4306 RIVERFRONT BLVD 2018-02-21 - Laserfiche WebLink

Prosect Name Everett River Front-Simpson Report104 -- - - _ ......... GeoDesign#: Polygon-127-01 Date 8/05/2016 I..11__.. ......._ - __—_— _ �� _ _. Reports with Unresolved Nonconformance Issues: Permit: P W 1505-005 DFR 052 ii Nick Abdelnour(Polygon) Randy Allen(City of Everett) Weather: Clear,60'S ............................. ......................... __ ...,....,,. _ ............: Ron Bowen(Polygon) Eddy Stevens(Polygon) Arrival/Departure. 0615/1500 Distribution �... ................_.___........... ..... Doug Ross(Polygon) Kirk Keck(City of Everett) I._.-__. ._._ ,. ....l .... ............. Paul McKee(City of Everett) Dave Foster(City of Everett) Prepared By: Ben Weinberg, E I T. _11_11 _ _1111 m Site Plans) m Density Test Summary Signature �-�%-- Attachments: 1111.... -- - _ . _ El Records ❑ Other Reviewed By: PURPOSE of VISIT: GeoDesign representative, Ben Weinberg, was on-site to observe earthwork activities at the request of Eddy Stevens and Doug Ross with Polygon for lot foundation checks and rain garden construction. SUMMARY of OBSERVATIONS: Lot 105: Previously, GeoDesign had observed the exposed foundation subgrade for Lot 105 and noted the contractor elected to over-excavate loose material along the west perimeter footing 2 feet and backfill the area in 1 foot lifts using 2-inch clean crushed rock material compacted into a firm and unyielding mass. Today, GeoDesign noted that the contractor had completed backfilling the over-excavated area. GeoDesign noted that the exposed foundation subgrade generally consisted of a brown silty SAND (f-m)with gravel (f-c)which could be penetrated generally less than 2 inches using a 1/2 inch diameter soil probe under the full weight of the user; in-place density tests taken on three sides of the foundation area indicated that the material had been compacted to greater than 95%of its maximum dry density as determined by a Modified Proctor analysis. Lot 106: Previously, GeoDesign had observed the exposed foundation subgrade for Lot 106 and noted the contractor elected to over-excavate loose material along the west and south perimeter footings 2 feet and backfill the area in 1 foot lifts using 2-inch clean crushed rock material compacted into a firm and unyielding mass. Today, GeoDesign noted that the contractor had completed backfilling the over-excavated area. GeoDesign noted that the exposed foundation subgrade generally consisted of a brown silty SAND (f-m)with gravel(f-c)which could be penetrated generally less than 2 inches using a 1/2 inch diameter soil probe under the full weight of the user; in-place density tests taken on three sides of the foundation area indicated that the material had been compacted to greater than 95%of its maximum dry density as determined by a Modified Proctor analysis. For the above-mentioned lot areas, it is the opinion of GeoDesign that the exposed foundation subgrades observed today are currently suitable for support of the intended loads. GeoDesign recommends that any surficially loose or saturated material be removed from the base of the footings prior to the placement of concrete. A summary of our observations and density tests taken today can be found in the attached Nuclear Density Gauge Data and Figure 1. Rain Gardens: Today, GeoDesign observed the exposed base of rain garden areas along the north (2)and east perimeters(2)of the project(with exception to rain garden area north of D/W 'D"). GeoDesign noted that the exposed material at the base of the rain gardens generally consisted of a gray-brown SAND(f-m)with trace to minor gravel (f-c) and trace silt. The rain garden areas ranged in length from 40 feet to 120 feet and were approximately 10 feet wide. Observed depths appeared to be in accordance with the approved plans for the project. It is GeoDesign's understanding that the rain garden areas will be backfilled with a bioretention soil; GeoDesign previously sampled and submitted this material for testing to verify its properties meet project specifications. GeoDesign notified the client and contractor of our observations prior to our departure from the site today. This report presents opinions formed as a result of our observation of activities relating to geotechnical engineering or environmental services.We rely on the contractor to comply with the plans and specifications throughout the duration oft he project irrespective of the presence of our representative. Our work does not include supervision or direction of the contractor,the contractor's employees or agents.Our firm is not responsible for site safety.This field report is a DRAFT representation of our field observations,testing,and preliminary recommendations.The report can only be considered final upon review of the GeoDesign project manager,as indicated by initials in the"Reviewed 6y"section. 10700 Meridian Avenue North,Suite 210 1 Seattle,WA 98133 1 206.838.9900 2502 Jefferson Avenue I Tacoma,WA 98402 1 253.203.0095