Laserfiche WebLink
4561 51si- -vim <br /> DESIGN FIELD REPO <br /> o <br /> Project Name: Everett River Front-Simpson Report: 080 <br /> GeoDesign#: Polygon-127-03 Date: 11/7/2017 <br /> Reports with Unresolved Nonconformance Issues: Permit: <br /> PW1505-005 <br /> rrip, -r-rroo 1.4,1,. a ;m .rg a ?e.. . r' _ ;$M? . 4'k�sn�5a: <br /> Nick Abdelnour(Polygon) Randy Allen(City of Everett) Weather: Cloudy, 50's <br /> Ron Bowen(Polygon) Eddy Stevens(Polygon) Arrival/Departure: 1710/1730 <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, EIT <br /> Attachments: ElSite Plan(s) ❑✓ Density Test Summary Signature: 4447 <br /> 0 Installation Records ❑ Other <br /> Reviewed By: 4 4 ..4_ _--� <br /> PURPOSE of VISIT: GeoDesign representative, Ben Weinberg, was on-site part time at the request of Craig with DDS to <br /> observe foundation subgrade for Lots 277. <br /> SUMMARY OF OBSERVATIONS: <br /> LOT 277: <br /> Previously, GeoDesign noted that Northwest Construction/BDZ had removed 3.5 to 4 feet of unsuitable fill material down to <br /> firm and unyielding ground and replaced the material with structural fill that was compacted to greater than 95% of its <br /> maximum dry density as determined by a Modified Proctor analysis. Today, GeoDesign noted that DDS had completed <br /> excavation of the footing and crawl space area for Lot 277. GeoDesign noted that the exposed subgrade material consisted <br /> of a gray to gray-brown silty SAND (f-m)with gravel (f-m)which could generally be probed less than 1 inch using a 1/2 inch <br /> diameter soil probe. GeoDesign noted approximately 2-3 inches of surficially loose and saturated material across the south <br /> half of the foundation area which exhibited yielding underfoot. <br /> Relative compaction of the exposed foundation subgrade material (areas which were not submerged or covered with loose <br /> material that was representative of soil underlying the lot area)was tested using a Troxler 3430 Moisture-Density Gauge; <br /> in-place density tests indicated that the material had been compacted to greater than 95% of its maximum dry density as <br /> determined by a Modified Proctor analysis. <br /> GeoDesign recommends removing the surficially loose and saturated material from the base of the foundation areas prior to <br /> the construction of concrete forms. It is our opinion that the foundation subgrade has been prepared in general accordance <br /> with the project plans and our geotechnical recommendations, except for the previously noted loose and saturated surface <br /> material. <br /> The client and contractor were notified of our observations and recommendations after our departure from the site today.A <br /> summary of our 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.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 I Seattle,WA 98133 I 206.838.9900 <br /> 2502 Jefferson Avenue I Tacoma,WA 98402 I 253.203.0095 <br />