Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992 02 10 Regular e February 6, 1992 TO: . City Manager FROM: Land Development Coordinator RE: Agenda Items III. C and D, Commission Meeting of February 10, 1992 Item C SALA, Inc. (Deersong) is requesting Commission Waiver to Section 9-157 of the Code. This would allow private streets to not meet design/construction and inspection standards of private streets. Please refer to attached City Engineer letter dated January 30, 1992 and Carlander & Associates, Inc. letter dated February 5, 1992. e. Item D This item refers to the approval of the plat and covenants for Deersong, and only if the Commission grants the above waiver. This was on the Agenda for the January 27th Commission Meeting but was pulled because of the concerns of the City Engineer. The City Attorney has approved the plat and the covenants. /nav attachment(s) cc: Mayor/Commission City Attorney City Clerk CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA, '/':' '- ' (o~p..!'--/ 1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434 WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA 32708 Telephone (407) 327.1800 January 30, 1992 Mr. Albert L. Land, P.E. Land Eng i neer i ng , 848 County Road 427 South Longwood, FL 32150 RE: Deersong (AKA Indian Ridge Phase I I I) Dear Mr. Land: The project Deer song (AKA Indian Ridge Phase I I I) was recently inspected, January 27, 1992, for corrective action to the initial "as-built" inspection. During an interim inspection, January 24, 1992, the City was given the test results for asphalt overlay, the soil cement base and the subgrade. . It was noted that the soil cement compression strength test did not meet the Code standard in Section 9-201(3)(a)(2). On January 21, 1992, Mr. H. Sabetti, the developer agreed in a telephone conversation, to post a bond on one hundred (100%) percent of the cost of replacing the road that does not meet the Code specifications for four years, obtain a variance to the Code from the Board of Adjustment and at the end of the four year period obtain another series of compressive strength cores for further evaluation of the road base which may require the developer to adhere to further disposition of the road by the City at the developer's expense. Such a caveat would be requested of the Board of Adjusbment. If you have any further questions, please contact this office. Inn cc: City Manager Land Development coordinator ~ Building Department " Q c.. '. CA~ N\~-o.. ']€ t'L e.~\--\ ~~\ V\€-efL carLonoer & ASSOCIOTes, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & MATERIALS TESTING February 5, 1992 Attention: Mr. Donald R. LeBlanc, Land Development Coordinator ~~~~nw~~ FEB 0 6 1992 TO: City of Winter Springs 1126 East State Road 434 Winter Springs, Florida 32708 \ CITY. OF: WINTER SPRINGS SUBJECT: City of Winter Springs Soi I-Cement Design andtMxt~Ve/upment Coordinator. Criteria A.~e~\~c..e.- Dear Mr. LeBlanc: . Sec. 9-201. Standards for Roadway Base Materials under DIVISION 2. STREETS AND BRIDGES of The City of Winter Springs Development Cod.;:: states in part that soil-cement bases for commercial and residential roadways must meet the following criteria; 1) A minimum compaction density of ninety-eight (98) percent, 2) A minimum compressive strength of three hundred (300) psi at the end of seven (7) days. Based upon the above wording, it is my understanding that your City Engineer, Mr. Leonard Kozlov, P.E., has advised the City not to accept any com mercial or residential roadways where the results of tests performed upon field samples do not achieve 300 psi at the end of 7-days. As discussed with you, and the City Manager, Mr. Dick Rozansky, during our meeting on this date, this interpretation of the City Code is totally inconsistent with long establ ished soi I-cement design, construction, and. acceptance standards throughout the Industry. The Industry referred to above includes Civi I Engineers, Road Bui Iders, Material Suppliers and Independent Testing Laboratories, all of whom were represented at our meeting; as well as Organizations such as the Portland Cement Association (PCA), the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), the American Society of State Highway and Transportation Officials (ASSHTO); and various Agencies such as Municipal and County Engineering Departments, and the Florida Department of Transportation (FOOT). 80 Triplet Lake Drive. P.o. Box 181426. Casselberry. Florida 32718-1426. Telephone (407) 339-4602 ( City of Winter Springs 2 As a Registered Professional Engineer special izing in Geotechnical Engineering and Construction Materials Testing, my personal experience with the use, design and construction of soil-cement base materials goes back to the year 1963, when as an employee of Ardaman & Associates, Inc. of Orlando, I attended a one-day seminar sponsored by PCA in Cocoa Beach, Florida. During the following twenty-nine years, whi Ie an employee at Ardaman & Associates; as a Co-Founder and Principal of Jam mal & Associates in 1975; and as the Chief Engineer for Carlander & Associates, Inc. which was founded in 1981, I have worked on hundreds of soil-cement construction projects for com mercial and residential roadways and parking areas throughout Central Florida. I have watched the industry mature from the days when we would layout bags of cement, break open the bags and then mix it with whatever soils were in-place, to the current practice of removing the in-place soils and replacing them with pre-mixed soil-cement base materials produced at a Central Plant. Though the construction methods have changed and improved over the years, the design and acceptance standards, which were developed through extensive research by PCA during the 1930s, and which were accepted by ASTM and AASHTO in the 1940s, have remained virtually unchanged. Laboratory and field experience over more than fifty-five years has shown conclusively that soils can be hardened adequately by the addition of relatively small quantities of Portland Cement to produce a strong, durable material suitable for low-cost paving. The key to the long-term success of soil-cement in the road construction field has been the careful predetermination of engineering control factors in tl1e Laboratory and their appl ication throughout construction. Two methods of Laboratory Mix Design were establ ished by PCA, which have long been accepted by the aforementioned agencies and associations, including the FDOT. These are the wet-dry and freeze-thaw series of tests commonly referred to as Brush Loss Criteria for soils of all textures; and the short-cut test method for sandy soils commonly referred to as Strength Design. When designed using the Brush Loss Criteria, the compressive strength of the materials is not taken into consideration. When designed using Strength Criteria, the standard practice in the industry have been to use the minimum compressive strength set out in the plans or specs for selection of a safe cement factor in the Laboratory, and not for acceptance tests in the field. Very few Paving Contractors, use the Mix-In-Place method today to construct a soil-cement base. Most Paving Contractors obtain their materials from a Central Plant Supplier. There are only four or five active Suppliers in the Central Florida area today, and to the best of my knowledge, the materials being produced by all of these Suppliers, are be'ing proportioned using . Laboratory Test Results that meet both the Brush Loss Criteria and a minimum 7-day Laboratory Strength of 300 psi. This is the most co!nmon minimum Strength Design referred to in almost all local Municipa, and County Subdivisions Regulation and Road Construction Standards. This minimum specified strength for laboratory design purposes simply insures tl1at the Mix Design will have a sufficient cement content so that the resulting in-place soil-cement base will have adequate hardness at an age of seven (7) days so that the roadway can be paved and opened to traffic. l~~ J carLOnoer aASSOCIOTeS, InC.