Laserfiche WebLink
2,t <br /> YY <br /> CEO L ESIGNz �� by- r'1:� FIELD REP. !!- i '6 ' 1 0 4. <br /> Project Name: Everett River Front-Simpson Report: 122 <br /> GeoDesign#: Polygon-127-01 Date: 9/30/2016 <br /> Reports with Unresolved Nonconformance Issues: Permit: <br /> P1W 1r 505-00p5 <br /> Nick Abdelnour(Polygon) Randy Allen(City of Everett) Weather:Cloudy, 50's <br /> Ron Bowen(Polygon) Eddy Stevens(Polygon) Arrival/Departure: 0800/1015 <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 /> 0 Site Plan(s) m Density Test Summary Signature: may:•— � - <br /> Attachments: ❑ Installation Records 0 Other <br /> Reviewed By: leX • <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 compaction of the exposed foundation subgrade for Lots 125 and 126. <br /> SUMMARY of OBSERVATIONS: <br /> Lot 125: <br /> Previously, GeoDesign had taken in-place density tests on the exposed foundation subgrade for Lot 125 that indicated that <br /> the material had been compacted to less than 95%of its maximum dry density as determined by a Modified Proctor <br /> analysis and recommended that the top 1 foot of material be re-compacted to greater than 95%of its maximum dry density. <br /> Today, GeoDesign observed the re-compaction of the exposed foundation subgrade material using a Dynapac CA252 <br /> smooth-drum vibratory roller making slow overlapping passes over the footing and crawl space areas. <br /> Relative compaction of the re-compacted foundation subgrade material was tested using a Troxler Moisture-Density gauge; <br /> in-place density tests indicated that the exposed foundation subgrade material had been compacted to greater than 95%of <br /> its maximum dry density as determined by a Modified Proctor analysis. It is the opinion of GeoDesign that the exposed <br /> foundation subgrade material observed today is currently suitable for support of the intended load. GeoDesign <br /> recommends that any surficially loose and saturated material be removed from the base of the foundation area prior to the <br /> placement of concrete. <br /> Lot 126: <br /> Previously, GeoDesign had taken in-place density tests on the exposed foundation subgrade for Lot 126 that indicated that <br /> the material had been compacted to less than 95%of its maximum dry density as determined by a Modified Proctor <br /> analysis and recommended that the top 1 foot of material be re-compacted to greater than 95%of its maximum dry density. <br /> Today, GeoDesign observed the re-compaction of the exposed foundation subgrade material using a Dynapac CA252 <br /> smooth-drum vibratory roller making slow overlapping passes over the footing and crawl space areas. <br /> Relative compaction of the re-compacted foundation subgrade material was tested using a Troxler Moisture-Density gauge; <br /> in-place density tests indicated that the exposed foundation subgrade material had been compacted to greater than 95%of <br /> its maximum dry density as determined by a Modified Proctor analysis. It is the opinion of GeoDesign that the exposed <br /> foundation subgrade material observed today is currently suitable for support of the intended load. GeoDesign <br /> recommends that any surficially loose and saturated material be removed from the base of the foundation area prior to the <br /> placement of concrete. <br /> A summary of our observations and density tests taken today can be found in the attached Figure 1, Nuclear Density <br /> Gauge Data, and Photo Log. <br /> The client and contractor were notified of our 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 contrachor 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 supet4islon or direction of the contractor,the contractor's employees <br /> or agents. Our firm is not responsible for site safety.This Reid 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 I Seattle,WA 98133 I 206.838.9900 <br /> 2502Jefferson Avenue I Tacoma,WA 98402 I 253.203.0095 <br /> I , <br />