Report Feb. 7. 2006 3:07PM ) No. 2209 P. 1/2
;L Y;.. .
boo 471
tnninccrin9, hu:.
Real World Geotechnical Solutions
Investigation • • Design • Construction Support
x. N,y February 7, 2006
57-4? (Q— c:r c o
. Project No. 04 -8608 icici 7 Le s ICCrt-i 4 D'or
Terry Kinney / Jim Cavanaugh
West Hills Development
15500 SW Jay Street
Beaverton, Oregon 97006
Fax No. (503) 641 -7661
Copy: Froelich Consulting Engineers (Fax 503 - 6241005)
Wyatt, Arbor Field Office (Fax 503- 524 -4403)
Subject: Geotechnical Observation of Foundation Excavation and Consultation
Arbor Summit Lot 15
Tigard, Oregon
References: 1. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report, Oregon State University Property,
12780 SW Bull Mountain Road, Washington County, Oregon, GeoPacific
Engineering, Inc. report dated February 17, 2004.
2. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report, Arbor Summit, 12950 SW Bull
Mountain Road Washington County, Oregon, GeoPacific Engineering, Inc. report
dated May 24, 2004.
3. Summary Report of Geotechnical Observation and Testing Arbor Summit, Tigard
Oregon, GeoPacific Engineering, Inc. letter report dated September 8, 2005
At your request, GeoPacific Engineering, Inc. ( GeoPacific) performed a geotechnical review of the proposed
residential construction on Lot 15 of the Arbor Summit development. GeoPacific performed geotechnical
studies for the project (References 1 and 2), and provided on -call testing and construction observation services
during mass grading. Results of our observation and testing are presented in our report dated September 8,
2005 (Reference 3).
Lot 15 is underlain by engineered fill, with on -call monitoring and testing performed by GeoPacific. The
proposed development on Lot 15 consists of a two -story conventional timber - framed residence. The garage
floor will be elevated as will the living space, with a crawlspace beneath. GeoPacific visited the site on
February 6, 2006 to observe foundation excavations.
The existing lot grades slope down toward the southest. Building plans for Lot 15 call for strip footings to
5 support home. The southwest corner of the home encountered uncompacted backfill for the sewer manhole.
This material was removed and replaced with compacted gravel to 2 feet depth. The northeast corner exposed
one thin area of engineered fill that was not cement treated. This area was also removed and replaced with
compacted gravel. We observed a third small area at the back of the garage that showed a localized area of
topsoil. We recommended removal and replacement at this location as well.
7312 SW Durham Road Tel (503) 598 -8445
Portland, Oregon 97224 Fax (503) 598 -8705
Feb. 7. 2006 3:07PM ) No. 2209 P. 2/2
''' P r.lairy 7, 2006
Project No. 04 -8608
/IN Results of our site visit indicate that, once the final small area is corrected, footings should have
adequate embedment depth (minimum 12 inches) and adequate footing -to -wall setback distances have
been maintained. In our opinion, the observed subgrade conditions on the subject lot are adequate to
support an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Where stepped foundations are present, a 1H:1V
setback should be maintained to avoid surcharging of the lower foundation wall.
Care should be taken to avoid saturation or disturbance of footing subgrade soils during and after
excavation. If footing bearing soils become saturated or disturbed, any softened soil or slough should
be removed and replaced with crushed aggregate or additional concrete. In general, footing
excavations should be cleaned such that no more than about Y2 inch of loose soils are present prior to
pouring concrete.
This foundation excavation review should be considered supplemental to the above - referenced
geotechnical reports. The conclusions, recommendations, uncertainties and limitations of those reports
remain applicable, except where modified herein.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service.
• Sincerely,
GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING INC.
, c 0.0 PR ,
44, b EN6INEE, 0/0
ty 14743
• - 0 / .
OREGON
Kik
0
James D. Imbrie, P.E. c/q . 23, 19 4, e p - r
Principal Geotechni .. Engineer Eg 0. Ilag / 1 0'07
..
04- 8608 -Arbor Summlt Lot 15 2 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC.
Nov. 17. 2005 10:51AM —_ 6 f?)e/Q No. 0766 P. 2
&q. 514J Lay
6iginceting.lii!
Real -World Geotechnical Solutions
Investigation • Design • Construction Support
September 8, 2005
GeoPacific Project No. 04 -8608
Terry Kinney / Jim Cavanaugh
West Hills Development
15500 SW Jay Street
Beaverton, Oregon 97006
Fax No. (503) 641 -7661
Copy: Pam Boyd, LDC Design Qroup. Inc. (Fax 503- 645 -5500)
Ken Wheelock, K&G Construction 1,Fax (Fax 50381 -2389)
Subject: Summary Report of Geotechnical Observation and Testing
Arbor Summit
Tigard, Oregon
References: 1. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report, Oregon State University
Property, 12780 SW Bull Mountain Road Washington County, Oregon,
GeoPacific Engineering, Inc. report dated February 17, 2004.
2. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report, Arbor Summit, 12950 SW Bull
Mountain Road, Washington County, Oregon, GeoPacific Engineering, Inc.
report dated May 24, 2004.
3. Rockery Wall Analysis and "Lock +Load" Wall Design Parameters, Arbor
Summit, Tigard, Oregon, GeoPacific Engineering, Inc. letter report dated
August 13, 2004
4. Wet Subgrade Pavement Section, Arbor Summit, Tigard, Oregon, GeoPacific
Engineering, Inc. letter report dated November 8, 2004
5. Geotechnical Engineering Report, Bull Mountain Road Improvements at Arbor
Summit, Arbor Summit Subdivision, 12950 Bull Mountain Road, Tigard
Oregon, GeoPacific Engineering, Inc. letter report dated November 12, 2004
GeoPacific Engineering, Inc. ( GeoPacific) conducted on -call testing and construction observation
services for Arbor Summit Phases 1 and 2. The project site and proposed improvements are
shown on the attached reduced grading plan sheet prepared by LDC Design Group, Inc. The
development consists of grading 42 lots (Lots 1 -42) for single - family residences, and associated
improvements that include new streets and driveways, and underground utilities. The project
also included construction of several rockery walls up to about 9 feet in height, and a Lock +Load
type wall up to about 11 feet high, in the southeast corner of the property.
7312 SW Durham Road Tel (503) 598 - 8445
Portland, Oregon 97224 Fax (503) 598 -8705
Nov. 17. 2005 10:51AM No. 0766 P. 3
September 8, 2005
GeoPacific Project No. 04 -8608 •
GeoPacific performed geotechnical engineering studies for the site (References 1 and 2), which
include geotechnical recommendations for the project. Reference 3 includes recommendations
for rockery retaining wall design and construction, and soil parameters for use by others in design
of the Lock +Load retaining wall.
Results of field monitoring and density testing for the Arbor Summit development are attached to
this report. In addition to providing a summary of geotechnical observation and testing
performed to date, this letter report provides recommendations for residential structure
construction.
SITE PREPARATION AND FILL PLACEMENT
Prior to fill placement, areas to receive fill were stripped and proof - rolled. Stripped materials
were removed from the site. Based on the grading plan and our field observations, engineered
fill was placed on the following lots:
• Lot 6
Lots 14 — 25)
• Lots 35 — 37
• Lot 41
The remaining lots were planned as either cut lots or near previously existing grade.
Engineered fill consisted of on -site native silt, moisture conditioned to facilitate compaction.
During placement of the engineered fill, we performed periodic density testing to verify the
relative compaction of fill materials. The compaction specification for engineered fill was a
minimum of 95 percent of maximum dry density based on Standard Proctor (ASTM D 698).
Density test results are attached. Due to wet soil conditions, some of the engineered fill was
cement treated to facilitate compaction. From our observations and test results, fill soils were
adequately compacted and are suitable for spread foundation support under dry weather
conditions (see Structural Foundations section below).
RETAINING WALLS
GeoPacific performed wall stability analysis and provided construction recommendations for
rockery walls on the project (Reference 3). During construction, we monitored rockery walls for
keyway soil suitability, rock size and placement, wall batter and subsurface drainage. Based on
our observations, the rockery walls on site were constructed in general accordance with the
geotechnical recommendations.
Lock +Load walls on the project were designed by others, with soil parameters for design .
provided by GeoPacific (Reference 3). The wall extends southeast of Lots 14 and 15, above the
new cul -de -sac for SW Terraview Drive in the southeast corner of the site.
04 -8608 -Arbor Summit Final 2 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC.
Nov. 17. 2005 10:51AM No. 0766 P. 4
September 8, 2005
GeoPacific Project No. 04 -8608
During wall construction, GeoPacific provided on-call observation and testing services (see
attached Field Soil Inspection Summary). The walls were inspected for materials used, subgrade
bearing, keyway, subdrain, and drainage/backfill materials. Based on our observations, the walls
were constructed in general accordance with the wall designer's recommendations,
As noted in the above - referenced reports, an adequate setback should be provided between the
top of retaining walls and building foundations. Foundation excavations on lots adjacent to
retaining walls should have a footing -to -slope setback of no less than 1.5H:1V, measured from
the base of the wall to the footing bottom. GeoPacific should review the foundation excavation
if footing excavations are located within 12 feet of a retaining wall.
If concrete patios or other improvements are constructed in the back yard of homes adjacent to
rockery or Lock +Load retaining walls, we anticipate these improvements could be within the
influence zone of the wall. It should be noted that any movement of the wall may result in minor
displacement and/or settlement of concrete patios or other improvements located over or near the
influence zone of the wall.
CONCRETE STAIRWAY
At the request of the contractor, GeoPacific performed reinforcing steel inspections and concrete
testing for the stairway ascending to the top of a Lock +Load wall in the southern portion of the
site. Results of our reinforcing steel inspections are summarized in the attached Field Soil
Inspection Summary. Compressive strength test results of concrete cylinders obtained during
pouring of the stairway are also attached.
FINISHED LOT SURFACES
As of our final walk through of the project site on September 7, 2005, it appeared that mass
grading had been completed for the subject lots. To our knowledge, no uncompacted soil or
stripped organic soil was placed over the surface of the engineered fill lots.
Lot surfaces probed medium stiff to stiff under moderate pressure using a steel "T" bar, based on
spot - checking during our site visit of September 7, 2005. The depth of excavation for house
foundations should be expected to vary and is generally deepest when constructed during the
winter, over sloping ground, and at the back of the lots. In general, it appears that 12 inches of
excavation will be the average depth required. Deeper excavations may be needed in areas
softened by surface water.
Foundation excavations should be carried through any soft or organic soil to competent native
soil or engineered fill. If earthwork during home construction exceeds 50 yd per lot; is planned
more than 1 foot thick, on ground sloping steeper than 20 percent grade; or is expected to support
appurtenant structures, such as deck footings, patios, and sidewalks, then a grading permit will be
required and a geotechnical engineer should be consulted. We expect that 12 inches of excavation
will be necessary to reach suitable bearing soils on lots with the exception of the lots described
above that may have water softened soils. Deeper excavations may be required in localized areas
where native soils may be softened due to high moisture content. The depth of excavation for
04.860840ot Summit Final 3 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC.
Nov. 17. 2005 10:52AM _ No. 0766 P. 5
• September 8, 2005
GeoPacific Project No. 04-8608
house foundations should be expected to vary and is generally deepest when constructed during
the winter.
STRUCTURAL FOUNDATIONS
It is our understanding that the proposed residential structures will be single - family buildings a
maximum of three stories high. The buildings will most likely be founded on shallow spread
footings bearing on competent native soils or engineered fill. Spread footing design and
construction is expected to conform to the Oregon One and Two Family Dwelling Specialty Code.
For protection against frost heave, spread footings should have a minimum embedment depth of
12 inches below exterior grade. The designer should determine appropriate widths for
continuous wall and pad footings.
Based on our findings, and assuming building foundations are prepared during dry weather
conditions, native soils and engineered fill are considered suitable for support of foundations to a
maximum allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 lbs/ft and a maximum column load of 35 kips. For
greater loads, the geotechnical engineer should be consulted. The coefficient of friction between
on -site soil and poured -in -place concrete may be taken as 0.45 with no factor of safety included.
For the foundation loads anticipated, we estimate total settlement of spread foundations of less
than about 11/4 inch and differential settlement of less than about % inch between two adjacent
load - bearing components supported on competent soil. We anticipate that the majority of the
estimated settlement will occur during construction, as loads are applied.
Footing excavations should be trimmed neat and the bottom of the excavation should be carefully
prepared. Loose, wet or otherwise softened soil should be removed from the footing excavation
prior to placing reinforcing steel bars.
If foundations along the front walls of buildings extend within 10 feet of the curb, geotechnical
review should be performed to determine the potential impact of franchise utility trench backfill
on the building foundations. If utility laterals or other pipelines extend within the influence zone
of structural foundations, geotechnical review may also be necessary.
Building foundation plans and excavations for lots adjacent to retaining walls should be reviewed
by the geotechnical engineer, where structures are located within 12 feet of the wall, as discussed
above in the Retaining Walls section.
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND STREETS
GeoPacific performed periodic testing of backfill during placement of underground utilities.
Tested backfill consisted of / " - crushed rock. Density test results indicate the backfill was
compacted in accordance with project specifications, to at least 95 percent of Standard Proctor
(ASTM D 698): Density tests results are included in the attached Summary of Field Soil Density
Tests.
GeoPacific evaluated pavement sections for Bull Mountain Road improvements constructed
adjacent to the site as part of the project (Reference 5). We monitored roadway subgrade
04.8608Arbor Summit Final 4 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC.
Nov. 17. 2005 10:52AM _ _ No. 0766 P. 6
•
• September 8, 2005
GeoPacific Project No. 04-8608
conditions, base rock and AC placement and compaction for both the on -site streets and the
offsite Bull Mountain Road improvements. Portions of the on -site streets were constructed
during a period when subgrade soils were wet and it was not feasible to compact the subgrade to
project specifications. A wet weather pavement section (Reference 4) was implemented in these
areas.
Density testing was performed of 1 W' -0 crushed rock base course materials. Density testing of
the base course materials in these areas indicated compaction results of at least 95 percent of
Modified Proctor (ASTM D1557). At the time of this report, paving has been placed over the
on -site streets and offsite Bull Mountain Road improvements. Test results indicate relative
compaction of at least 91 and 92 percent of Rice Density (bottom and top lifts, respectively) at
the locations tested, in accordance with project specifications.
SEEPS AND SPRINGS
No seeps or springs were noted on site during our construction observation and testing.
CLOSING AND LIMITATIONS
Our conclusions and opinions as to whether the work essentially complies with the project
specifications are based on our observations and experience. The conclusions contained herein
represent conditions at the date of this report and apply only to our work with respect to site
stripping, fill placement and compaction, rockery wall construction, utility trench backfill, base
course and AC placement and compaction. We cannot provide advice, opinions, or conclusions
relative to site work that we have not observed. Observations by GeoPacific are performed to
determine, in general, if the work is being performed in accordance with applicable geotechnical
recommendations. The fact that any particular work has been observed does not waive the
contractor's responsibility for the means and methods of construction, job site safety, or to
comply with the contract documents.
Locations indicated in our field reports are generally based on construction staking placed by
others, or information provided by the contractor at the time of our site visit. Surveying of test
locations or locations of site improvements, and establishment/verification of line and grade, are
beyond the scope of services provided by GeoPacific.
Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, GeoPacific attempted to execute the scope
of services in accordance with generally accepted professional principals and practices in the
field of geotechnical engineering at the time the report was prepared. No warranty, express or
implied, is made.
If conditions are encountered during foundation excavation that differ from this report, then the
developer, the contractor, and GeoPacific should be allowed to review the condition before
corrective action is taken. Corrective work performed by the builder without notification of the
above parties will be considered as an acceptance of the conditions encountered.
04.8609•Arbor Summit Final 5 GEOPACWFIC ENGINEERING, INC.
Nov. 17. 2005 10:52AM No. 0766 P. 7
• September 8, 2005
GeoPacific Project No. 04 -8608
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service.
Sincerely,
GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC.
k t 4 A PRO
II14 411
o � l
HAV
I t oe4j
Sott L. Hardm
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
Attachments: Lot Layout Plan
Field Inspection Summary
Test Prefixes
Summary of Field Soil Density Tests
Summary of Field Asphaltic Concrete Density Tests
Concrete Cylinder Compressive Strength Test Results
04- 8608 -Arbor Summit Final 6 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC.
Nov. 17. 2005 10:52A I § t Pi I No. 0766 P. 8
I I
. 6 116Foev; 1 I
1 ,... r ...... - ........... v,,g sill Id I 11
I 4 I t'l - ..' -' " VD -• - ..-51 1 i ii 1 #/!,_ 1
, a: , e e et) tl ---- -0 ---
, 9 1 2*Eu., I e o vc . .,
1
I r c r( ,' _ -y �+ • . I I. 3'
..._:+1/4" • 7 F .r..v. t: rr y� N
D ii
, . „,„, ;11 , . _. -,...- • �� •
:r ° u • yE a \I e a • �, . t ■� j ` I . !l - , f. ,. .. - -•.' , _..i.• 1 a
I. I ., . } II `+,, Ss d ' 1
In ',-;‘,:;.,:.,‘..•;:f.:',4•;;,%.,-.'w Y� � .u!�i s' .a 'Y r v)',n` n vyi, v , �' 1
y a ^ w ., J C i ,. -, ..A' ..t'. ...... . ;,... / , I 1,
. Ci r ' _,i'L.C:-..„:.1 .: s '..'•,'"i'-'%.: VIMPSIMEMOVidinigialkliiiiiMe / a ,0 i I
ti ' , ;', e, 0)1. '::.• '.', „ . . - zit o, i ,
+ ■ref. y' i / / ' �., I �' , ,v •• I • •
, V • ..71..;; ;45, .• ; .. ', i . 1 ... ' ','' ..c..., -. i , ' ! I il 1 1 ,/ , I •• :
" '''': ,i:: ''' ::- „ /' / I .'
x "' l'` :'''4:-i-,•::.-;,;4t)3-',,,ZS , ...", , ,',:xvi ili:. , .,.,....., , -... , - - ?1 ,.....,,,
2 ` I . . ) r'�_. �,R I. {, / i , ,, ..(, :- a / • I ,
f „". fi ,f - j •• 1 ' / ' I i
J � •_ . ,,A �. ' i:� l' : , , BSI• I • " •
1 f ! ...- . '1 . / y 0; y , ,,,,-/h1.SA.
I.. R,„, . If •
; , 1 '.4.?.? ,
lig 1 .,ate''_, / , r .�'y , u i +` 11. , •
5 � ; te r . L n )' } . r � l ji
• I ; � r.. 1. �. ,, . .. , ter ; .
mfrs... . ).E a _ i. f e. I .
r )
r , :' '' 1 t: • �. , J.i' • ii-= �I L.,4,- ' 1 J + rr, � _ — �,
1
• ? ` r u:, '/ • y� a.r.:b ra +t+r ,..; i_, ; •..,,,,„.•, .1
Nov. 17. 2005 10:53AM No. 0766 P. 9
• WOK 0 FROSION cON1 OL 'slim) 6 >s a eTj at 0e9011_ 8Y t
-- 1•0-00 001011 i 11
ep.pv 00.11e0 ..L IET =A711ER llw611311 COIARO.. FLAN
- 11--- s•-- -- amoes:a spasms awry MT SA AM VET MUTATE FR051a1 dal.
!MUM StO'tT 5E. n ICI
WEE 000 mC1010101010M¢ f i
® 0011.e11 =On Osaka
a 1 00=1 0 1 3 0 1 0t1i6 ! _ a 1 Hal
d e
I I Y KRIM a01W1aon
666 Warr It
0 . IIIm1110ED 2Zp
l
9 MINI a s TO IR S O W l _ — 1 CV tl
IA.N a. Z O
N N , i "'..- '' - - 14'( / El tO t ix
—.—Ti • *�' .lx a�rJT _ V - , r 4 8
' ' + - ..- -�., --`tom �r; �- ^ . - - -. • __ 4 , • II C r N� (, ; i . 1 1 1 K :-..n
..
aa nr ,' a ; .
Aitip i $
l
L Wilt. :A, A .1,.. : .,.. 4 k---,-"rill i §
. : -16Z 1
W l ' '- , 24 /�
Maj. °
� : .. r . � 7 �:1�► n ;j� . l ad II. : -
3� i ni Ma II ' 4 ; 1
a , _ ti . . I ! , I H
0semi 0l II01 1 m®cro , Z. 'Y r J 1 �� / I . ! , , f 23 ' � Q hill 44A. all aa� / / • ' � ! ' 11 0 y � / m
e -ate.: c: ' 9; Lt r - -- i
pi li';W;f•--,1 :r. ; i r amwet S
. if i .. .,. ,/ 4 b,.. / 1 4 ..: , -2 ' Et , ;• -= .' I 1 , -- I .
:OM .7 • .. -.■4 / ... fi66 i lb 14 .'
wax o me , . / / / / . / r Irl z li 1 ..----;;;-- / g
%Id d
I AS— BUILT
a m 3091 1
8/16/2005 Fwd
NO1EE near Moat 6/016166 wane d
, ' aS
CASE FILE NO. S2B2OO4-00013
Nov. 17. 200410: 53AM ary No. 0766 POP. 1X2
Field Soil Inspection Summary
Project: Arbor Summit
Job number: OR 04 -8608
Project address: 12780 SW Bull Mt. Rd. Washington County, OR
Permit number:
Permit t
Daily Reports
11/3/04= GeoPacific technician, Jeff Stenberg, was called to Arbor Summit for
visual of stripping on lots 25, 24 a 23. Contractor has stripped lots 25, 24 &
23. Soft area found on lots 23 & 24, will need to be excavated out 18" to firm
subgrade. contractor removed orgaic topsoil and stockpiled for later removal.
okay for fill placement on lots 24 & 23.
11/9/04: GeoPacific technician, Jeff Stenberg, was called to Arbor Summit for
visual of stripping. Contractor, K & 0, has removed highly organic topsoil and
debris to firm competent subgrade on SW Greenfield Srive from existing roadway
of Summit Ridge side to SW Bull Mt. Road. Okay for fillplacement in roadway.
Due to moisture of on site soils some soft areas will need to be removed prior
to rock placement. Also contractor has cored specified section per GeoPacific
engineer, Scott Hardman, recommendations. Streets cored were, SW Lookout Drive
& SW Winterview Drive, as well as cut areas of SW Greenfield Drive.
I hand probed subgrade in areas of above mentioned core, subgrade is firm and
competent at subgrade. Okay for rock placement.
11/15/04: GeoPacific technician, Jeff stenberg, was called to Arbor summit for
visual of soil subgrade at back of lots 14 & 15 for lock -n -load wall placement.
I hand probed subgrade and found subgrade to be firm, competent and suitable
for wall placement.
3/1/05: GeoPacific engineer, Scott Hardman, on site to observe area in
southeast corner of site where cement treated fill is planned. Suggested 3
percent (by dry weight) cement initially, with adjustments as needed to
facilitate compaction. Also suggested no more than one or two lifts be placed
in a day to allow cement treated soils to hydrate. Contractor indicated the
fill would be brought up separately in this area on three adjacent benches.
Where fills on the lower benches tie into the fill on the upper benches,
adequate mixing and compaction needs to be performed to eliminate a soft strip
between the terraces.
Also observed rockery wall keyway and construction in the north east portion of
the site. Soils exposed are very stiff to hard and considered adequate to
support the planned rockeries. Portions of rock walls that had been stacked at
the time of my visit had adequate rock rise, placement and wall batter. Also
observed subsurface drains being placed.
4/20/05: GeoPacific engineer, Scott Hardman, was on site to observe reinforcing
steel in foundation mat for stairway at lock & load wall. Reference Peterson
Structual Engineers, Inc. plans dated 2/21/09, sheets 91 and 92.
Steel consists of #5 bars 12" o.c. in foundation mat, 2'6" minimum stick up for
walls. Observations indicate steel is installed in general accordance with
plans and ok to pour.
http: // 192 .168.0.1 /geouacific/admin/view soil field revort.Dl 9/9/2005
Nov. 17. 200410: 53AM,r„ No. 0766 PEP. 15f2
Soils appear adequate for 2000 pef bearing pressure.
4/25/05: GeoPacific engineer, Scott Hardman, was on site to observe reinforcing
steel in concrete sidewalls, for stairway at lock & load wall. Reference
Peterson Structual Engineers, Inc. plans dated 2/21/05, sheets S1 and S2.
Steel consists of #5 bars 12" o.c. in side walls. Adequate clear ances
maintained.
Observations indicate steel is installed in general accordance with plans and
okay to pour.
5/10/05: CeoPacific engineer, Jim Imbrie, was on site to observe reinforcing
steel in concrete stairs, for stairway at lock & load wall. Reference Peterson
Structual Engineers, Inc. plans dated 2/21/05, sheets S1 and 82. Steel
consists of #5 bars 12" o.c. throughout the vertical and horizontal portions of
the stairs. At time of our site visit, steel was in place except the bottom
two stairs. We discussed this with Troy of parker Concrete, who indicated he
would extend rebar to the bottom two steps prior to pouring concrete. Adequate
clearances appear to have been maintained.
Observations indicate steel is installed in general accordance with plans and
okay to pour, subject to rebar being extended to the bottom two steps as noted
above.
8/13/05: GeoPacific technician, Jeff Stenberg, was called to Arbor Summit II
for visual of rockery wall keyways at lots 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 & 42. I looked
at all wall footing areas listed above. I probed subgrade and found subgrade
to be firm, competent and suitable for rockery wall placement. While on site I
witnessed placement of 4" in some areas and saw placement of drain and base
boulders along west property line.
8/19/05: GeoPacific engineer, Scott Hardman, on site to observe rockery wall
construction in the Phase 2 area (vicinity of Lots 35 - 42). Four or five
sections of rockery wall are in various stages of construction in this area.
Based on probing, keyway subgrade soils consisted of very stiff native silt
that is considered suitable for support of the rockery walls. At the time of
my site visit, rock size, placement, wall batter and keyway embedment depth
appeared adequate. Also observed subdrain systems installed per GeoPacific's
recommendations.
Discussed with the wall builder a wall issue at the boundary of Lots 36 and 37.
At this location, the wall alignment, is straight. In order to keep top of wall
approximatley level on the two lots, it would be necessary to have a wall
height of about 11 feet over a very short distance. The overheight wall
section would be about 4 feet long, along the wall alignment, and wall heights
would decrease to about 6 feet on the east side, and 9 feet on the west side,
immediately beyond the overheight section. In our opinion, this condition is
allowable and should not compromise wall stability, provided boulder width at
the bottom of the overheight section is 5 to 6 feet. Since this condition
exists over a very limited distance, and additional rockery walls will be
constructed perpendicular to this section prior to house construction, it is
our opinion that an adequate factor of safety will be maintained for long term
wall stability in the affected area.
Cho back to the task select page for Arbor Summit
Go back to the project select page
http:/ / 192 .168.0.1 /geopacific /admin/view soil field report.pl 9/9/2005
Nov. 17. 2005 10:54AM No. 0766 PaP. 1241
Test Prefixes
The following test prefixes are used.
BC Rase Course
DT storm Brain Trench
FT Franchise utilities Trench
LF residential Lot engineered fill
NC No Code (general fill areas and backfill)
PS Pavement Subgrade
RF Roadway engineered Fill
RW Retaining Wall backfill
SF structural Fill
ST sanitary newer Trench
WT Water line Trench
Go back to project select nage
http: //192 .168.0.1 /geopacific/admin/test prefxes.n1 9/9/2005
•
. Nov. 17. 2005F 54AM p -'� - Tests
No. 0766 PaP. 13't 9
•
Summary of Field Soil Density Tests
Project: Arbor Summit
Job number: OR 04 -8608
Client: West Hills Development Summary Cod ni g, and Explan 'on
Date vim^ Elev C.P. Max Field Dry Comp Comp Test
Test
of number Test location (ft) ( %) density moist density spec result status
test (inn (%) (pcf) ( %) ,( %)
[ ,
RETEST Storm
1/27 /05 Retestl sewer on Green TOP 124.3 5.3 118.5 95 95 Passed
Field @ (14+65)
RETEST Storm
1/27/05 Retest2 sewer on Winter TOP 124.3 5.0 119.5 95 96 Passed
View @ (11 +50) ,
RETEST Storm
1/27/05 Retest3 sewer on Winter TOP 124.3 5.9 119.2 95 • 96 Passed
View @ (13 +25) , _____
RETEST Storm
1/27/05 Retest4 sewer on Lookout TOP 124.3 5.4 120.1 95 97 Passed
Drive @ (12 +50)
RETEST Storm
1/27/05 Retests sewer on Lookout TOP 124.3 5.0 118.4 95 95 Passed
Drive @ (13 +71)
I 3/11/05 BC1 SW Lookout BC 7 125.01 12.0 120.3 95 96 Passed
Drive (11 +25)
3/11/05 BC2 SW Lookout BC 7 125.0 11.3 121.7 95 97 Passed
Drive (11 +85) ,
3/11/05 BC3 SW Lookout BC 125.0 11.9 122.6 95 98 Passed
Drive (12 +50)
3/11/05 BC4 SW Lookout BC 125.0 11.1 120.8 95 97 Passed
Drive (13 +75) I
3/11/05 BC5 SW Lookout BC 125.0 11.0 121.6 95 971 Passed
Drive (14 +50) nl I v , , 1
3/11/05 BC6 SW Winterview BC 125.0 12.3 124.2 95 99 Passed
Drive (10 +25)
3/11/05 BC7 SW Winterview
Drive (11 +25) BC 125.0 12.1 120.2 95 96 Passed
i
3/11/05 BC8 SW Winterview BC 125.0 11.7 121.2 95 97 Passed
Drive (12 +50)
3/11/05 BC9 SW Winterview BC 125.0 12.0 119.1 95 95 Passed
Drive (13+75) 1
I II II II II II II I
L http:// 192 .168.0.1 /geopacific /admin/view soil summary.pl 9/9/2005
Nov. 17. 2005 :110: 54AMD '-. Tests No. 0766 PaP. 149
II
Greenfield Drive
3/11/05 BC10 BC 125.0 l 11.4 123.8 I 95 9911Passed
II 1
(11+25)
11 ,
3/11/05 BC11 Greenfield Drive BC 125.0 11.0 121.21 95 97 Passed
(12+00)
1
3/11/05 BC12 Greenfield Drive BC 125.0 12.1 124.0 95 99 Passed
(12 +85)
3/11/05 BC13 Greenfield Drive BC 125.0 12.3 1204 95 96 Passed
(13 +25)
3/11/05 BC14 Greenfield Drive BC 125.0 12.11 119.2 95 95 Passed
(14+00) _
3/11/05 BC15 Greenfield Drive BC 125.0 12.0 121.3 95 97 Passed
(14 +50)
Bull Mt. Road
5/3/05 BC 16 improvement FG 125.0 12.0 120.8 95 97 Passed
(18 +50)
Bull Mt. Road
5/3/05 BC17 improvement FG 125.0 12.9 123.6 95 99 Passed
(19+00)
Bull Mt. Road
5/3/05 BC18 improvement FG 125.0 12.4 124.1 95 99 Passed
(19 +58)
Bull Mt. Road
5/3/05 BC 19 improvement FG 125.0 13.1 122.5 95 98 Passed
(20+65)
Bull Mt. Road
5/3/05 BC20 improvement FG 125.0 13.2 120.5 95 96 Passed
(21 +50)
Bull Mt. Road
5/3/05 BC21 improvement FG 125.0 12.9 119.8 95 96 Passed
(22 +25)
Bull Mt. Road
5/3/05 BC22 improvement FG 125.0 12.1 121.6 95 97 Passed
(22 +60)
•
Bull Mt. Road
5/3/05 BC23 improvement FG 125.0 12.8 119.7 95 96 Passed
(22 +85)
5/19/05 BC24 Tract "C" in cul- FGI 129.6 6.7 127.3 951 98 Passed
de -sac (0 +25)
5/19/05 BC25 Tract "C" in cul- FG 129.6 7.0 125.7 951 97 Passed
de -sac (0 +75)
5/19/05 BC26 Tract "C" north of FG 129.6 6.2 125.3 95 97 Passed
centerline (1 +00)
��ITract "C" south of + n�
http : // 192. 168 .0.1 /aeopacific/admin/view soil summarv.pl 9/9/2005
. Nov. 17. 2005F110:54AMDens; vTests No. 0766 PaP. 15'f
1 5/19/05 BC27 (/centerline (1 +75) II FGII II 129.611 6.91 125.81 95IL 97 Passed)
5/19/05 BC28 Tract "D" south of FG 129.61 7.3 128.6 95 99 Passed
centerline (0+50)
5/19/05 BC29 Tract "D" north of FG 129.6 7.0 125.5 95 97 Passed
centerline (0 +85)
5/19/05 BC30 Tract "D" south of FO I 129.6 6.8 124.1 95 96 Passed
centerline (1 +30)
Tract "D" north of - 1[ 5/19/05 BC31 FG 129.6 7.3 127.0 95 98 Passed
_ centerline (1 +50)
5/19/05 ` BC32 Tract "D" south of FG 129.6 7.1 124.8 951 96 Passed
centerline (1 +85) _
Storm line
12/8/04 DTI Lookout Drive GRADE 124.2 10.3 119.6 95 96 Passed
(11+00) _
Storm
12/8/04 DT2 Lookout Dr ive GRADE 124.2 9.9 120.2 95 97 Passed
,(12+00) ,
Storm line
12/8/04 DT3 Lookout Drive GRADE 124.2 10.3 120.5 95 97 Passed
(13+00)
Storm line
12/8/04 DT4 Lookout Drive GRADE 1242 14.8 123.9 95 100 Passed
(14 +00)
12/28/04 DT5 Storm sewer line TOP 124.3 7.3 118.5 95 95 Passed
"6" (10 +85)
12/28/04 DT6 Storm sewer line TOP 124.3 7.0 119.5 951 96 Passed
"6" (11 +50)
12/28/04 DT7
Storm sewer line TOP 124.3 6.8 121.5 95 98 Passed
"6" (12 +30)
12/28/04 DT8 Storm sewer line TOP 124.3 6.1 118.5 95 95 Passed
"6" (12 +65)
12/28/04 DT9 Storm sewer line TOP 124.3 7.3 122.9 95 99 Passed
"7" (12 +85)
12/28/04 DT10 Storm sewer line TOP 124.31 7.9 123.4 95 99 Passed
"7" (13 +25)
12/28/04 DT11 Storm sewer line TOP 124.3 6.2 119.9 95 97 Passed
"7" (13 +85)
12/28/04 DT12 Storm sewer line TOP 1243 6.01 121.9 95 98 Passed
"2" (10 +30)
12/28/04 DT13 Storm sewer line TOP 124.3 7.1 123.3 95 99 Passed
"2" (11 +15)
I 1F Ilstorm sewer line 11-777-1711-1n1-171
http: // 192 .168.0.1 /geopacific /admin/view soil summarv.vl 9/9/2005
Nov. 17. 05F10: 54AM. Dens;w Tests No. 0766 PEP. 16g9
(12/28/04 DT14 1( "2" (11 +65) . II TOPI( 1I 124.311 8.311 118.411 9511 9511 Passed'
12/28/04 DT15 Storm sewer line TOP 124.3 611 123.1 95 1 99 Passed
"2" (12 +50)
1 12/28/04 DT16 Storm sewer line 2 (13 +25) TOP 124.3 7.1 120. 95 97 Passed
1 12/28/041 DT17 'Storm sewer line TOP 124.3 7.0 122.1 95 98 Passed
"2" (13 +85) 1
Storm sewer line
12/28/04 DT18 TOP 124.3 9.01 123.5 95 99 Passed
_ "3" (14 +50) ,
12/28/04 DT19 St °, (15+10) line TOP' 1243 6.3 1 120.3 95 971 Passed
"3" 15 +10)
Storm sewer line
12/28/04 DT20 ••3" (15 +50) TOP 124.3 6.71 121.9 95 98 Passed
Storm sewer line
12/28/04 DT21 ••3" (15 +65) TOP 124.3 7.0 120.1 95 97 Passed
Storm sewer line
12/28/04 DT22 "3" (16+10) TOP 124.3 6.9 119.2 95 96 Passed •
Storm sewer line
12/28/04 DT23 TOP 1 124.3 6.1 120.5 95 97 Passed
"03" (16+50)
' Storm sewer line
12/28/04 DT24 TOP 124.31 6.7 121.9 95 98 Passed
"03" lateral lot 31 I
Storm line
12/28/04 DT25 „ „ TOP 124.3 6.0 121.8 95 98 Passed
6 (13 +50)
1/13/05 DT26 St°tm drain line -12" 124.3 6.7 120.1 95 97 Passed
OS (1 5 +65)
1/13/05 DT27 Storm drain line -12" 124.3 7.3 122.9 95 99 Passed
"05" (16 +10)
1 /13/05 DT28 Storm drain line 1 +12" 124.3 7.0 123.4 95 99 Passed
"04" (12 +30)
1/13/05 DT29 Storm drain line -12" 124.3 6.1 121.8 95 98 Passed
"04" (12 +85)
1/13/05 DT30 Storm drain line -12" 124.3 6.9 121.0 95 97 Passed
"04" (13 +40)
1/13/05 DT31 Storm drain line -12" 124.3 7.1 120.4 95 97 Passed
,"04" (14 +00)
Storm drain line
1/13/05 DT32 _ 12" 1 124.3 7.0 122.1 95 98 Passed
"04" (14 +30)
Storm drain line
1/13/05 DT33 -12" 124.31 6.3 123.1 95 99 Passed
"04 "(14+85) I
- , [Passed
5/12/05 DT34 Storm sewer tract TOP 121.4 6.0 118.1 95 97 C line 9 (1 +50)
II - ii I - � -- ll -- lf -- if
http:/ / 192 .168.0.1 /geopacific /admin/view soil summary.pl 9/9/2005
. Nov. 17. Den4� Tests 2005 10:55AM No. 0766 PaP. 17'f9
F -
DT35 Storm sewer trect 121.4 10.11 "C" line 9 (1 +00, 115.6 95 95 Passed 15/12105 � I
TOP
II
Storm sewer tract
5/12/05 TOP 121.4 9.81 116.7 95 96 Passed
1 DT36 "D" line 10
r -
Storm sewer tract
5/12/05 DT37 "D" line 10 (1+1_01 TOP 121.4 8.7 1 116.7 95 96 Passed
3/4/05 LF1 Lots 19 & 18 @ +14" 103.6 21.3 101.8 95 98 Passed
front of lots ,
3/4/05 LF2 Lots 17 & 16 ® +14" 103.6 22.4 111.1 95 107 Passed
front of lots
l
3/4/05 LF3 Lot 15 @front of +14" 103.61 r 20.9 108.0 I 95 10 j Passed
lot
3/4/05 LF4 Lots 19 & 18 @ +14" 103.6 18.6 102.1 95 99 Passed
back of lots
3/4/05 LF5 Lots 17 & 16 @ +14" 103.6 20.41 101.4 95 98 Passed
back of lots I 106 Lot 15 @ back of
3/4/05 LF6 103.6 19.7 110.1 95 Passed
lot
•
J _
Lot 25 @ middle +2 103.6 22.3 100.1 95 97 1Pa s
11/3/04 LF7 of lot
11/3/04 LF8 Lot 24 @ middle +2 103.6 22.0 98.8 95 95 Passed
of lot
11/3 /04 LF9 Lot 23 @middle +2 103.6 21.8 100.1 95 971 Passed
of lot I
11/3/04 LF10 Lot 20 @ middle 1 FO 103.6 21.0 98.7 95 951 Passed
of lot
• 11/3/04 LF11 Lot 21 @ middle
FO 103.6 20.7 102.6 95 99 Passed
I of lot
,_ �^
3/5/05 LF12 Lot 15 @ front of +2 103.6 20.3 100.8 95 97 Passed
lot
3/5/05 LF13 Lot 6 middle _ +2 103.6 21.0 102.7 95 99 Passed
bench
3/5/05 LF14 Lot 17 & 18 lower +2 103.6 20.9 101.9 ( 95 98 Passed
bench
3/6/05 LF15 Lot 19 lower + 4 E 103.6 20.4 99.9 95 97 Passed
bench
3/6/05 LF16 Lot 17 & 18 upper +4 103.6 20.7 100.4 95 97 Passed
bench I
3/6/05 LF17 Lot 19 middle +4 103.6 20.8 102.8 95 99 Passed
1r bench f l
1 3/7/05 II LF18 1 16 & 17 upper I1 FGIT-II 103.611 20.41i 98.51 95 95 Passed)
http: // 192 .168.0.1 /aeonacific /admin/view soil swnmarv.vl 9/9/2005
1
:
. Nov. 17. 2005:110: 55AMD -' Tests No. 0766 PaP. 109
l_II Ibench 1U IIL,JL -11 II
I I Lot 18 & 19 lower
1 3/7/05 1 LF1 finch FG 103.6 20.7 100.1 95 97 Passed
Lot 15
3/7/05 LF20 upper FG 103.6 20.3 102.4 95 99 Passed
bench ,
8/8/05 LF21 Lot 35 +2 11 1 103.611 16.81 102.6 F 9511 99 Passed'
8/8/05 11 LF22 Lot 36 +211 j 103.611 20.21 102.811 95' 99 Passed]
1 8/8/05 1 LF23 IILot 41 +21 • 103.611 18.91 105.111 95) 1021 Passed
1 8/9/05 LF24 'Lot 37 - E +311 103.611 19.61 104.311 951 101IlPassed'
1 8/9/05 LF25 Lot 36 [ +311 I 103.61 19.71 101.9 951 981 Passed
1 8/9/05 ' „ LF26 Lot 35 1 +3.5I • 103.611 20.31 100.9 9511 971 Passed
15' north of
1/18/04 RW1 southeast corner of +16" 124.3 8.9 118.2 95 95 Passed
wall ,
30' west of
1/18/05 RW2 southeast corner of +64" 124.3 7.9 119.8 95 96 Passed
_____[ wall
20' north of
1 /18 /05 RW3 southeast corner of +32" 124.3 8.0 118.7 95 96 Passed
wall _ .__
40' west of
1/19/05 RW4 southeast corner of +96" 124.3 8.4 119.8 95 96 Passed
wall
15' north of
1/19/05 RW5 southeast corner of +48" 124.3 8.6 119.2 95 96 Passed
wall _
1/21/05 RW6 Western wall 30' +64" 124.3 8.4 121.7 95 98 Passed
south of end I
Lot 14 @ back of
11/16/04 RW7 lot retaining wall +2 124.3 6.7 120.3 95 97 Passed
backfill
Lot 15 @ back of
11/16/04 RW8 lot retaining wall +2 124.3 7.3 120.9 95 97 Passed
backfill
Lot 14 @ back of
11/16/04 RW9 lot retaining wall +4 124.3 7.0 123.3 95 L 99 Passed
backfill
Lot 15 @ back of
11/17/04 RW10 lot retaining wall +4 124.3 6.8 122.6 95 99 Passed
backfill
{ 11/17b04 RW11 Lot 14 @ back of +6 124.3 7.9 120.4 95 97 Passed
lot retaining wall
http: //192.168.0.1 /acopacific /admin/view soil surnmarvpl 9/9/2005
. Nov. 17. 2005Fi10: 55AMDensity Tests No. 0766 Pap, 19
I I backfill I iI II , I 11_11 It I
at 15 @ back of
11/17/05 RW12 lot retaining wall +9 124.3 6.5 121.0 95 97 Passed
backfill
12/8/04 ST1 Sanitary sewer GRADE 124.2 8.7 121.5 95 98 Passed
line "B" (1 +00)
=== 12/8/04 ST2 Sanitary sewer GRADE
Sanitary 11.6 119.71 I
95 96 Passed
line "B" (2 +00) . 4 _
12/8/04 ST3 Sanitary sewer GRADE 124.2 10.6 124.1 95 100 Passed
line "B" (3+00)
12/28/04 ST4 Sanitary sewer TOP - 1 124.3 7.3 119.7 95 96 Passed
liine "B" (3 +25)
12/28/04 ST5 Sanitary sewer - 124.3 7.9 118.2 95 95 Passed
I line "B" (3+00)
12/28/04 ST6 Sanitary sewer TOP 124.3 6.2 123.4 95 99 Passed)
line "B" (2 +50)
12/28/04 ST7 Sanitary sewer 4 124.3 6.0 118.2 951 95 Passed
line B (2+00) 1
12/28/04 ST8 t sewer TOP 124.3 7.3 120.1 95 97 Passed
line B (1 +30)
12/28/04 ST9 Sanitary sewer 1 TOP1 124.3 7.9 123.1 95 99 Passed
line "C" (0 +30) 1
12/28/04 ST10 Sanitary sewer -2 124,3 6.4 122.01 95 98 Passed
line "C" (0 +85)
12/28/04 ST11 Sanitary sewer TOP 124.3 7.3 120.1 95 97 Passed)
line "B" (0 +30) _ 1
12/28/04 ST12 Sanitary sewer TOP 124.3 7.9 118.41 95 95 Passed
line "C" (1+25)
1/13/05 ST13 Sanitary sewer _4 124.3 6.9 118.4 95 951 Passed
line "D" (0+25) sewer
1 /13 /05 ST14 Sne "D" (0+65) -12" 124.3 7.1 120.5 95 97 Passed
1/13/05 ST15 Sanitary sewer -4 124.3 7.0 118.0 951 95 Passed
line "D" (1 +30) .
1/13/05 ST16 Sanitary sewer
line "D" (1 +80) 1 -12" 124.3 6.2 122.0 951 98 Passed
1/13/05 ST17 Sanitary sewer
Line "D" (2 +25) -12" 124.3 6.9 123.4 95 99 Passed
, I I _
1/13/05 ST18 lineD (Z+w65) -12" J1 124.3 6.0 120.5 95 97 Passed
1 1/13/05 II ST19 11Sanitary sewer I .12'hI 124.3 7.1 119.91 951 971IPassedl
http: //192 .168.0.1 /geopacific/admin/view soil suntmary.pl 9/9/2005
Nov. 17. 2005p10: 55AM Den °`w Tests No. 0766 PaP. 20 ►f9
I II Inns "D" (2 +95) II . it 1I ... I UII II II II 1
Sanitary sewer
5/12/05 ST20 tract "C" line T 121.4 6.7 116.0 95 96 Passed
"F" (1 +65)
Sanitary sewer
5/12/05 ST21 tract "C" line TOP 121.4 7.9 117.0 95 96 Passed
"F" (1 +00)
Sanitary sewer
5/12/05 ST22 tract "D" line TOP 121.4 9.0 117.7 95 97 Passed
"G" (1 +80)
Sanitary sewer
5 /12/05 ST23 tract "D" line TOP 121.4 8.4 119.0 95 98 Passed
"0" (1+00) .
Water line SW
1/26/05 WT1 Winterview TOP 124.3 6.3 122.9 95 99 Passed
(10 +50 ) . -
Water line SW
1/26/05 WT2 Winterview TOP 124.3 6.0 119.5 95 96 Passed
(11 +30) �.. _
Water line SW
1/26/05 WT3 Winterview TOP 124.3 5.3 120.6 95 97 Passed
(12+00)
Water line SW
1/26/05 WT4 Winterview TOP 124.3 5.0 120.9 95 97 Passed
(12 +65) .
Water line SW
1/26/05 WT5 Winterview TOP 124.3 6.7 121.6 95 98 Passed
(13 +50) _ --
Water line SW
1/26/05 WT6 Green Field Drive TOP 124.3 7.3 121.8 95 98 Passed
(10+75)
Water line SW
1/26/05 WT7 Green Field Drive TOP 124.3 5.1 121.0 95 97 Passed
(11 +30)
Water line SW
1/26/05 WT8 Green Field Drive TOP 124.3 5.0 119.5 95 96 Passed
(12 +50)
Water line SW
1/26 /05 WT9 Green Field Drive TOP 124.3 4.8 120.9 95 97 Passed
(13 +25)
Water line SW
1/26 /05 WT10 Green Field Drive TOP 124.3 4.3 123.1 95 99 Passed
(14 +50)
_
I Water line SW �I I - II
http:// 192. 168 .0.1 /aeopacific/admin/view soil swm arv.pl 9/9/2005
Nov. 17. 2005F10:55AM Den r:-- Tests No. 0766 PaP. 21)t 9
I
1/26 /05 WT1l Green Field Drive TOp 124.3 4.1 120. 951 9711Passedl
I l
(15+10)
Il I 5 _
II
I
Water line
1/26/05 WT12 Lookout Drive TOP 124.3 4.0 123.6 95 100 Passed
(10+67)
Water line
1/26/05 WT13 Lookout Drive TOP 124.3 6.2 120.3 95 97 Passed
(11 +50) L
Water line
1/26/05 WT14 Lookout Drive TOP 1 124.3 5.1 120.6 95 97 Passed
(12 +75)
Water line
1126/05 WT15 Lookout Drive TOP 124.3 5.0 120.5 95 97 Passed
(13 +50)
Water line on
1/27 /05 WT16 Lookout Drive TOP 124.3 6.9 122.3 r 95 98 Passed
(13 +85)
Water line on
1/27/05 WT17 Lookout Drive TOP 124.3 7.0 120.4 95 97 Passed
(14 +20)
Water line on
1/27/05 WT18 Lookout Drive TOP 124.3 7.1 118.9 95 96 Passed
(15 +00)
Water line on
1/27/05 WT19 Lookout Drive TOP 124.3 7.3 121.8 95 98 Passed
(15 +85)
Go hack to the task select page for Arbor Sjunmit
Go back to the project select page
•
http:// 192 .168.0.1 /geopacific/adnzin/view soil summary.pl 9/9/2005
Nov. 17. 2005F:10: 56AMDenc : r Tests No. 0766 PaP. 2M2
Summary of Field Soil Density Tests
Project: Arbor Summit Offsite - Robinson Coast.
Job number: OR 05 -9371
Client Robinson Construction SAD= Coding and Explanation
Date Field Dry Comp Comp Test
Test Elev C.P.
° number Test location at) (ado) density moist density spec result status
test . (pci) (/o) (pet) CYO (/")
Bull Mt. Road south
1 715/05 BC1 edge (12 +50 FG 124.8 7.3 124.4 95 100 Passed
7/15/05 BC2 Bull Mt. Road south FG 124.8 6.5 125.9 95 101 Passed
edge (13 +50)
7/15/05 BC3 Bull Mt. Road south FG 124.8 6.0 120.8 95 971 Passed
edge (14+50) , _
7/15/05 BC4 Bull Mt. Road south FG 124.8 10.1 123.3 95 99 Passed
edge (15 +50)
Bull Mt. Road south
7/15/05 BC5
edge (16+10) _
Bu11 Mt. Road south
7/15/05 BC61 edge (16 +70) ]FG 124.8 6.9 123.7 95 99 Passed
Bull Mt. Road north ' FG 124.8 7.3 125.6 95 101 Passed
7/26/05 BC7 panel (17+00) FG 124.8 7.5 120.0 95 96 Passed
7/26/05 BC8 Bull Mt. Road north FG 124.8 7.8 121.6 8 Passed
anel (17+75) l 95 9 1
7/26/05 BC9 Bull Mt. Road north F 124.8 7.4 120.41 95 I 97 Passed
panel (18 +50) L__
7/26/05 BC 10 Bull Mt Road north FG 124.8 7.7 120.5 95 97 Passed
panel (19 +00)
7/26/05 BC11 Bull Mt. Road north FG 124.8 8.8 119.4 95 96 Passed
panel (19+30) .
7/19/05 DTI Storm sewer Bull Mt. FG 122.7 4.6 120.51 95 98 Passed
Road (13 +00)
(7/19/05 DT2 Storm sewer Bull Mt. FG 122.7 5.5 120.6 951 98 Passed
Road 13 +75) 1
7/19/05 DT3 Storm sewer Bull Mt. FG 122.7 5.4 121.11 95 99 Passed
Road (14 +50)
7/19/05 DT4 Storm sewer Bull Mt. FG 122.7 5.5 121.1 95 991 Passed
Road (15 +00) I
7/19/05 DT5 Storm sewer Bull Mt FG 122.7 6.2 120.9 95 99 Passed)
Road crosses over road •
http:// 192 .168.0.1 /geopacific/admin/view soil summarv.pl 9/9/2005
Nov_ 17. 2005F10:56AMl,altr °nsity No. 0766 PaP. 23'f3
Summary of Field Asphaltic Concrete Density Tests
P ro j ec t : Arbor Summit
Job number: OR 04 -8608
Client: West Hills Development
Page #1
Rice density: 155.3 Marshall value: Method of test: Ind Serial #: 286
Description: "B" Mix from Baker Rock
Date In Compac
Test Lift
of number Test location number place -
test density Lion
3/10/051 1 1 Greenfield Drive (11 +25) 1 X11 144.911 93.1
3/10/051 2 'Greenfield Drive Ql +85)1 11 144.61 92.91
3/10/051 3 'Greenfield Drive (12+65) 1 r 143.21 92.01
3/10/05 4 !Greenfield Drive (13 + 25 1 I 143.3] 92.11
3/10/051 5 Greenfield Drive (13 +80) II 1 144.31 92.71
3/10/051 6 Greenfield Drive (14 +25) I I 11 144.61 92.9
3/10/05 7 Gree Drive (14 +85) 11 111 143.7] 92.31
3/10/051 8 Greenfield Drive (15+6 1 145.41 93.41
,
3/10/051 9 Greenfield Drive (15 +85) II 1 143.31 92.1
3/10/05 10 SW Lookout Drive (11+25) L 1 144.31 92.71
3/10/051 11 SW Lookout Drive (11 +85)11 1 143.2 92.01
3/10/051 12 ISW Lookout Drive (12 +50) 1 143.3 92.1
3/10/05 13 1 SW Lookout Drive (13 +25) 1 144.6 I 92.9
3/10/05 14 SW Lookout Drive 513 +85) -, 11 143.811 92.4
3/10/051 15 IISW Lookout Drive (14 +25) 1 143.711 93.2
Page #2
Rice density: 155.7 Marshall value: Method of test: Indirect Serial #: 286
Description: "B" Mix from Baker Rock
Date Test Lift In Compac
of number Test location number place -
test density don
http:// 192. 168. 0 .1 /aeopacific/admin/view asphalt summary.pl 9/9/2005
. Nov. 17. 2005F:10:56ANIhaltr-nsit No. 0766 PaP. 24'f3
13/10/05 1 ISW Lookout Drive (14 +85) II 1 11 143.711 92.31
3/10/05 2 (SW Lookout Drive (15 +50) 11 143.2 92.01
3/10/05 r 3 SW Lookout Drive (16 +20) 11 143.8 92.41
3/10/0511 4 SW Winterview Drive (10+25) L 1 I 144.6 92.9
x1 0/051 5 1(SW Winterview Drive (10 +75) L 1 143.71 92.3
13/10/05 6 (SW Winterview Drive (11 +85)11 1 14 3.3 92.1
3/10/051 7 SW Winterview Drive (12+30)I[ 1 143.8 92.4
3/10/05J( 8 SW Winterview Drive (12 +83)1 11 144.1 92.61
13/10/0511 9 I[SW Winterview Drive (13 +20)1 1) 143.71 92.31
13/10/0511 10 1(SW Winterview Drive (13 +85 I 111 143.2( 92.0
3/10/05 11 SW Terraview Drive (3 +75) I 111 144.6( 92.9
3 /10/05 12 SW Winterview Drive (4 +25) I 111 143.7 92.31
3/10/05 13 SW Winterview Drive (3 +( 75 211 143.8 92.4j
13/10/051 14 SW Winterview Drive (4 +25 I 21( 144.31L 921
Page #3
Rice density: 157.1 Marshall value: Method of test: Indirect Serial #: 35472
Description: "C" Mix from Baker Rock Farmington
Date In Compac
Lift of number Test location number place -
test density tion
15/20/05 I Tract "B" south panel 51 +00)11 BASEII 145.111 92.4(
(5/20/05) 2 Tract "B" south panel (1 +25)J1 BASE I 148.01 94.2
15/20/05 I Tra " B" south panel (1 +80)I[ BASE 1 145.111 92.3
15/20/05 4 (Tract "B" north panel (1 +00) I BASE 147.811 94.1
15/20/05 5 ',Tract "B" north panel (1 +25) BASE 144.811 92.21
15/20/05 6 IlTract "B" north panel (1 +80) BASEL 145.71 92.7
5/20/05 7_1ITract "C" north panel (1+00) 147.511 93.9
15/20/051 8 Tract "C" north panel (1 +25) BASE) 146.91 93.51
15/20/051 9 Tract "C" north panel (1 +85) BASE 147.01 93.5]
5/20/05 10 Tract "C" south panel (1+00) BASE 146.11)
5/20/05 11 (Tract "C" south panel (1 +25) BASE 146.811 93.5(
I II II 11 1[11 -- 1
http: // 192. 168. 0. 1 /geopacific/admin/view_asphalt summary.pl 9/9/2005
Nov. 17. 200500: ItP-- No. 0766 PaP. 25'f
I I�0b05II 12 IlTract "C" south panel (1 +85)IL BASEII 144.5 I 92.0
Go back to the task select page for Arbor Summit
Go back to the proiect select page
http:// 192. 168. 0.1 /geopacific /admin/view asphalt summary.pl 9/9/2005
. Nov. 17. 2005Ei10:56AN ltD sityTests No. 0766 PaP. 26f2
Summary of Field Asphaltic Concrete Density Tests
Project: Arbor Summit Offsite- Robinson Const.
Job number: OR 05 -9371
Client Robinson Construction
Page #1
Rice density: 157.0 Marshall value: Method of test: Indirect Serial #: 35472
Description: "C" Mix from Baker - Beaverton
Date Lift In Compac
of
number Test location number place
test density tion
17/15/05 - 1 iBul1 Mt. Road south panel (14 +25) I TOPIF 146.31 93.2
17/15/0511 2 IlBull Mt. Road south panel (13 +75)11 TOP!' 146.611 93.41
17/15/05 I 3 I Bull Mt. Road south •anel (12+50)1 TOPII 147.0 I 93.61
Page #2
Rice density: 157.3 Marshall value: Method of test: Indirect Serial #: 35472
Description: "C" Mix from Baker Rock
Date Test Lift In Compac
of number Test location number place
test density tion
17/27/051 1 Bull Mt. Road north panel (17+00111 BASEL 146.717 93.3
7/27/05 2 Bull Mt. Road north panel (18+00) I BASEL 146.511 93.11
7/27/05 3 1 Bull Mt. Road north panel (19+00) I BASEII 146.9 I 93.41
4/27/051 4 Bull Mt. Road south panel (19+50 I BASEII 147.511 93.81
Page #3
Rice density: 156.9 Marshall value: Method of test: Indirect Serial #: 35472
Description: "C" Mix from Baker Rock
IlDate II 1 II In Compac ,
http : // 192. 168. 0.1 /aeopacific/admin/view asphalt summarv.pl 9/9/2005
. Nov. 17. 2005F10:56AMhaltDnsity Tests N o.0766 PaP. 27
of Test Test location Lift p late
test number I�number densi tion
17/29/051 1 Bull Mt Road middle panel (17 +25) BASE 144.8 92.3
17/29/0511_2 11Bull Mt. Road middle . anel (16+50) BASE!! 143.91 91.7
17/29/0511 3 11Bull Mt. Road north panel (24 +00) BASE 145.1 92.5
7/29/0511 4 BBull Mt Road north panel (23 +00) BASE 144.3 92.0
17/29/051 5 1Bull Mt. Road north panel (22 +00) BASE 144.5 92.1
17/29/051 6 'Bull Mt. Road north panel (21+00) 1I BASE!! 145.911 93.0
17/29/0511 7 11Bu11 Mt. Road north panel (19+25) I. BASEII 144.6 92.2
17/29/0511 8 IlBull Mt Road north panel (18 +25) II BASE, 146.0 93.0
17/29/0511 9 11Bull Mt. Road north panel (17 +25) 1 I BASER 146.011 93.1
17/29/051 10 1 Bull Mt. Road north panel (16+50) 11 BASE11 147.41 93.9
Go back to the ta. k elepage for Arbor Summit Qffsite- Robinson Const.
Go back to the project select page
•
•
•
http:// 192. 168. 0. 1 /geopacific/admin/view asphalt summary.pl 9/9/2005
. Nov. 17. 2005 10:57AM No.0766 P. 28
REPOR I OF CONCRETE CYLIN.,ER TEST
GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC.
7312 SW Durham Road, Portland, OR 97224
Report Date: 5/24/05
Project Number: 8608 -Arbor Summit Report Number 1
Project: 8608 -Arbor Summit
Client: West Hills Development
Address: 15500 SW Jay Street
Beaverton, OR 97006
Attn: Bill Baker (Fax 503- 641 -7661)
FIELD TE ST CONDITIONS AND RESULTS (f PASHTO T 23)
Date Placed: 4/20/2005
Time Sampled: 14 :10
Location of Sample: Concrete Sidewalk
Supplier Glacier
Truck Number. 62 Ticket Number: 664472
Mix Number.
Design Strength: 4000
Time Batched: Time Placed:
Batch Size:
Slump: 5.25 (AASHTO T 119) Air Content: 4. (AASHTO 7 152)
Concrete Temp: 73 Ambient Temp: 64
Water Added: Technician: JS
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS ( AASHTO T 22
Test Percent of Type of
Specimen Date Age Load Diameter Area Strength Design Fracture
1572 4/27/2005 7 110520 6.00 28.27 3905 C
1573 5/18/2005 28 152095 6.00 28.27 5375 134% C
1574 5/18/2005 28 151140 6.00 28.27 5345 134% C
1575 Hold
Remarks: TYPES OF FRACTURE
Copies t0: XQ A 8 / - D E
K &G (Fax 503 - 681 - 2389) MAY 4 Z005 Cone Cone& C. & Shear Columnar
Split rk
BY.. P6
eported by:
Scott L. Hardman, P.E.
Concrete Laboratory Supervisor
Nov. 17. 2005 10:57AM No. 0766 P. 29
REPOR OF CONCRETE CYLIIs +R TEST
GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC.
7312 SW Durham Road, Portland, OR 97224
Report Date:6 /17/05
Project Number. 8608 - Arbor Summit Report Number. 21 JUN j 7 71105
Project 8608 - Arbor Summit
Client West Hills Development
Address: 15500 SW Jay Street
Beaverton, OR 97006
Attn: Bill baker (Fax 503 641 - 7661)
FIELD TEST CONDITIONSJAND RESULTS (AASHTO T 23)
Date Placed: 4/27/2005
Time Sampled:14: 20
Location of Sample: stairway Walls
Supplier. Glacier
Truck Number: 255 Ticket Number. 664638
Mix Number:
Design Strength: 4000
Time Batched: Time Placed:
Batch Size:
Slump: 6. 2 5 (AASHTO T 119) Air Content: 4. 6 (AASHTO T 152)
Concrete Temp: 75 Ambient Temp: 63
Water Added: , Technician: JS
- � • :- • RY TEST RE i : _ • T
Test Percent of Type of
Specimen Date Age Load Diameter Area Strength Design Fracture
1576 5/4/2005 7 96995 6.00 28.27 3430 C
1577 5/25/2005 28 123410 6.00 28.27 4365 109% C
1578 5/25/2005 28 120265 6.00 28.27 4250 106% C
1579 Hold
Remarks: TYPES OF FRACTURE
Copies to:
A B C D fE
K&G (Fax 503 - 681 -2389) Cone Cone& e& Shear Columnar
Split S
Reported by: `
Sc L. Hardman, P. E.
Concrete Laboratory Supervisor
- Nov. 17. 2005 10:57AM No. 0766 P. 30
REP®FOF CONCRETE CYLIR' ER TEST
GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC.
7312 SW Durham Road, Portland, OR 97224
Report Date: 6 / 17 / 05
Project Number. 8608 -Arbor summit Report Number. 3
Project: 8608 -Arbor Summit JUN ] 7 7►1►1�
Client West Hills Development
Address: 15500 SW Say Street By_
Beaverton, OR 97006
Attn: Bill Baker ( Fax 503-641 -7661)
_ T •N/I_IONS 'NO ` =
Date Placed: 5/11/2005
Time Sampled: 9:05
Location of Sample: stairway steps
Supplier: Glacier
Truck Number. 84 Ticket Number. 664833
Mix Number.
Design Strength: 4000
Time Batched: Time Placed:
Batch Size:
Slump: 5 (msHTO T 119) Air Content 4. 1 (AASHTO T 152)
Concrete Temp: 68 Ambient Temp: 57
Water Added: Technician: JS
: • ; -_- - O EST - ES _ - S • T 22
Test Percent of Type of
Specimen Date Age Load Diameter Area Strength Design Fracture
1580 5/18/2005 7 116795 6.00 28.27 4130 C
1581 6/8/2005 28 153510 6.00 28.27 5425 136% C
1582 6/8/2005 28 154635 6.00 28.27 5465 137% C
1583 Hold
Remarks: TYPES OF FRACTURE
/c
Copies too: A B C P E
K &G (Fax 503 - 681 -2389) Cone Cone al e& Shear Columnar
Sp h
Reported by:
Scott L. Hardman, P. E.
Concrete Laboratory Supervisor