My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4321 30TH DR SE 2017-09-11
>
Address Records
>
30TH DR SE
>
4321
>
4321 30TH DR SE 2017-09-11
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/11/2017 1:46:34 PM
Creation date
9/11/2017 1:46:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Address Document
Street Name
30TH DR SE
Street Number
4321
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.
/
53
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
DESIGNZu FIELD REPO ., <br /> 4;1 of <br /> Project Name: Everett River Front-Simpson Report: 022 <br /> GeoDesign #: j Polygon-127-03 Date: 01/10/2017 <br /> Reports with Unresolved Nonconformance Issues: Permit: <br /> PW 1505-005 <br /> Z© <br /> Nick Abdelnour(Polygon) Randy Allen(City of Everett) Weather: Cloudy, 30's <br /> Ron Bowen(Polygon) Eddy Stevens(Polygon) Arrival/Departure:1515/1630 <br /> Distribution: -- _ <br /> Doug Ross(Polygon) Kirk Keck(City of Everett) <br /> I <br /> Paul McKee(City of Everett) Dave Foster(City of Everett) I Prepared By: Ben Weinberg <br /> -m Site Plan(s) m Density Test Summary Signature: �. �1 <br /> Attachments: I ❑ Installation Records ❑ Other ~ Reviewed By: � <br /> PURPOSE of VISIT: GeoDesign representative, Ben Weinberg, was on-site part time at the request of John Feltner with <br /> Polygon to observe the foundation subgrade for Lots 159, 161, and 169. <br /> SUMMARY of OBSERVATIONS: <br /> Lot 159: <br /> Previously, GeoDesign noted that the exposed foundation subgrade was covered in approximately 2 inches of surficially <br /> loose and saturated material. Today, GeoDesign noted that that the subgrade had generally been cleared. GeoDesign did <br /> note areas in the southwest and northeast corners which were covered in cleared of loose material with a concrete rake <br /> while on-site. GeoDesign also noted pooled water across the footing subgrade area which is at risk of freezing at low <br /> temperatures. It is the opinion of GeoDesign that the exposed footing subgrade is currently suitable for support of the <br /> intended structure. <br /> Lot 161: <br /> Upon arrival, GeoDesign noted that the foundation excavation subcontractor had completed excavation of the footing and <br /> crawl space area for Lot 161. GeoDesign noted that the exposed foundation subgrade generally consisted of a brown to <br /> dark brown silty SAND (f-m) with gravel (f-c) which could be probed generally less than 3 inches using a 1/2 inch diameter <br /> soil probe. Relative compaction of the exposed footing subgrade material was tested using a Troxler Moisture-Density <br /> gauge; in-place density tests indicated that the exposed footing subgrade had been compacted to greater than 95%of its <br /> maximum dry density as determined by a Modified Proctor analysis. It is the opinion of GeoDesign that the exposed footing <br /> subgrade is currently suitable for support of the intended structure. <br /> Lot 169: <br /> Previously, GeoDesign noted loose subgmerged material in the southeast corner of Lot 169 that we recommended <br /> removing prior to the placement of concrete. Today, GeoDesign observed the foundation excavation subcontractor use an <br /> excavator to remove ice, water, and loose soil from the southeast and northeast corners of Lot 169. GeoDesign also noted <br /> that a shovel and concrete rake was used to remove scattered loose and saturated material from footing subgrade areas. <br /> GeoDesign also noted pooled water across the footing subgrade area which is at risk of freezing at low temperatures. It is <br /> the opinion of GeoDesign that the exposed footing subgrade is currently suitable for support of the intended structure. <br /> For all of the lots, GeoDesign recommends that loose or saturated material that may build up under the footing area be <br /> removed prior to the placement of concrete. GeoDesign recommends that any water/ice be removed from the footing <br /> subgrade areas prior to the placement of concrete. <br /> A summary of our observations can be found in the attached Figure 1.John Feltner with Polygon was notified of our <br /> observations prior to our departure from the site. <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 of the 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"sectlon. <br /> 10700 Meridian Avenue North,Suite 402 1 Seattle,WA 98133 1 206.838.9900 <br /> 2502 Jefferson Avenue I Tacoma,WA 98402 1 253.203.0095 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.