HomeMy WebLinkAbout20180398E003_Renton_ES_16_2022-08-04_FR_045
Kirkland | Tacoma | Mount Vernon
425-827-7701| www.aesgeo.com
Date Mailed: Principal / PM: Bruce Guenzler, L.G., L.E.G.
This document is considered a DRAFT until signed or initialed by an AESI Principal or Project Manager
Page 1 of 6
v.7.20
FIELD REPORT
Date Project Name Project No. Report No.
08/04/2022 Renton Elementary School 16 20180398E003 045
Location Municipality AESI Project Manager AESI Field Rep
1075 Duvall Ave NE Renton Bruce Guenzler, L.E.G. Samantha Parker
Permit No. Client/Owner Attn Requested By
B21004604 Renton School District No. 403 Ed Thomson Contractor
Engineer/Architect General Contractor Grading Contractor Weather
CPL / Hutteball + Oremus Cornerstone/Kyle Continental Dirt Contractors/ Jerry Jr. Cloudy, 60’s
THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED:
Associated Earth Sciences Inc. (AESI) was on-site in the afternoon for observation of vapor barrier, subgrade in Stormwater
Detention Facility 1A, grease interceptor backfill, storm line backfill and water line backfill at the request of Jerry Jr. of CDC. Upon
arrival, AESI met with Jerry Jr. of CDC.
Vapor Barrier Observation – Area A
While on-site, we observed that vapor barrier had been placed in Area A, as noted in Figure 1 below. The vapor barrier was
confirmed to be 15 mils and placed over 4-inches of capillary break. In our opinion, the vapor barrier completed today appeared
consistent with project plans.
Stormwater Detention Facility 1A
While on-site, we observed that trending east, the contractor had begun excavation for Stormwater Detention Facility 1A. Approximately 40’ of subgrade, on the west end, had been prepared for observation by removing approximately 4’ to 7’ of existing
material. AESI used a ½ diameter steel soils T-probe to assess the subgrade conditions. Generally, the area probed less that 2” under
full body weight. In our opinion, based on our observations we found the area of subgrade observed today to be firm and unyielding
and suitable for support of Stormwater Detention Facility 1A. See Figure 2 for location of observed area today.
Grease Interceptor Backfill
While on-site, we observed that more backfill had been placed around and on top of a grease interceptor near the eastern edge of
Area A, near SS #5 (Figure 3). The backfill consisted of on-site soils, was placed in 1’ to 1.5’ lifts and compacted with a hoepac. AESI
used a density gauge to test the new backfilled sections. Test results met or exceeded 95% compaction (Table 1). In our opinion, based on our observations and test results, we found the observed area of backfill, to be firm and unyielding and suitable for
planned landscaping.
Storm Line Backfill
While on-site, we observed that approximately 4’ of storm line backfill, consisting of on-site soils, had been placed between SD #56,
#47, #24 #20 and #22 (Figure 4). The backfill was placed in 1’ to 1.5’ lifts and compacted with a hoepac and vibratory roller. AESI
used a density gauge to test the new backfilled sections. Test results met or exceeded 95% compaction (Table 1). In our opinion,
based on our observations and test results, we found the of the storm line backfill, to be firm and unyielding and suitable for support of planned paving.
Water Line Backfill
While on-site, we observed that approximately 3’ to 4’ of water line backfill, consisting of on-site soils, had been placed on the
northwestern side of Area C (Figure 4). The backfill was placed in 1’ to 1.5’ lifts and compacted with a hoepac. AESI used a density
gauge to test the new backfilled sections. Test results met or exceeded 95% compaction (Table 1). In our opinion, based on our
observations and test results, we found the observed area of the water line backfill, to be firm and unyielding and suitable for
support of planned paving.
16
Date Project Name Project No. Report No.
08/04/2022 Renton ES 16 20180398E003 045
Page 2 of 6
FIELD REPORT
Table 1: Compaction Test Results
Test
No. Location
Approximate Backfill Depth
Relative to Existing
Ground Surface (ft)
Proctor
(ASTM D1557)
Dry Density
(pcf)
Moisture
%
Compaction
% Pass/Fail Notes
1 See Figure 4 0 133.5/8.2 132.7 4.0 99 Pass
2 See Figure 4 0 133.5/8.2 130.7 5.1 98 Pass
3 See Figure 4 0 126.9/10.5 120.7 7.2 95 Pass
4 See Figure 4 0 126.9/10.5 120.8 6.7 95 Pass
5 See Figure 4 0 126.9/10.5 121.8 9.7 96 Pass
6 See Figure 4 0 126.9/10.5 119.8 8.8 95 Pass
7 See Figure 4 0 126.9/10.5 119.9 9.6 95 Pass
8 See Figure 3 0 133.5/8.2 128.1 6.7 96 Pass
Figure 1. Sheet S2.01 The approximate location of vapor barrier observed today in Area A is indicated in red. North is to
the right of the figure.
16
Date Project Name Project No. Report No.
08/04/2022 Renton ES 16 20180398E003 045
Page 3 of 6
FIELD REPORT
Photo 1. Vapor barrier placed in Area A.
Figure 2. Sheet C2.1 The approximate area of Stormwater Detention Facility 1A subgrade observed today is indicated in
blue. North is to the right.
16
Date Project Name Project No. Report No.
08/04/2022 Renton ES 16 20180398E003 045
Page 4 of 6
FIELD REPORT
Photo 2. The subgrade area prepared for Facility 1A observed today.
16
Date Project Name Project No. Report No.
08/04/2022 Renton ES 16 20180398E003 045
Page 5 of 6
FIELD REPORT
Figure 3. Sheet C3.1 The location of grease interceptor backfill observed today is indicated in blue. North is to the right of
the figure.
8
16
Date Project Name Project No. Report No.
08/04/2022 Renton ES 16 20180398E003 045
Page 6 of 6
FIELD REPORT
Figure 4. Sheet C3.2 The observed area of storm line backfill is indicated in blue. The observed area of water line backfill is
indicated in red. North is to the right of the figure.
2
4
1
3
5
6
7