Phone (813) 989-1354 Fax (813) 989-1355
Florida Certificate No. 6486
Table of Contents
PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................. 1
Project Description ................................................................
Scope of Services ...........................................................
SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ...................................................................... 2
General Site Information ....................................................
Potentiometric Surface Maps ................................................................
Pinellas County Soil Survey ...............................................................
Subsurface Exploration ................................................................
Subsurface Conditions ................................................................
Groundwater Information ......................................................
Seasonal High Groundwater Estimates ............................................................
LABORATORY TESTING .............................................................................................. 5
General ......................................................... 5
Test Designations ...........................................................
Environmental/Corrosion Classification ...........................................................
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................. 7
General ......................................................... 7
Drainage and Groundwater Concerns .............................................................
Directional Drilled Pipeline Installations ..........................................................
Excavations ............................................................
REPORT LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................. 8
APPENDIX
USDA and USGS Vicinity Maps (Sheets 1 and 2)
Key Map and Boring Location Plans (Sheets 3 through 16)
Soil Profiles (Sheets 17 and 18)
Final Geotechnical Engineering Services Report
Greenleaf East/West Interconnect RCW
Pinellas County, Florida
Tierra Project No. 6511-10-317
Page1 of 8
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project Description
Based on the information provided by URS, the proposed reclaimed water project is located
in Clearwater, Florida. The project includes the installation of approximately 20,000 lineal
feet of a reclaimed water distribution pipeline in Clearwater. Based on project plans
provided by URS, the pipeline is anticipated to consist of a 12-inch PVC distribution pipeline
installed via directional drilling methods.
This report focuses on geotechnical services performed along the proposed pipeline
network alignment. The purpose of the geotechnical exploration is to provide subsurface
soil conditions and relevant geotechnical engineering properties as well as to provide
geotechnical recommendations to guide the project design and construction.
Scope of Services
The objective of our study was to obtain information concerning subsurface conditions at
the site in order to obtain data from which to base engineering estimates and
recommendations in each of the following areas:
1. Identification of subsurface conditions at the locations explored.
2. General location and description of potentially deleterious materials discovered in
the borings which may interfere with construction progress including existing fills or
surficial organics.
3. Identification of groundwater levels and estimation of Seasonal High Groundwater
Table (SHGWT) levels.
In order to meet the preceding objectives, we provided the following services:
1. Reviewed published soils and topographic information. This published information
was obtained from Potentiometric Surface maps and the ÐClearwater, FloridaÑ
quadrangle map published by the United States Geological Survey
Soil Survey of Pinellas County, published by the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
2. Executed a program of subsurface exploration consisting of borings, subsurface
sampling and field testing. We performed a total of thirty-eight (38) soil borings to
depths of approximately 10 to 14 feet below existing grades along the pipeline
alignment. The borings consisted of thirty-six (36) Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
test borings and two (2) hand auger borings. The auger borings were substituted for
SPT borings in areas where access was limited or utilities were present that limited
the use of mechanized equipment.
3. Visually examined recovered soil samples in the laboratory to develop the soil
legend for the project using the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Soil Classification System. Identified the soil
Final Geotechnical Engineering Services Report
Greenleaf East/West Interconnect RCW
Pinellas County, Florida
Tierra Project No. 6511-10-317
Page2 of 8
conditions at each boring location. Performed laboratory testing on selected
representative soil samples to confirm visual classification of the recovered soil
samples.
4. Obtained groundwater level measurements and estimated the Seasonal High
Groundwater Table (SHGWT) levels.
5. Prepared this formal engineering report in accordance with the scope of services
herein that summarizes the course of study pursued, the field and laboratory data
generated, subsurface conditions encountered, and our engineering
recommendations in each of the pertinent topic areas.
The scope of our services did not include an evaluation of sinkhole potential or an
environmental assessment for determining the presence or absence of wetlands or
hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, bedrock, groundwater, or air, on or below or around
this site. Any statements in this report or on the boring logs regarding odors, colors,
unusual or suspicious items or conditions are strictly for the information of our client.
SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
General Site Information
Based on the ÐClearwater, FloridaÑ USGS quadrangle map, the ground surface elevation
along the project alignment ranges from approximately +15 to +65 feet National Geodetic
Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD29). An exhibit of the USGS map within the project vicinity is
Appendix
presented in the .
Potentiometric Surface Maps
Based on a review of the ÐPotentiometric Surface of the Upper Floridan Aquifer, West-
Central FloridaÑ maps published by the USGS, the potentiometric surface in the vicinity of
the project areas ranges from approximately +5 to +10 feet, NGVD29. As previously noted,
ground surface elevations along the proposed pipeline alignment generally range from
approximately +15 to +65 feet, NGVD29. Artesian flow conditions were not encountered
during the field exploration; however, the Contractor shall be prepared to control artesian
water up to a head elevation of +10 feet NGVD 29, if encountered, at no additional cost to
the owner.
Pinellas County Soil Survey
The Soil Survey of Pinellas County, Florida published by the USDA NRCS was reviewed for
general near surface soil information. This information indicates there are six (6) primary
soil mapping units along the pipeline alignment. The mapping units are illustrated on the
USDA Vicinity MapAppendix
in the . Information from the USDA NRCS regarding near-
surface soil information and the SHGWT are summarized in the fol
Final Geotechnical Engineering Services Report
Greenleaf East/West Interconnect RCW
Pinellas County, Florida
Tierra Project No. 6511-10-317
Page3 of 8
PINELLAS COUNTY USDA SOIL SURVEY
Seasonal High Water
Soil Classification
USDA Map
Table
DepthPermeability
Unit and pH
(in)(in/hr)
Depth
Soil Name
USCS AASHTO Months
(feet)
0-6 SP-SM A-2-4, A-3 6.0-20.04.5-6.0
(2)
6-17 SP-SM A-2-4, A-3 6.0-20.05.1-6.5
2.0-3.5 June-Nov
Adamsville-
17-80 SP, SP-SM A-2-4, A-3 6.0-20.05.1-6.5
Urban Land
--- --- --- 0.0-0.0 --- --- ---
0-6 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0-20.03.5-6.0
6-35 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0-20.03.5-6.0
(13)
0.5-1.5 June-Nov
35-50 SM, SP-SM A-2-4, A-3 0.6-6.0 3.5-6.0
Immokalee-
Urban Land
50-80 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0-20.03.5-6.0
--- --- --- 0.0-0.0 --- --- ---
0-42 SP, SP-SM A-3 2.0-6.0 6.1-8.4
2.0-3.0 June-Oct
42-80 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0-20.06.1-8.4
0-8 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0-20.06.1-8.4
(16)
8-33 SP-SM A-2-4 2.0-20.06.1-8.4
Matlacha- St.
Augustine-
33-48 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0-20.06.1-8.4 1.5-3.0 June-Oct
Urban land
48-63 SM, SP-SM A-2-4 2.0-20.06.1-8.4
63-80 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0-20.06.1-8.4
--- --- --- 0.0-0.0 --- --- ---
0-4 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0-20.03.5-6.5
4-22 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0-20.03.5-6.5
(17)
0.5-1.5 June-Nov
22-36 SM, SP-SM A-2-4, A-3 0.6-6.0 3.5-6.5
Myakka-
Urban Land
36-80 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0-20.03.5-6.5
--- --- --- 0.0-0.0 -- --- ---
0-3 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0-20.04.5-6.0
3-44 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0-20.04.5-6.0
(26)
2.5-3.5 June-Nov
44-59 SM, SP-SM A-2-4, A-3 2.0-6.0 4.5-6.0
Pomello-
Urban Land
59-80 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0-20.04.5-6.0
--- --- --- 0.0-0.0 --- --- ---
0-5 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0-20.03.5-6.5
(29)
3.5->6.0 June-Dec
Tavares-
5-80 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0-20.03.5-6.5
Urban Land
--- --- --- 0.0-0.0 --- --- ---
The Urban Land component consists of miscellaneous areas that are covered by concrete,
asphalt, buildings, or other impervious surfaces and areas that have been shaped/modified
that obscure or alter the natural soils.
It should be noted that information contained in the USDA Soil Survey may not be reflective
of current subsurface conditions particularly if recent development in the project vicinity has
modified existing soils or surface/subsurface drainage.
Final Geotechnical Engineering Services Report
Greenleaf East/West Interconnect RCW
Pinellas County, Florida
Tierra Project No. 6511-10-317
Page4 of 8
Subsurface Exploration
The subsurface conditions were explored using thirty-eight (38) soil borings performed to
depths of approximately 10 to 14 feet below existing grades along the proposed pipeline
alignment. The borings consisted of thirty-six (36) SPT test borings and two (2) hand auger
borings. The auger borings were substituted for SPT borings in areas where access was
limited or utilities were present that limited the use of mechanized equipment.
The hand auger borings were performed by manually twisting and advancing a bucket auger
into the ground, typically in 4 to 6 inch increments. As each soil type was revealed,
representative samples were placed in air-tight containers and returned to our office for
classification by a geotechnical engineer.
In order to verify utility clearance, the initial 4 feet of the SPT borings were performed with a
hand auger. SPT resistances were then measured continuously to the boring termination
depths. The SPT borings were performed using truck-mounted drilling equipment. As each
soil type was revealed, representative samples were placed in jars and returned to our
office for confirmation of the field classification by a geotechnical engineer. The soil
sampling was performed in general accordance with the American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM) test procedure D-1586.
The borings were located in the field by a representative of Tierra with the aid of handheld
Global Positioning System (GPS) equipment and base map information provided by URS.
Sheets 4 through 16Appendix
The approximate boring locations are presented on in the .
Subsurface Conditions
The borings generally encountered sandy soils within 10 feet beneath the ground surface.
The soil strata encountered in the borings are summarized in the following table:
StratumAASHTO
Soil Description
NumberSymbol
Gray to Brown Fine SAND to SAND with Silt
1 A-3/A-2-4
Brown Silty SAND
2 A-2-4
Brown Clayey Sand to Silty CLAY
3 A-6
Limerock Base (Fill)
4 ---
The subsurface soil stratification is of a generalized nature to highlight the major subsurface
Sheets
stratification features and material characteristics. The soil profiles are included on
Final Geotechnical Engineering Services Report
Greenleaf East/West Interconnect RCW
Pinellas County, Florida
Tierra Project No. 6511-10-317
Page5 of 8
17 and 18 Appendix
in the , and should be reviewed for specific information at individual
boring locations. These profiles include soil descriptions, stratifications and penetration
resistances. The stratifications shown on the boring profiles represent the conditions only at
the actual boring location. Variations may occur and should be expected between boring
locations. The stratifications represent the approximate boundary between subsurface
materials and the actual transition may be gradual.
Groundwater Information
The groundwater table, when encountered, was measured at depths ranging from
approximately 3 to 10 feet below the existing ground surface at the boring locations. GNE
(Groundwater Not Encountered) was recorded at the boring locations where no
groundwater was encountered within the depths explored. It should be noted that
groundwater levels tend to fluctuate during periods of prolonged drought and extended
rainfall and may be affected by man-made influences. In addition, a seasonal effect will also
occur in which higher groundwater levels are normally recorded i
We recommend that the Contractor determine the actual groundwater levels at the time of
construction to evaluate potential impacts to the proposed pipeline installations.
Seasonal High Groundwater Estimates
Tierra estimated the seasonal high groundwater table (SHGWT) at selected soil boring
locations. The results of the SHGWT estimates are presented alongside the respective soil
Sheets 17 and 18 Appendix.
profiles on in the
In general, the seasonal high groundwater table levels estimated along the project
alignment were based on soil stratigraphy, measured groundwater levels from the borings,
the Pinellas County, Florida USDA Soil Survey information and past experience with similar
soil conditions. In areas where subsurface soil conditions were disturbed, normal seasonal
high groundwater indicators such as Ðstain linesÑ were not evide
LABORATORY TESTING
General
Representative soil samples collected from the soil borings were classified and stratified in
general accordance with the AASHTO soil classification system. Our classification was
based on visual observations, using the results from laboratory testing as confirmation.
Corrosion testing was assigned on selected soil samples to provide a basis for soil
environmental classification. These tests measure parameters such as pH, resistivity, sulfate
content and chloride content.
Final Geotechnical Engineering Services Report
Greenleaf East/West Interconnect RCW
Pinellas County, Florida
Tierra Project No. 6511-10-317
Page6 of 8
Test Designations
The following list summarizes the laboratory tests performed and their respective test
methods.
Grain-Size Analyses. The grain-size analyses were conducted in general accordance
with the AASHTO test designation T-088 (ASTM test designation D-422).
Natural Moisture Content - The test is performed in general accordance with AASHTO
test designation T-265 (ASTM test designation D-2216).
Atterberg Limits - The liquid limit and the plastic limit tests ("Atterberg Limits") were
conducted in general accordance with the AASHTO test designations T-089 and T-090,
respectively (ASTM test designation D-4318).
Organic Content - The organic content tests were performed in general accordance with
the AASHTO test designation T-267 (ASTM test designation D-2974).
Environmental Corrosion - Environmental corrosion tests were conducted in accordance
with the FDOT test designations FM 5-550, FM 5-551, FM 5-552 and FM 5-553.
The laboratory test results are presented next to the respective soil profile from which the
Sheets 17 and 18 Appendix
soil sample was obtained on in the .
Environmental/Corrosion Classification
Based on the laboratory test results and the latest FDOT Structures Design Guidelines, the
environmental classifications are slightly aggressive for concrete and moderately
Sheets
aggressive for steel. The results obtained are presented in the table below and on
17 and 18 Appendix
in the .
Resistivity ChloridesSulfates
BoringDepthpH
Stratum(ohm-cm)(ppm) (FM (ppm) (FM 5-
Number(ft) (FM 5-550)
(FM 5-551) 5-552)553)
B-2 2.0 - 3.0 1 7.7 43,000 15 <4.8
B-22 4.0 - 8.0 1 7.0 35,000 30 <4.8
B-26 2.0 - 4.0 1 8.2 17,000 15 <4.8
B-30 6.0 - 8.0 1 6.7 11,000 15 <4.8
It should be noted that the results of the environmental tests are specific only to the
locations from which the soil samples were obtained. These results can be used as a
general indication of the potential environmental soil characteristics that can be
encountered within the project vicinity. The characterization provided above is based on
FDOT guidelines. The project corrosion engineer should use the results of this laboratory
testing as an aid in evaluating corrosion potential for the proj
Final Geotechnical Engineering Services Report
Greenleaf East/West Interconnect RCW
Pinellas County, Florida
Tierra Project No. 6511-10-317
Page7 of 8
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General
Tierra recommends utilizing the current FDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge
Construction (SSRBC) and applicable City of Clearwater specifications as guidelines for
installation of the proposed pipeline. The following report sections present our geotechnical
recommendations with respect to the proposed pipeline installati
Drainage and Groundwater Concerns
The groundwater levels presented in this report are the levels that were measured at the
time of our field activities. Fluctuation should be anticipated. We recommend that the
Contractor determine the actual groundwater levels at the time of construction to determine
groundwater impact on the construction procedure.
Directional Drilled Pipeline Installations
Applicable City of Clearwater specifications and the FDOT SSRBC should be utilized as
guidelines for the installation of the pipeline.
Depending on the installation depth of the proposed pipeline, the contractor should be
prepared to address sandy and clayey soils with variable degrees in density/consistency
during pipeline installation. If very dense cemented sands or hard clays are encountered,
difficult drilling/excavation requiring specialized drill bits and/or excavation equipment may
be necessary. Tierra recommends that the plans incorporate a note to warn the Contractor
of the potential for difficult drilling conditions, similar to a
If very dense cemented sands or hard clays are encountered during pipeline
installation, difficult drilling/excavation requiring specialized drill bits and/or
excavation equipment may be necessary. The contractor should be prepared to
address sandy soils and clays with variable degrees in density/consistency during
pipeline installation at no additional cost to the owner.
Excavations
In Federal Register, Volume 54, No. 209 (October 1989), the United States Department of
Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) amended its ÐConstruction
Standards for Excavations, 29 CFR, Part 1926, Subpart PÑ. This document was issued to
better ensure the safety of workmen entering trenches or excavations. It is mandated by
this federal regulation that excavations, whether they be utility trenches, basement
excavations or footing excavations, be constructed in accordance with the current OSHA
guidelines. It is our understanding that these regulations are being strictly enforced and if
they are not closely followed, the owner and the contractor could be liable for substantial
Final Geotechnical Engineering Services Report
Greenleaf East/West Interconnect RCW
Pinellas County, Florida
Tierra Project No. 6511-10-317
Page8 of 8
penalties.
The contractor is solely responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary
excavations and should shore, slope, or bench the sides of the excavations as required to
maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. The contractorÓs Ðresponsible
personsÑ, as defined in 29 CFR Part 1926, should evaluate the soil exposed in the
excavations as part of the contractorÓs safety procedures. In no case should slope height,
slope inclination, or excavation depth, including utility trench excavation depth, exceed
those specified in all local, state, and federal safety regulations.
We are providing this information solely as a service to our client. Tierra does not assume
responsibility for construction site safety or the ContractorÓs or other partyÓs compliance
with local, state, and federal safety or other regulations.
REPORT LIMITATIONS
The recommendations contained in this report are professional opinions based on the site
conditions and project layout described herein and further assume that the conditions
observed in the exploratory borings are representative of the subsurface conditions
throughout the site, i.e., the subsurface conditions elsewhere on the site are the same as
those disclosed by the borings. If, during construction, subsurface conditions different from
those encountered in the exploratory borings are observed or appear to be present, we
should be advised at once so that we can review these conditions and reconsider our
recommendations where necessary.
This report was prepared for the exclusive use of URS and the City of Clearwater for
evaluating the design of the project as it relates to the geotechnical aspects discussed
herein. It should be made available to prospective contractors for information on factual
data only and not as a warranty of subsurface conditions included in this report.
Unanticipated soil conditions may require that additional expense be made to attain a
properly constructed project. Therefore, some contingency fund is recommended to
accommodate such potential extra costs.
APPENDIX
USDA and USGS Vicinity Maps (Sheets 1 and 2)
Key Map and Boring Location Plans (Sheets 3 through 16)
Soil Profiles (Sheets 17 and 18)
PIPELINE
PIPELINEPIPELINE
B-32
PIPELINE
B-23
B-27
B-25
B-28
B-30
B-31
B-26
B-22
PIPELINE
B-5
B-6
B-4
PIPELINE
PIPELINE
PIPELINEPIPELINE
B-32
PIPELINE
B-23
B-27
B-25
B-28
B-30
B-31
B-26
B-22
PIPELINE
B-6B-5
B-4
PIPELINE
B-32
B-23
B-27
B-25
B-28
B-30
B-31
B-26
B-22
B-5
B-6
B-4
DEPTH IN FEETDEPTH IN FEET
DEPTH IN FEET
DEPTH IN FEETDEPTH IN FEET
MOT Certification Form
Attach this form to Maintenance of Traffic plans submitted to the
City of Clearwater
Skycrest Reclaimed Water
Project name:
Contract 2 Transmission and Distribution
________________ ________________________ _________
Printed Signature Date
Name of certified person signing off the MOT plans
________________________________________________________
IMSA certification level IMSA certification number IMSA certification
expiration date
________________________________________________________
FDOT certification level FDOT certification number FDOT certification
()expiration date
required for FDOT roads
Comments:
For office use only
MOT certification form.Rev4.Skycrest RCW.doc