My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4412 RIVERFRONT BLVD 2018-02-21
>
Address Records
>
RIVERFRONT BLVD
>
4412
>
4412 RIVERFRONT BLVD 2018-02-21
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/21/2018 8:38:30 AM
Creation date
9/11/2017 1:31:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Address Document
Street Name
RIVERFRONT BLVD
Street Number
4412
Imported From Microfiche
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
55
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
yr tS( <br /> �-� fZ <br /> C <br /> DESIGNzu FIELD REPORT <br /> 1 of 3 <br /> Project Name: Everett River Front-Simpson Report: 008 <br /> GeoDesign#: Polygon-1 27-03 Date: 11/18/2016 <br /> Reports with Unresolved Nonconformance Issues: Permit: <br /> P W 1505-005 <br /> �vu I la oma(- Ob -7 <br /> Nick Abdelnour(Polygon) Randy Allen(City of Everett) Weather: Clear, 40's <br /> Ron Bowen(Polygon) Eddy Stevens(Polygon) Arrival/Departure: 0745/1545 <br /> Distribution: ---- -- <br /> Doug Ross(Polygon) Kirk Keck(City of Everett) <br /> Paul McKee(City of Everett) Dave Foster(City of Everett) Prepared By: Ben Weinberg, E.I.T. <br /> m <br /> Attachments: Site Plan(s) m Density Test Summary Signature:- <br /> - — - -- -- -- -_ --- — <br /> �] Installation Records ❑ Other Reviewed By: )rX <br /> PURPOSE of VISIT: GeoDesign representative, Benjamin Weinberg, was on-site part time at the request of John Feltner <br /> with Polygon to observe the foundation subgrade for Lots 121 and 122. <br /> SUMMARY of OBSERVATIONS: <br /> Lot 121: <br /> Today, GeoDesign observed the exposed foundation subgrade for Lot 121;the foundation and crawl space excavation had <br /> been completed prior to our arrival on-site. The exposed foundation subgrade consisted of a gray silty SAND with gravel. <br /> Penetration depths encountered using a 1/2 inch diameter soil probe were generally less than 2 inches. Relative <br /> compaction of relatively undisturbed exposed foundation subgrade material was tested using a Troxler Moisture-Density <br /> gauge. In-place density tests indicated that the exposed foundation subgrade material had been compacted to greater than <br /> 95% of its maximum dry density as determined by a Modified Proctor analysis. <br /> GeoDesign noted scattered surficial pockets of approximately 3 inches of material which were saturated and exhibited <br /> yielding underfoot. The precise footing locations were not marked out while we were on-site. GeoDesign recommends that <br /> any surficially loose and saturated material be removed from the base of the foundation areas prior to the placement of <br /> concrete. <br /> Lot 122: <br /> Today, GeoDesign observed the exposed foundation subgrade for Lot 122;the foundation and crawl space excavation had <br /> been completed prior to our arrival on-site. Previously, GeoDesign recommended the over-excavation of the west half of the <br /> foundation area down to firm and unyielding material, which had been completed prior to our arrival on-site (1 foot). The <br /> contractor lined the base of the excavation with a standard nonwoven geotextile and intends to backfill the area with 2-inch <br /> clean crushed railroad ballast compacted into a firm and unyielding mass. The exposed foundation subgrade consisted of <br /> a gray silty SAND with gravel. Penetration depths encountered using a 1/2 inch diameter soil probe were generally less <br /> than 2 inches. Relative compaction of the exposed foundation subgrade material was tested using a Troxler <br /> Moisture-Density gauge. In-place density tests indicated that the exposed foundation subgrade material had been <br /> compacted to greater than 95%of its maximum dry density as determined by a Modified Proctor analysis. <br /> GeoDesign noted scattered surficial pockets of approximately 3 inches of material which were saturated and exhibited <br /> yielding underfoot. The precise footing locations were not marked out while we were on-site. GeoDesign recommends that <br /> any surficially loose and saturated material be removed from the base of the foundation areas prior to the placement of <br /> concrete. <br /> A summary of our observations can be found in the attached Figure 1 and Nuclear Density Gauge Data. <br /> The client and concrete contractor were notified of our observations prior to our departure from the site today. <br /> 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 <br /> 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 <br /> 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 <br /> final upon review of the GeoDesign project manager,as indicated by initials in the"Reviewed By"section. <br /> 10700 Meridian Avenue North,Suite 402 1 Seattle,WA 98133 1 206.838.9900 <br /> 2502 Jefferson Avenue I Tacoma;WA 98492 1 253.203.0095 <br /> J <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.