Laserfiche WebLink
/-1(-11 /-1 sc Lod. <br /> CEO DESIGN FIELD REP, <br /> Project Name: Everett River Front-Simpson Report 004 <br /> GeoDesign#: Polygon-127-03 Date: 10/28/2016 <br /> Reports with Unresolved Nonconformance Issues: Permit: <br /> PW 1505-005 <br /> Plyll°0°I- O x' <br /> ,_.. ..�...:.:.:.........�, <br /> x� Y Y° <br /> Nick Abdelnour(Polygon) Randy Allen(City of Everett) Weather:Clear, 60's <br /> Ron Bowen(Polygon) Eddy Stevens(Polygon) Arrival/Departure: 1400/1645 <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: <br /> Attachments: El Installation Records In Other <br /> Reviewed By: XX <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 from Lots 123 and 124. <br /> SUMMARY of OBSERVATIONS: <br /> Lot 124: <br /> Upon arrival, GeoDesign noted that the foundation excavation subcontractor was in the process of removing surficially <br /> loose and saturated material from the base of the foundation area for the east portion of Lot 124. GeoDesign noted that the <br /> exposed foundation subgrade consisted of a gray silty SAND (f-m)with gravel (f-c)which could be probed generally less <br /> than 3-4 inches. Relative compaction of the exposed foundation subgrade area was tested using a Troxler <br /> Moisture-Density gauge; in-place density tests indicated that the exposed material had been compacted to greater than <br /> 95%of its maximum dry density as determined by a Modified Proctor analysis. <br /> It is the opinion of GeoDesign that the foundation subgrade area observed today is currently suitable for support of the <br /> intended structure. GeoDesign recommends that any surficially loose and saturated material be removed from the base of <br /> the foundation areas prior to the placement of concrete. <br /> Lot 123: <br /> GeoDesign noted that the over-excavated area on the west side of Lot 123 had been backfilled with permeable ballast <br /> material compacted into a firm and unyielding mass. GeoDesign also noted that material was being stockpiled on the <br /> eastern portion of the foundation area,which was currently not ready for the foundation subgrade evaluation. <br /> The client and concrete contractor were notified of our observations prior to our departure from the site. A summary of our <br /> observations can be found in the attached Figure 1 and Nuclear Density Gauge Data. <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.Ourwork 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 I Seattle,WA 98133 I 206.838.9900 <br /> 2502 Jefferson Avenue I Tacoma,WA 98402 I 253.203.0095 <br />