Laserfiche WebLink
ei 60-7 - p i ) <br /> • <br /> 1)--31g 02� ��'� bit <br /> Project Name: Everett River Front-Simpson Report: 104 <br /> GeoDesign#: ! Polygon-127-01 Date: 8/05/2016 <br /> Reports with Unresolved Nonconformance Issues: Permit: <br /> P W 1505-005 <br /> DFR 052 <br /> ©' <br /> Nick Abdelnour(Polygon) Randy Allen(City of Everett) Weather: Clear, 60's <br /> Ron Bowen(Polygon) Eddy Stevens(Polygon) Arrival/Departure: 0615/1500 <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 Site Plan(s) m Density Test Summary Signature <br /> Attachments: .. <br /> ❑ Installation Records 0 Other Reviewed By: <br /> PURPOSE of VISIT: GeoDesign representative, Ben Weinberg, was on-site to observe earthwork activities at the request <br /> of Eddy Stevens and Doug Ross with Polygon for lot foundation checks and rain garden construction. <br /> SUMMARY of OBSERVATIONS: <br /> Lot 105: <br /> Previously, GeoDesign had observed the exposed foundation subgrade for Lot 105 and noted the contractor elected to <br /> over-excavate loose material along the west perimeter footing 2 feet and backfill the area in 1 foot lifts using 2-inch clean <br /> crushed rock material compacted into a firm and unyielding mass. Today, GeoDesign noted that the contractor had <br /> completed backfilling the over-excavated area. GeoDesign noted that the exposed foundation subgrade generally <br /> 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 <br /> inch diameter soil probe under the full weight of the user; in-place density tests taken on three sides of the foundation area <br /> indicated that the material had been compacted to greater than 95%of its maximum dry density as determined by a <br /> Modified Proctor analysis. <br /> Lot 106: <br /> Previously, GeoDesign had observed the exposed foundation subgrade for Lot 106 and noted the contractor elected to <br /> over-excavate loose material along the west and south perimeter footings 2 feet and backfill the area in 1 foot lifts using <br /> 2-inch clean crushed rock material compacted into a firm and unyielding mass. Today,GeoDesign noted that the contractor <br /> had completed backfilling the over-excavated area. GeoDesign noted that the exposed foundation subgrade generally <br /> 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 <br /> inch diameter soil probe under the full weight of the user;in-place density tests taken on three sides of the foundation area <br /> indicated that the material had been compacted to greater than 95%of its maximum dry density as determined by a <br /> Modified Proctor analysis. <br /> For the above-mentioned lot areas, it is the opinion of GeoDesign that the exposed foundation tubgrades observed today <br /> are currently suitable for support of the intended loads. GeoDesign recommends that any surficially loose or saturated <br /> material be removed from the base of the footings prior to the placement of concrete. A summary of our observations and <br /> density tests taken today can be found in the attached Nuclear Density Gauge Data and Figure 1. <br /> Rain Gardens: <br /> Today, GeoDesign observed the exposed base of rain garden areas along the north (2)and east perimeters (2)of the <br /> project(with exception to rain garden area north of D/W"D"). GeoDesign noted that the exposed material at the base of the <br /> rain gardens generally consisted of a gray-brown SAND(f-m)with trace to minor gravel (f-c) and trace silt. The rain garden <br /> areas ranged in length from 40 feet to 120 feet and were approximately 10 feet wide. Observed depths appeared to be in <br /> accordance with the approved plans for the project. It is GeoDesign's understanding that the rain garden areas will be <br /> backfilled with a bioretention soil; GeoDesign previously sampled and submitted this material for testing to verify its <br /> properties meet project specifications. GeoDesign notified the client and contractor of our observations prior to our <br /> 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 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 Sy'section. <br /> 10700 Meridian Avenue North,Suite 210 I Seattle,WA 98133 I 206.838.9900 <br /> 2502 Jefferson Avenue I Tacoma,WA 98402 I 253.203.0095 <br />