Report 4467 -02007— pro / t /
240 575 w D'-.1)11 - �
GeoP: T=AO
Engineering; Inc. _ `
Real -World Geotechnical Solutions
Investigation • Beni n • Construction Support
August 3, 2007
Project No. 05 -9119
V. C
CT
Mr. Craig Brown Cu .Y
(j1 11 (1�y
Matrix Development -" T
12755 SW 69 Avenue, No. 100 �`� �A VIS
Portland, Oregon 97223
Via Facsimile: 503 -598 -8900.
Copy: Steve Roper; SR Design LLC (Fax 503- 469 -8553)
Wilhelm Egloff, Excel Excavation (Fax 503- 691 -9812)
Subject: Summary Report of Geotechnical Observation and Testing
Walnut Creek
Barrows Road and Walnut Street
Tigard, Oregon
References: 1. Geotechnical Engineering Report, Cherry Tree Subdivision, Barrows Road and
Walnut Street, Tigard, Oregon, GeoPacific report dated March 18, 2005.
2. Retaining Wall Design and Construction Recommendations, Walnut Creek (Cherry
Tree Subdivision), Barrows Road and Walnut Street, Tigard, Oregon, GeoPacific
report dated July 25, 2006.
GeoPacific Engineering, Inc. (GeoPacific) conducted on -call testing and construction observation
services for Walnut Creek (formerly Cherry Creek Subdivision), located generally northeast of the
intersection of SW Barrows Road and SW Walnut Street in Tigard, Oregon. The project site and
constructed improvements are shown on the attached reduced grading plan sheet prepared by SR
Design. The development consists of grading 54 lots (Lots 1 through 54) for single - family
residences, and associated improvements that include new streets and driveways, underground
utilities and water quality facilities. The project also included construction of retaining walls,
primarily in the northeast corner of the site.
A geotechnical study for the site area was performed by GeoPacific (Reference 1). Prior to
construction, GeoPacific provided design and construction recommendations for the retaining walls •
on site (Reference 2).
7312 SW Durham Road Tel (503) 598 -8445
Portland, Oregon 97224 Fax (503) 598 -8705
August 3, 2007
GeoPacific Project No. 05 -9119
Results of field monitoring and density testing for Walnut Creek 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 or stockpiled on site for future use as landscaping fill on lot surfaces. The
geotechnical investigation of the site (Reference 1) indicated the presence of undocumented fill
ranging from about 1 to 6 feet thick, primarily in the eastern portion of the site. Undocumented fill
was removed where encountered, down to firm and relatively inorganic native soils, prior to fill
placement in the affected areas. Groundwater seepage was encountered at the base of the removal.
To stabilize subgrade soils and provide drainage, GeoPacific recommended placement of a
minimum 1 -foot thick layer of 4 -inch minus quarry rock. A perforated pipe subsurface drain was
also placed along the bottom of the deepest removal area, and extended to an outlet point at the base
of the concrete retaining wall in the northeast corner of the property.
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 90
percent of maximum dry density based on Modified Proctor (ASTM D1557). Density test results
are attached. From our observations and test results, fill soils were adequately compacted and are
suitable for spread foundation support (see Structural Foundations section below).
RETAINING WALLS
Retaining walls on site consisted of Keystone type walls up to 8 feet high adjacent to Lots 19, 20,
and 39 through 41. Rockery walls up to about 8 feet high were constructed on the west and south
sides of the stormwater pond. A reinforced concrete retaining wall up to about 10'feet high was
constructed along the backs of Lots 18 and 19 (see attached grading plan). GeoPacific performed
wall stability analysis and provided construction recommendations for Keystone walls, and provided
design parameters for use by others in design of the concrete retaining wall (Reference 2).
During Keystone and rockery wall construction, GeoPacific provided on -call observation and testing
services for materials used, subgrade bearing, keyway, geogrid and rock. placement, subdrain, and
drainage/backfill materials. During construction of the reinforced concrete wall, GeoPacific
observed foundation soils and made recommendations for overexcavation of unsuitable soils where
encountered. Based on our observations, the walls were constructed in general accordance with the
geotechnical 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. We anticipate the foundation excavation on Lots 18, 19, 41, 44, and 45
may require foundation excavation reviews and deepened foundations adjacent to retaining walls.
05 -9119- Walnut Creek Final.doc • 2 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC.
August 3, 2007
GeoPacific Project No. 05 -9119
GeoPacific should review the foundation excavations for these lots to verify footing -to -wall
setbacks.
If concrete patios or other improvements are constructed in the back yard of homes adjacent to
rockery or Keystone 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.
FINISHED LOT SURFACES AND STRUCTURE EXCAVATION GUIDELINES
At the time of our most recent site visit, it appeared that mass grading was complete for the lots. In
accordance with local practice, it appeared that up to about 12 inches of organic strippings had been
spread across the surface of the lots. GeoPacific did not monitor placement of the strippings and
locally thicker zones may be present. If so, footings would need to be deepened into inorganic
native soils or engineered fill.
Foundation excavations should be carried through any soft or organic soil to competent native soil
or engineered fill. The depth of excavation for structural 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 roughly 12 to 18 inches of excavation will be necessary to reach suitable
bearing soils on lots with the exception of lots that may have water softened soils. However, it should
be noted that GeoPacific has no influence over lot soil conditions except for those times we have
been on site as reported herein. Variable lot surface conditions may be encountered at the time of
structure foundation excavation, due to weather, surface water, vehicular traffic, undocumented fill
placement, or other factors beyond our control.
Along the edge of fill slopes, minimum footing -to -slope setback of 7 feet should be maintained,
measured horizontally from the outside edge of the closest footing to the compacted face of the slope.
If necessary, foundations should be deepened at the back of affected lots to provide the minimum
footing -to -slope setback. Where stepped foundations are present, a minimum 1H:1 V
(Horizontal:Vertical) setback should be maintained between the upper and lower footings, to prevent a
• surcharge loading condition.
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.
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
05 -91 19- Walnut Creek Final.doc 3 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC.
August 3, 2007
GeoPacific Project No. 05 -9119
footings bearing on competent native soils or engineered fill. Spread footing design and
construction is expected to conform to applicable building codes and local agency requirements.
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, 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 0.5 with no factor of safety
included. For the foundation loads anticipated, we estimate total settlement of spread foundations of
less than about 1'/ 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 or 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.
FOOTING AND ROOF DRAINS
Where single family residential structures are not impacted by potential groundwater seepage, and
have raised wood floors, perimeter footing drains would not be required based on soil conditions
encountered at the site and experience with standard local construction practices. If it is desired to
reduce the potential for moist crawl spaces, footing drains may be installed. If concrete slab -on-
grade floors are used, perimeter footing drains should be installed as recommended below.
Where used, the outside edge of perimeter footings should be provided with a drainage system
consisting of 3- or 4 -inch diameter, perforated plastic pipe embedded in a minimum of 1 ft per
lineal foot of clean, free - draining drain rock. The drain pipe and surrounding drain rock should be
wrapped in non -woven geotextile (Mirafi 140N, or approved equivalent) to minimize the potential
for clogging and/or ground loss due to piping. Water collected from the footing drains should be
directed to the local storm drain system or other suitable outlet. A minimum 0.5 percent fall should
be maintained throughout the drain and non - perforated pipe outlet. The footing drains should
include clean-outs to allow periodic maintenance and inspection. In our opinion, footing drains may
outlet at the curb, or on the back sides of lots where sufficient fall is not available to allow drainage
to the street.
Construction should include typical measures for controlling subsurface water beneath the homes, -
including positive crawlspace drainage to an adequate low -point drain exiting the foundation,
05- 9119- Walnut Creek Final.doc 4 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC.
August 3, 2007
GeoPacific Project No. 05 -9119
visqueen covering the exposed ground in the crawlspace, and crawlspace ventilation (foundation
vents). The homebuyers should be informed and educated that some slow flowing water in the
crawlspaces is considered normal and not necessarily detrimental to the home given these other
design elements incorporated into its construction. Appropriate design professionals should be
consulted regarding crawlspace ventilation, building material selection and mold prevention issues,
which are outside GeoPacific's area of expertise.
Down spouts and roof drains should collect roof water in a system separate from the footing drains
in order to reduce the potential for clogging. Roof drain water should be directed to an appropriate
discharge point well away from structural foundations. Grades should be sloped downward and
away from buildings to reduce the potential for ponded water near structures.
ADDITIONAL GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW
GeoPacific should observe foundation excavations for lots adjacent to retaining walls, in particular
Lots 18, 19, 41, 44, and 45, 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 % " -0 crushed rock. Density test results indicate the backfill was compacted in
accordance with project specifications, to at least 90 percent of Modified Proctor (ASTM D1557) at
the locations tested. Density tests results are included in the attached Summary of Field Soil Density
Tests.
Due to wet weather construction, additional crushed rock was placed in the pavement sections in
accordance with the recommendations of Reference 2. Density testing was performed of 1Y2"-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. 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.
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 as described herein. 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.
05- 9119 - Walnut Creek Final.doc 5 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC.
August 3, 2007
GeoPacific Project No. 05 -9119
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 which 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.
0.0
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service.
Sincerely,
GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC.
� P ROP
, 5 (‹, INF �,•`
c
_
OR
c ° P � c� -3 —
� L.HOF.
EXPIRES: 06 -30-20 Oc
Scott L. Hardman, P.E. •
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
Attachments: Grading Plan (SR Design, LLC)
Field Soil Observation Summary
Test Prefixes
Summary of Field Soil Density Tests
Summary of Field Asphaltic Concrete Density Tests
05- 9119 - Walnut Creek Final.doc 6 GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC.
.
J ,
._. ...cQ
NV
0 40 ace
SCHOLLS VILLAGE
T. T.L T.L
T.L 400 14100 14000 13900 •
1. w rw 4- 4 904111 !AIIIIMIEM1 , A 1
6, / • --- - - 1 ------------,-----1—!--------------. - ---4--mur.., I, --- ----- • '• V goloo
e i.. 4 ,: .�� �.. ! i�..!. . Am . 1 . _ . . ,, vivo, � 11, ip IPPRCIL 5-r
,.,. !II�� �� 1� ► �•w /" ,O- �i =1W ► • :7 -1VAIP P&WiWA1VISI D � ►:� ► : _\r ov; e j v� « T.
V �r - -���� -�_ • P / �• ������� ■.�,�,au•-- ��. �.�r.c? - �- � � �/ \. � 2700 %
%44.0 1 1 41 , K g . 110 1 . 4 aNIM 1 VI WI . I Kr r P S74.V \ i itwo
i%rx . ■■r - \ moo - 1k .s.,4,_4,,,;411--:,__,T-.-_---avk D
...%tN
\ ,-,, v , , ., I • , N ‘IIIVI lirrtro-1.111■
41 . . /' '*" ( k ' IL - 0
`'` \ ■ `'� ,♦L�1 1 �J1" �� _ �`�"� r � � � , J I 1 c Mir
1 � �-� -I 2600
r�i� 7` � �1 - ∎ \ . ?��� .`4� -_ =� X 11 y , ` � •' •� �� -,:':: - 1 k 4 k - p
V '� � i w A �V *. � � � lit � � �� tsoo
GRADING NOTES
IL 200 \ �\ / ' \ i I
m NSTAIL 1 , • \ ' � � � i `I� � ' , ,,., ' I � � , 4 11 16 II
iiiirmg T L 161/41 ouln caalNnlcnax pima pima ` ` '� �` \ ` \ �' n , 1♦— 11• �I / \
0 Lam cr non noncom ma
�� �� � tai - �`�J��1
PROPOSE CUM URI PRIMED . 1Ra s ���. I 1700 -100— PRIMO COIIGN UM 0 "� 431e....._ \� -` ` A Ii ' � IL
n TIP a RAIL MELON • `\ \� ` I \
/Z MEN CAM EVA= 4 �\ �` �—
®
to =PC MOO MEM C l PRaO� NRIET swam mow= R ` ��� -
® - PROPa� aim mum= minx � � RP19R0f
ON .. 005010 01101 USN
CO ISLIIIIIL
AND 10 MOONS DO NOT MUM MIL 01rIx �nvam�r�rls ... -• •.,
■ \., V
1.Z ` C 2
Field Soil Observation Summary Page 1 of 2
•
Field Soil Observation Summary
Project: Walnut Creek - fka Cherry Tree
Job number: OR 05 -9119
Project address: Barrows Rd. & Walnut St. Tigard OR
Daily Reports
8/28/06: GeoPacific technician, Tom Wayland, was on site to inspect the
stripping. The entire site has been cleared of vegetation and most of the
organic soils. The southern area still needs 2 inches of rooty soils to be
stripped off and the site will have been adequately stripped. Stripping is on
the southern end of the west edge of the site.
8/29/06: GeoPacific technician, Tom Wayland, was on site to inspect fill
subgrade in the southern low are of the site and to make any necessary
recommendations. 3.5 to 4 feet of soil have been removed out of the southern
area (an area approximately 50 feet north to south by 25 feet east to west).
Soft areas still remain in random spots around southern area although the
majority is stiff upon probing and 'remains relatively undisturbed under the
weight of full scrapers running over. Upon speaking to GeoPacific engineer,
Scott Hardman, we recommend a minimum of 1 foot of 3.5 or 4 " -0 over entire
southern area. This should tighten up soft areas and protect the stiffer soils
prior to fill placement. Material being removed from area needs to be dried
out to within an optimum moisture before being placed back as engineered fill.
8/31/06: GeoPacific technician, Tom Wayland, was on site to address a
groundwater issue on the south fill area. Overexcavation of soft soils in the
south area has exposed groundwater in several areas. Upon digging a hole on
the west side approximately 5 feet below original grade water filled in fairly
quick up to 4 feet. Groundwater flow appears to trend east to southeast. We
recommend trenching in a subdrain on the western end of the southern low area
running north to south and running the water east along the south edge down to
the prepared wetland area. A 4" perforated pipe and drain rock should be
adequate.
9/6/06: GeoPacific technician, Tom Wayland, was on site to robserve lot fill on
the south end of site. Fill is between +2' to +4'. Tested fill using
proofroll method with a loaded scraper. Fill proofrolled tight with no areas
showing any significant deflection. Fill may proceed.
9/7/06: GeoPacific technician, Tom Wayland, was on site to observe lot fill.
Fill is being compacted in along the south end of site. Upon taking density
tests throughout the fill area at depths ranging from +4' to +5' it was
determined that the moisture throughout the entire fill area is too high. Fill
needs to be aerated or mixed with drier material. Fill was also deflecting in
the top 1' upon proofrolling with a loaded scraper.
9/7/06: GeoPacific technician, Tom Wayland, was on site to reobserve lot fill
condition. Drier fill has been mixed with previously placed fill to bring_
moisture down to optimum range. Proofrolled fill using loaded scraper at +5
and +6 1/2'. Compacted fill not deflecting under scraper. As long as the fill
stays consistent moisture wise, fill placement may continue.
9/12/06: GeoPacific technician, Tom Wayland, was on site to proofroll road
subgrade on Walnut Creek Court, tract "B ", and Walnut Creek Way from street
station 10 +00 to 7 +00. Proofroll conducted with full water truck. No
deflection detected. Subgrade tight on road sections tested and are ready for
road section rock.
9/13/06: GeoPacific technician, Tom Wayland', was on site to proofroll road'
subgrade. Proofroll conducted with a full water truck. SW Northview Drive
showed no signs of deflection. One soft area approximately 10 feet long and •
http://192.168.0.1/geopacific/adminkiew_soil_field_report.pl 8/6/2007
Field Soil Observation Summary Page 2 of 2
•
spanning the'width Walnut Creek Way at STA 1 +50 needs to be fixed.
Deflection wasn't very deep. The rest of the proofroll consisted of Walnut
Creek Way from 1 +00 to 7 +00 and Bluestem Lane. All very tight with no soft
areas detected.
1/9/07: Geopacific technician, Tom Wayland, was on site to proofroll road base
on entire site. Also inspecting the proofroll is Mike with the City of Tigard
and Andrea with SR Design. The proofroll was conducted with a full water
truck. There was no significant deflection anywhere on site. There was slight
deflection along the center of SW Walnut Creek Road by lots 33 -32. Also an
area of slight deflection was observed aroung the central east area of the
cul -de -sac on Walnut Creek Court.
4/16/07: GeoPacific technician, Jason Burgess, was on site twice to watch
backfill on cast in place retaining wall, back of Lots 19 -21, Earlier was able
to see socked in perforated drain surrounded with open graded drain rock,.at
the base of the wall. Contractor is back filling with reject rock, however,
have asked that a minimum of 1 foot section up against the wall be filled with
3/4 " -0 for drainage. At plus 2 reject rock did pass 90% of modified proctor.
It is on the cusp of being too wet.
Go back to the task select page for Walnut Creek - fka Cherry Tree
Go back to the project select page
•
•
http://192.168.0.1/geopacific/admin/viewsoil_field_report.pl 8/6/2007
1 est Prefixes Page 1 of 1
Test Prefixes
The following test prefixes are used.
BC Base Course
DT storm Drain 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 Sewer Trench
WT Water line Trench
Go back to the project select page
•
•
http://192.168.0.1/geopacific/adrnin/test_prefixes.pl 8/6/2007
Summary of Field Soil Density Tests Page 1 of 2
Summary of Field Soil Density Tests
Project: Walnut Creek - ika Cherry Tree
Job number: OR 05 -9119
Client: Matrix Development Summary Coding and Explanation
Date Max Field Dry Comp Comp
Test Elev C.P. Test
of number Test location (ft) (%)
density moist density spec result status
test (pct) ( %) (pcf) ( %) ( %)
12/19/06 BC1 SW Walnut Road north FG 128.3 8.7 120.8 90 94 Passed
improvement/bike lane (1+00)
12/19/06 BC2 SW Walnut Road north FG 128.3 9.2 120.2 90 94 Passed
improvement/bike lane (2+00)
12/19/06 BC3 SW Walnut Road north FG 128.3 8.4 125.4 90 98 Passed
improvement/bike lane (3+00)
12/19/06 BC4 SW Walnut Road north FG 128.3 9.3 121.7 90 95 Passed
improvement/bike lane (4+00)
12/19/06 BC5 SW Walnut Road north FG 128.3 9.6 123.5 90 96 Passed
improvement/bike lane (5+00)
12/19/06 BC6 SW Walnut Road north FG 128.3 7.9 120.7 90 94 Passed
improvement/bike lane (6+00)
12/19/06 BC7 SW Walnut Road north FG 128.3 8.2 120.6 90 94 Passed
improvement/bike lane (7+00)
/
10/26/061 DTI )Storm drain Northview (0 +70) FG) 132.71 5.81 128.211 901[ 97IIPassed
10/26/061 DT2 )Storm drain Northview (2+00) FG) 132.71 6.21 130.911 901 991) Passed
10/26/06) DT3 'Storm drain Street "C" (11 +80) FG) 132.7) 4.2] 125.611 90) 9511Passed
10/26/061 DT4 'Storm drain Street "C" (9 +50) FGI 132.7) 7.5 123.711 90) 9311 Passed
10/26/06) DT5 )Storm drain Street "C" (8+00) FGI 132.7) 7.41 128.711 90) 9711 Passed
10/26/06) DT6 )Storm drain Street "B" (6 +50) FG) 132.71 7.8] 127.9)1 90) 9611Passed
10/26/06) DT7 )Storm drain Street "B" (5+00) FO) 132.7) 6.01 133.3) 901 101)IPassed
10/26/061 DT8 )Storm drain Street "B" (4+00) FGI 132.71 7.01 128.01 90) 97IIPassed
10/26/06) DT9 )Storm drain Street "A" (2 +75) FGI 132.7) 7.11 125.91 90) 9511Passed
10/26/061 DTIO 'Storm drain Street "A" (1 +50) FGI 132.71 5.9) 131.2) 90) 9911Passed
10/26/06) DT11 )Storm drain Street "A" (0 +50) Ila 132.7) 5.31 132.91 90) 100))Passed
10/26/06) LF 1 'Lot 24/25 central ID 111.4) 20.61 106.2) 95) 9511 Passed
110/26/06) LF2 'Lot 23 Imn 111.4) 18.9) 107.0) 95) 961)Passed
10/26/061 LF3 )Lot 21 I -61 111.41 23.0 110.0) 95) 9911 Passed
10/26/06) LF4 )Lot 25/26 -6 n 111.4) 22.11 109.0) 951 98)IPassed
10/27/06) LF5 )Lot 26 central 1 FG) I 111.4) 17.0) 112.2) 95) 101))Passed
10/27/06) LF6 I1ot 24 central Ear 111.41 19.71 107.21 951 96))Passed
10/27/061 LF7 1)Lot 22/23 eastern I FGI 1 111.41 22.51 105.91 951 951IPassed
10/27/06) LF8 )1 Lot 21/22 western 111 n 111.41 20.31 108.41 95) 97)) Passed
10/27/06) LF9 1ILot 19/20 central 1 FG1 1 111.4) 19.2) 107.81 95) 9711 Passed
http://192.168.0.1/geopacific/adminiview_soil_sturunary.pl 8/6/2007
Summary of Field Soil Density Tests Page 2 of 2
4/16/07 I RW1 'Back of lot 19 north I +211 II 124.411 16.11 114.711 9011 9211PassedI
4/16/07 1 RW2 'Back of lot 19 south +21 124.41 16.41 113.11 901 9111Passed
4/16/07 1 RW3 'Back of lot 20 middle +21 I 124.41 11.41 115.41 901 9311Passed
4/16/07 1 RW4 'Back of lot 20 north L +21 1 124.41 15.31 112.81 901 9111Passed
4/16/07 1 RW5 (Back of lot 19 north +41 I 124.41 12.0( .116.41 901 941(Passed
4/16/07 I •RW6 'Back of lot 20 north +41 I 124.4 11.71 118.11 901 951(Passed
4/16/07 1 RW7 (Back of lot 20 south +411 -1 124.41 9.71 118.61 901 95I1Passed
4/16/07 1 RW8 'Back of lot 21 north +41 1 124.4( 11.61 116.8( 90I 9411Passed
4/16/07 1 RW9 (Back of lot 19 north FG11 - 1 124.41 11.11 120.81 901 97IIPassed
4/16/07 I RW10 'Back of lot 19 south FG11 124.41. 11.21 117.01 901 94IIPassed
4/16/07 1 RW11 (Back of lot 20 middle FGI 124.41 9.61 121.71 901 9811Passed
4/16/07 I RW 12 'Back of lot 21 north Es n 124.4 8.91 117.31 901 941(Passed
10/12/061 ST 1 (Sanitar Sewer street "C" (12+00) -11 124.01 6.71 127.51 951 10311 Passed
10/12/061 ST2 (Sanitary Sewer street "C" (10 +50) -3l[ ] 124.01 6.51 123.81 951 100((Passed
10/12/061 ST3 'Sanitary Sewer street "C" (8+00) -11 124.0 8.71 121.71 951 98 ('Passed
10/12/061 ST4 (Sanitary Sewer street "B" (6 +00) -21 124.01 4.61 119.81 951 9711Passed
10/12/061 ST5 (Sanitary Sewer street "B" (5 +50) -11 124.01 7.21 123.71 951 10011 Passed
10/12/061 ST6 (Sanitary Sewer street "A" (3 +50) -2.51 124.01 3.71 120.01 951 9711Passed
10/12/061 ST7 'Sanitary Sewer street "A" (2+00) -11 124.01 4.11 125.81 951 10211Passed
10/12/061 ST8 'Sanitary Sewer street "A" (1+00) -21 124.01 6.91 119.41 951 96 'Passed
10/12/061 ST9 (Sanitary Sewer Northview (0+75) -11 124.01 5.91 124.71 951 101 I'Passed
10/12/061 ST10 'Sanitary Sewer Northview (2+00) -11 124.01 7.11 127.91 951 10311Passed
10/12/06( ST11 (Sanitary Sewer SW Blue Stem Lane -1( 124.0 6.31 120.61 951 971 Passed
11/16/061 WT1 ( Water line Northview (0 +50) FG1 132.71 6.61 124.81 901 9411Passed
11/16/061 WT2 'Water line Northview (1 +50) FGI 132.71 6.11 123.61 901 931 Passed
11/16/061 WT3 'Water line Northview (2 +50) r FG1 132.71 8.31 126.71 901 961 Passed
11/16/061 WT4 'Water line Walnut Creek (10 +50) FGI 132.71 7.81 122.91 901 93I1Passed
11/16/061 WT5 'Water line Walnut Creek (11 +50) FG1[ 132.71 6.31 125.51 901 95I1Passed
11/16/061 WT6 'Water line Walnut Creek (12+00) ME I 132.7( 7.21 119.61 901 90I'Passed
Go back to the task select page for Walnut Creek - fka Cherry Tree
Go back to the project select page
•
http://192.168.0.1/geopacific/admin/view_soilsturunary.pl 8/6/2007
Summary of Field Asphalt Density 1 ests Page 1 of 3 •
Summary of Field Asphaltic Concrete Density Tests
Project: Walnut Creek - fka Cherry Tree
Job number: OR 05 -9119
Project address: Barrows Rd. & Walnut St. Tigard OR
Page #1
Rice density: 156.0 Marshall value: Method of test: Indirect Serial #: 37545
Description: "B" Mix from Lakeside Portland
Date In Compac
of numtber Test location ufmber place -
test density tion
1/24/071 1 ISW Walnut Creek Way (3+00) south panel 111 143.91 92.3 ,
1/24/071 2 ISW Walnut Creek Way (3+00) south panel ill 144.41 92.6
1/24/071 3 ISW Walnut Creek Way (1+00) south panel iii 143.01 91.7
1/24/071 4 ISW Walnut Creek Way (0 +10) south panel 111 141.91 91.0
1/24/071 5 1 S W Northview Drive (0 +50) west panel 111 143.31 91.9
1/24/071 6 ISW Northview Drive (1+00) west panel 111 144.31 92.5
1/24/071 7 ISW Northview Drive (2+00) west panel 1 I 142.21 91.2
1/24/071 8 ISW Northview Drive (0 +50) east panel 1 I 143.31 91.8
1/24/071 9 ISW Northview Drive (1+00) east panel 111 143.91 ; 92.3
1/24/071 10 (SW Northview Drive (2+00) east panel 111 144.41 92.6
Page #2
Rice density: 156.0 Marshall value: Method of test: Indirect Serial #: 37545
Description: "B" Mix from Lakeside Portland
Date In Compac
of number Test location ufmber place -
test density tion
1/24/071 1 SW Walnut Creek Court (6 +00) west panel 1 11 142.21 91.1
1/24/071 2 ISW Walnut Creek Court (5+00) west panel 1 11 143.81 92.2
1/24/071 3 ISW Walnut Creek Court (4+00) west panel I 11 143.31 91.8
1/24/071 4 ISW Walnut Creek Court (6+00) east panel I 11 143.41 91.9 •
1/24/071 5 ISW Walnut Creek Court (5+00) east panel I 11 146.01 93.6
1/24/071 6 ISW Walnut Creek Court (4+00) east panel I 1 I 145.31 93.2 •
1/24/071 7 ISW Walnut Creek Way (3+00) north panel 1 11 142.71 91.3
1/24/071 8 ISW Walnut Creek Way (2+00) north panel I i 1 143.21 91.8
1/24/071 9 ISW Walnut Creek Way (1+00) north panel 1 11 144.31 92.5
http://192.168.0.1/geopacific/admin/view_asphalt_sununary.pl 8/3/2007
summary of 1 ield Asphalt Density Tests Page 2 of 3
1 11/24/0711 10 Walnut Creek Way (0 +100) north panel)' 111 142.811 91.611
Page #3
Rice density: 156.0 _ Marshall value: Method of test: Indirect Serial #: 37545
Description: "B" Mix from Lakeside Portland
Date In Compac
of numtber Test location number
place -
test density tion ,
1/24/071 1 1SW Walnut Creek Court (12+00) north panel' 11 143.411 91.9
1/24/071 2 'SW Walnut Creek Court (11+00) north panel) 11 146.611 94.0
1/24/071 3 1 SW Walnut Creek Court (10+00) north panel! 11 143.611 92.1
1/24/071 4 (SW Walnut Creek Court (9+00) north panel 1 11 142.511 91.4
1/24/071 5 'SW Walnut Creek Court (8+00) north panel 1 11 146.611 94.0
1/24/071 6 1SW Walnut Creek Court (7+00) north panel 1 11 145.211 93.1
1/24/071 7 1SW Walnut Creek Court (12+00) south panel' 11 145.511 93.3
1/24/071 8 (SW Walnut Creek Court (11+00) south panel' 11 143.011 91.7
1/24/071 9 (SW Walnut Creek Court (10+00) south panel) 11 145.311 93.2
1/24/071 10 (SW Walnut Creek Court (9+00) south panel 1 11 145.811 93.5
1/24/071 11 1SW Walnut Creek Court (8+00) south panel 1 11 144.111. 92.4
1/24/071 12 'SW Walnut Creek Court (7+00) south panel 11 143.411 91.9
Page #4
Rice density: 156.0 Marshall value: Method of test: Indirect Serial #: 37545
Description: "B" Mix from Lakeside Portland
Date In Compac
of nurntber Test location ufmber place -
test density tion
1/24/071 1 . 'Blue Stem Lane (0 +10) west panel' 111 142.7 1 91.51
1/24/071 2 (Blue Stem Lane (1+00) west pane11 111 143.011 91.71
1/24/071 3 'Blue Stem Lane (1 +80) west panel' 11I 143.911 92.31
1/24/071 4 'Blue Stem Lane (0 +10) east panel 1 11' 143.611 92.11
1/24/071 5 'Blue Stem Lane (1+00) east panel 1 111 142.511 91.41
1/24/071 6 'Blue Stem Lane (1 +80) east panel 1 111 142.711 91.31
1/24/071 7 'Tract "A" east I 111 144.411 92.61
r--n---ii II 11"
http://192.168.0.1/geopacific/adminhiewasphaltLsummary.pl 8/3/2007
Summary of Field Asphalt Density Tests Page 3 of 3
1 11/24/0711 8 IlTrat "A" west II 1 II 143.811 92.211
Go back to the task select page for Walnut Creek - fka Cherry Tree
Go back to the project select page
http://192.168.0.1/geopacific/admin/view_asphalt_sturunary.pl 8/3/2007