Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutX2009-0066 - MiscI 1104.5 b HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL SOUND WALL Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian West Hoag Drive Newport Beach, CA 92658 STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS Scope: To provide structural calculations showing that the load of the sound wall and construction of' the sound wall will not impact the existing City storm drain and existing City water line. EXPIRES 6/30/09 References: 1. 2007 California Building Code (CBC) 2. Design of Ductile Iron Pipe, Ductile Iron Pipe Research Association, Revised October 2006 3. Concrete Pipe Design Manual, 4. Geotechnical Report, MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., July 8, 2008, January 22, 2009, and March 19, 2009, their project no. 4953-08-1091 1 ADDENDUM TO ORIGINAL CALCULATIONS ORIGINALLY — DATED: 10 —02 —08 ' Re: Structural Checksheet Hoag Project # 125881 CityPlan Check # 0054-2009 Review Date: February 2, 2009 C,ITt OF NE..I4rU'Y.l -+U!LDING DEPARTMENT PPROVAL OF THESE PLANS DO--:ONSTITUTE EXPRESS OR IMPLIED CI EEIRE ORDI NO CONSTRUCT ANY .V VIOLATION OF OR INCONSISTENT JI I!1 i E ORDINANCES. PLANS. AND POLICED. tP1.S THE CITY OF NEWPORTR BEACH. THIS on +i1L DG 5 NOi 'GUARANTEEHAZ(I 'N 2DINSNCES, S ARE, IN ALL PLANS AND POLICIES. OE C-iANCE WITH CITY, BUILDING. THE sE THE `NEWPORTiLDING STRUCTUREEACH DRVES: TILE RIGHT R IMPROVEMENT TO ZED BY THESE TPLANS BEFORE, DURNIC OR AFTER CONSTRUCTION IF NECESSARY TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCES, PLANS AND POLICIES OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH. PERMITT EES ACKNOWLEDGMENT:_. DEDCr.'p/,EN? SIGNATURE WORKS ERVCES GIAI p IFh4 B (SIGNATURE) DATE APPROVAL TO ISSUE DATE: File: PSElcalclulations addendum.doc Peterson Struchnal Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Waetgata Drive, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 91221-2411 Phone (503)292-1635 Fete (503) 292-9846 Project designer O$-132 M �S date sheet MAR 2 4 2009 / Df 5 ps.ntosSE&.. Inc. 6319 S.W. MSS DIM, Sub216 Pedant Oiltgcm 87221-2411 1Mn.180H2@-1633 Fee M5)2924816 City Water Line (Either DIP or Concrete) — Checked Sh # 4 & 5 City Storm Drain — Checked Original Calculations dated Oct 02, 2008 Sh# 56, copy attached to these calculations, Sh# 3 protect a -132 designer MP5 MAR 2 4 II I Utility Pipe Analysis Utility Pipe Analysis. Analyzed using the Concrete Pipe Design Manual (CPDM) 36" dia. R.C.P., Assumed Class III Type IV installation, Assumed Calculate Load on Pipe: w =110 pcf — Assumed weight of soil H =15 feet — Distance between top of soil to utility pipe Ba = 6 feet — Assumed trench width at time of installation ICµ' = 0.110 — Load Coefficient per Figure 214, Saturated Clay per geotechnical report D = 36 in— Inside diameter of pipe Da — 3+12)' 4-3.67 ft— Outside diameter of pipe Weight of Soil a Load Coefficient, Cd =1 2 —1.92 Wat =Cd*W*Be+D°2(g-n)•w=7,6471bs (CPDM eq. 4-3) (CPDM eq. 4-4) Weight from Sound Wall Worst Case: Caisson is located, Hes = 5' above Storm Drain Wsw =1,330 lb - avg weight of sound wall (sh 3) w = 145 pa— Unit weight of concrete Las = 12.17 ft — Distance between gradebeams =.2 ft — Diameter of Caisson Agesma4ft2 Wag (ws •A s(Les + Lae) 2 (H , ++ +H�)2 •Da =2141bs. pip. Percent Increase from Sound Wall Way = Waf + Wd2 = 7,8611bs Percent Increase = --It *100 = 3% ma Summary — There is less than a 3% increase in additional load from the sound wall. Therefore the forces from the sound wall will have minimal tono impact on the existing utility pipe: Co/f OF Our . CAL C LL ,T/*,Y. sy,# Ih1110011611YCY�I01 Lh10100"�.1e4 Ps40aw0n 0i]]1.0,11 Pima 0133,>12,63, Pi= me Project o ` �✓ • date MAR.2 41tA9 designer Ai P S . sit 3 . of 5. n 0 Zi s co m 0 0 V rl O a m a HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL SOUND WALL DUCTILE IRON PIPE ANALYSIS Ref: "Design of Ductile Iron Pipe" by Ductile Iron. Pipe Research Assn. - Revised 10-06 Type 1 Laying condition - Table 1, pg 3 Class 200 psi Pressure class f = 48,000 psi Design maximum bending stress E = 24,000,000 - psi Modulus of elasticity w = 120 pcf Soil Weight H = 3.0 ft Depth of cover F = 1.5 Impact Factor P = 16000 lb Wheel Load b = . 36 in Effective pipe length E' = R= D= A= t= Kb = Kx = C= Pve!Iow-bend = Pvenow-dee = Pe = Pt = Pv = 150 psi 0.81 25.8 in 1.075 ft 0.330 in 0.235 0:108 0.260 Modulus of soil reaction - Table 1 Reduction Factor - Table 2 Outside diameter Outside Radius of Pipe Net thickness Bending moment coefficient Deflection coefficient Surface Load Factor 13.5 psi Max. Trench Load - Bending 21.3 psi Max. Trench Load - Deflection 2.5 psi 5.4 psi Earth Load Truck Load 7.9 psi. Actual Trench Load = Pe + Pt Pv < Pvell,,,,, is OK OK 3/13/2009 File: Ductile Iron Pipe Analysis CGP Table 1 - Page 3 Standard Pipe Laying Conditions Type E' Bedding Angle Kb Kx psi degrees. 1 150 30 0.235 0.108 2 300 45 0.210 0.105 3 400 60 0.1.89 0.030 4 500 90 0.157 0.096 5 700 150 0.128 0.085 Table t-Page 4 Reduction Factors R for Truck Load Calculations Size Depth of cover feet in. <4 4-7 7-10 >10 3-12 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 14 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 16 0.88 0.95 1.00 1.00 18 0.85 0.90 1.00 1.00 20 0.83 0.90 0.95 1.00 24-30 0.81 0.85 0.95 1.00 36-64 0.80 0.85 0.90. 1.00 Table 3 - Page 5 Standard Pressure Classes and Nominal Thicknesses Size Outside Dia. Pressure Class in. in. 150 I 200 I 250 I 300 -I 350 Nominal thickness - inches 24 25.8 I 0.33 I 0.37 I 0.4 I 0.43 r HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL SOUND WALL CONCRETE PIPE ANALYSIS Ref: Concrete Pipe Design Manual - Chapter 4 Dead Load Live Load 3/13/2009 File: Concrete Pipe Analysis CGP D, = 2 ft Pipe inside diameter Do = 2.5 ft Pipe outside diameter H = 3 ft Height of fill above top of pipe Type 4 Backfill installation type - Illustration 4.4 w= Kp' = Bd = Cd = Wd = a= IM = P= Spread a = Spread b = A= w= Lt. = L= Bc = SL = WT = Ro = Le = WL = 120 pcf 0.165 3.3 ft 0.78 1119 plf 0.83 ft 1.67 ft 0:206 32,000 Ib 7.8 ft 8.7 ft 67.9sgft 569 psf 64 psf 7.8 ft 2.5 ft 2.5 ft 12,383 Ib 2 ft 21 ft 602 pif Soil Loads Bte= 1.7 Bre= 1.5 Bd1= 4.5 ft BE;= 1.58 Dload = 2.2 F.S. = 1 WE = 1119 plf Wr = 62.4 plf Bf = D-load = 1.58 373 pif D-load per foot of inside diameter - Formula 4.26 800 Ib OK per ASTM C76 Unit Weight of Soil Sand and Gravel, Granular Width of trench = 4/3*Do - Illustration 4.3 Trench load coefficient - Formula 4.4 Trench soil load - Formula 4.3 Footprint - Illustration 4.9 Footprint - Illustration 4.9 Impact Factor - Illustration 4.11 Illustration 4.14 for "Other Soils" Illustration 4.14 for "Other Soils" Illustration 4.14 for "Other Soils" Spread wheel area at top of pipe Average Pressure Intensity - Formula 4.12 Lane Loading = 64 psf for H < 8 ft Spread dimension parallel to pipe Outside horizontal span of pipe = Outside diameter Minimum of Spread a and Be Total live load - Formula 4.13 Outside vertical rise of pipe = Outside diameter Effective supporting length of pipe - Illustration 4.17 Total unit live load on pipe - Formula 4.14 Bedding factor - Illustration 4.21 Trench min. bedding factor - Illustration 4.22 Transition width @ top of pipe - Table 17 for 24" pipe Variable bedding factor - Illustration 4.23 Bedding factor - Illustration 4.24 Factor of safety - Illustration 4.24 WE = Wd - From example Unit weight of water - From example OK Peterson Structural ER9lne48, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drivo. Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97221-2411 Phone 1503)292-1635 Pao (503) 292.9345 project O$ - I32- designer / 4 p; date sheet MAR 2 4 2009 5 of 5 OMACTEC engineering and constructing a better tomorrow January 22, 2009 Mr. Alan Kubitz Facilities Design and Construction Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive P.O. Box 6100 Newport Beach, California 92658-6100 *WW1 CITY OF NEWPORT EE.ACH BUILDING DEPARTMENT APPROVAL OF THESE PLANS DOES NCE! CONSTITUTE EXPRESS OR IMPLIED AUTHORZATION TO CONSTRUCT ANY (WILDLY IN VIOLATION OF OR INCONSISTENT WITH THE ORDINANCES, PLANS. AND POLICE:-JF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH. THIS APPROVAL DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT THESE PLANS ARE, IN ALL RESPECTS. _R COMPLIANCE WITH CITY. BUILDING, AND ZONING ORDINANCES, PLANS AND PGLUC:.c:^ THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REQUIRE ANY PERMIT REVISE ISE THE BUILDING STRUCTURE OR IMPROVEMENT AUTHORIZED BY THESE r L . 13 BEFORE. DURING OR .AFTER CONSTRUCTION, IF NECESSARY TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCES. PLANS AND POLICIES OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH: PERMITTEE'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT: - - DEPARrAiPNT_�� SIGNATSI� - - (SIGNATURE) Subject: Supplemental Geotechnical ConsultatlonnTrsrmr DATE Proposed Sound Wall eE :SAI.SERVICES Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyteria :Jut itmer Campus One Hoag Drive E L�-P Newport Beach, California MACTEC Project 4953-08-1091 Dear Mr. Kubitz: EIRE BY: APPROVAL TO ISSUE DATE: This letter presents our supplemental geotechnical consultation in regards to the passive resistance for the proposed sound wall. We previously perform a geotechnical consultation for the proposed sound wall and presented our recommendations in a letter dated July 8, 2008. At the request of Mr. Mike Schoch of Peterson Structural Engineers, this letter addresses his request to evaluate the recommended passive resistance for the design of caissons for the proposed sound wall. For isolated caissons spaced at least 3 diameters on center, the passive pressure may be taken as two times the recommended values provided in our July 8, 2008 letter. All other recommendations in that letter remain applicable. Our professional services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants practicing in this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this letter. 1 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc. 5628 East Slauson Avenue • Los Angeles, CA 90040-2922 • Phone: 323.889.5300 • Fax: 323.889.5398 www.mactec.com Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian —Geotechnical Consultation MACTECEngineeringand Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 July 8, 2008 It has been a pleasure to be of professional service to you. Please call if you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc. Ian-Anh Tran Project Engineer Marshall Lew, PhD. Senior Principal Engineer Vice President P:14953 Geotech12008-proj181091 Hoag -Sound Wa1114953-08-109111r02.doc (2 copies submitted) cc: (1) Peterson Structural Engineers Attn: Mr. Mike Schoch 2 OMACTEC engineering and constructing a better tomorrow March 19, 2009 Mr. Alan Kubitz Facilities Design and Construction Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive P.O.Box 6100 Newport Beach, California 92658-6100 Subject: CITY Or NEvOBORi c::.- ;,UiLDING DEPARTMENT. APPROVAL OF THESE PLANS DOE, '.ONSTITUTE EXPRESS OR IMPU' AUTHORIZATION TO CONSTRUCT ANY B W TH THE ORDINANCES, PLANS, AND POL ' IN EI CiTY ON OF E PR RIT BEACH.' APPROVAL DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT THESE PLANS ARE, IN RESPECTS.ALL COMPLIANCE WITH CITY BUILDING. AND ZONING ORDINANCES, PLANS AND PC CI• THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REQUIRE ANY PERMIT FEE F. :1 rL 4FE THE BUILDING STRUCTURE OR IMPROVEMENT AUTHORIZED BY THESE FI BEFORE- DURING OR AFTER CONSTRUCTION, IF NECESSARY TO COMPLY WO ....,E ORDINANCES. PLANS AND POLICIES OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH. PERMITTEE'SACKNOWLEDGMENT: p PARn,ENTT SIGNATURE <TgL SERVICES -- Supplemental Geotechnical Consu�tatton— esp w-nLten Proposed Sound Wall -Hi LkNINO Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyte 'lan Ui r ampus _' . -- One Hoag Drive BY: Newport Beach, California City of Newport Beach Plan Check 0054-2009 MACTEC Project 4953-08-1091 (SIGNATURE) - "-- DATE APPROVAL TO ISNDI� --,_— DATE. Dear Mr. Kubitz: This letter presents our responses to review comments from the City of Newport Beach Building Department dated March 11, 2009 for the proposed sound wall. We previously perform a geotechnical consultation for the proposed sound wall and presented our recommendations in a letter dated July 8, 2008 and supplemental letter dated January 22, 2009. Review comments requiring our responses are presented herein followed by our responses. The March 11, 2009 Correction List is attached for reference. Comment No. 5: Provide two wet signed copies of the soils report. Signature stamps, photocopies, initials, or electronic signatures are not sufficient. Response: Two signed copies of soil report, dated July 8, 2008 and supplemental letter dated January 22, 2009 are submitted. Comment No. 6: The soils engineer to review and approve the grading plan, and foundation plan to verify that the design is consistent with the geotechnical report recommendations. Soils engineer to stamp these plans with an approval stamp. MACTEC Engineering and Consulting. Inc. 5628 East Slauson Avenue • Los Angeles, CA 90040-2922 • Phone: 323.889.5300 • Fax: 323.889.5398 www.mactec.Com Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian—Geotechnical Consultation March 19, 2009 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-109/ Response: Grading and foundation plans will be reviewed for the conformance of our recommendations. Approved plans will be signed and submitted. Comment No. 12: Soils report shall present site specific seismic coefficients, based on the latitude and longitude of the wall location to four decimal places with supporting documentation. Response: We determined the seismic site coefficients in accordance with the California Building Code and ASCE 7-05 Standard using the United States Geological Survey Earthquake Motion Parameters, Version 5.0.8, program. The site location used was Latitude 33.6239° and Longitude - 117.9303° with a Site Class "D." The seismic site coefficients under the code are presented below: Site Coefficient Value Ss (0.2 second period, Site Class B) L828g S, (1.0 second period, Site Class B) 0.6851 1.0 Fa „ 1.5 SMs = FaSs(0.2 second period, Site Class D) 1.828g SM, = F,S,(1.0 second period, Site Class D) 1.027g Sos = 2/3 x Sus (0.2 second period, Site Class D) 1.219g Sin = 2/3 x Spa (1.0 second. period, Site Class D) 0.685g Prepared by: LT, 3/16/09 Checked by: MKT, 3/16/09 Comment No. 14: List the complete soils,report conclusions' and recommendations on a plan sheet, within the plan set, in addition to the soil. report. Response: This should be accomplished by the Design. Engineer. Comment' No. 26 Comply with all handwritten corrections on the plans in addition: to the above corrections. .Response: .We are unaware.ofany handwritten.corrections related to soils: Our professional services have beenperformed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants practicing in this or 2 Haag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian—Geotechnical Consultation MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc.. Project 4953-08-1091 March 19. 2009 similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this letter. It has been a pleasure to be of professional service to you. Please call if you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc. Lan-Anh Tran Project Engineer Marshall Lew, Ph:D- Senior Principal Engineer Vice President P:14953 Geotech12008-proj18/091 Hoag -Sound Wal114953-08-/091/tr03.doc (2 copies submitted) Attachments: March 11, 2009 City of Newport Beach Correction List March 11, 2009 Hoag Memorial Hospital, Sound Wall and Site Work Hoag Project # 125881 City Plan Check# 0054-2009 The following are the responses to the City of Newport Beach BUILDING DEPARTMENT / Correction List comments on 01-18-2009: General Corrections 1. Identify the 'Design Professional in Responsible Charge' for the project. The registered design professional charge shall be responsible for reviewing and coordinating submittal documents prepared by others, including phased and deferred submittal items for compatibility with thedesign of the building. R/Hdo response: R/Hdo identified as design professional in responsible charge 2. Provide a site survey, stamped and signed by a, State Licensed Surveyor or authorized Civil Engineer (License Number below 33,966). HMM response: 3. Provide relative elevations at the following .locations on the survey: a: All property comers. b. Around existing structures(s) at comers, including comers at jogs of exteriorwalls c. At bottom of all site walls. Indicate wall height. d. At bottom of elevated planters. Indicate. planter height. e. At` maximum ;spacing of 25' along the length and width of the property on all sides of an existing structure., f. Elevation contours for sloping sites every one foot of elevation change. HM1111 response: 4. All plan sheets shall be wet signed and stamped by the appropriate design professional Signature stamps, photocopies, initials,' or electronic signatures are not sufficient RHDO response: Sheets wet signed HMM response: FBA response: PSE response (per separate agreement with owner): iMacTec response (per separate agreement with owner): \\ HMH\125581\City1Comments\C.O. 11 I\Bidg Dept Comments_Revision 1 Correction List (CO #i).doc 5. Provide two wet signed copies of the soils report. Signature stamps, photocopies, initials, or electronic signatures are not sufficient. MacTec response: 6. The soils engineer to review and approve thegrading plan, and foundation plan to verify that the design is consistent with the geotechnical report recommendations. Soils engineer to stamp these plans withanapproval stamp. MacTec response (per separate agreement with owner): 7. Provide the correct and complete street address for the site on all plan sheets: RHDO response: Address added on each sheet HMM response: FBA response: PSE response (per separate agreement with owner): 8. Show name,address, telephone number, and name of individual signing the plansfor each design consultant, including the structural engineer, regardless of the contracts with the owner RHDO response: Address added to Sheet 0.00 9_ Includeall plan sheets on the sheet index, regardless of the contracts with the property owner. RHDO response: All plan sheets added to index on Sheet 0.00 10. Provide a separatepermit application for the offsite grading work on the Versailles Site. Where grading is proposed on adjacent property not owned by the permittee, a separate permit is required for that portion under the adjacent address. HMM :resonse: 11. Summarize the grading work for each site. Specify volume of over excavation, cut and fill in cubic yards for each site. HMM response: 12. Soils report shall present site specific seismic coefficients, based on the latitude and longitude of the wallaocationto four decimal places, with supporting documentation. MacTec response (per separateagreement with owner): 13. Revise :the structural, design calculations to utilize the: site specific seismic coefficients. PSE'response (per separate agreement with owner): 14. List the complete soils report conclusions and recommendations on a plan sheet, within the plan set, in addition to the soils, report. MacTec response (per separate agreement with owner): \\ HMH\125581\City\Comments\C.O. # i\Bldg Dept Comments_Revision 1-Correction List(CO #1).doc 15. List all special and/or continuous inspections on the cover sheetofthe plans. In addition to the structural sheets. RHDO response: Structural sheets and inspections added to sheet 0.00. 16. Fullydimension the wall on the site plans. HMM response: 17. Detectable warnings shall be installed along the entire ramp, slope where a level landing is not provided prior to entering a vehicle hazard area. Revise the plans toshowcompliance. HMM response: 18. Detail 5/C3.00: Clarify the area of the level landing area and zero curb at the sidewalk: intersection HMM response.. 19. Identify the detectable warnings manufacturer, product and installation method on the plans HMM response: 20. Include a copy of the manufacturer product warranty forthe detectable warnings' HMM response: 21. Write a note on drawings, "Contractor to provide a detectable waming product sample to the Building Inspector for approval of color contrast with finish surface." . HMM response: 22. Include the City standard plan details as a part of the plans. HMM: response: 23. Clarifyritems 16 & 17 on, sheet C500, what is the source of the air vents and blow -off? HMM response: 24. Revise, the wind design to account for exposure C, as the site is less than 2500ft from the ocean... PSE response (per separate agreement with owner): 25. Additional corrections may apply following -review of the review seismic and wind analysis. PSE response (per separate agreementwith owner): �� HMH\1255s11Ciry\CommentsC.o. # l\Bidg Dept Comments_Revision 1 Correction List (CO q l).doc 26. Comply with all handwritten corrections on the plans in addition to the abover corrections. RHDO response: HMM response: FBA response: PSE response (per separate agreement with owner): MacTec response (per separate agreement with owner): Comments on drawings in addition to the Correction Items listed above Refers to comment onE0.01: - Obtain EMP plan review and approval. R/Hdo response: EMP department has reviewed and approved plans. \1 HMH\125581\City\Comments\C.O. 14 t\Bldg Dept Commems_Revision I Conection List (CO #t).doc ( KLEINFELDER Bright People. Right Solutions November 19, 2009 Project No. 106934 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Facilities Design & Construction 500 Superior Ave, Suite 300 Newport Beach, California 92663 • •- - _ LDING DEPARTMENT PLANS DOE INSTITUTE EXPRESS OR IMPLIED f NSTRUCT A"' '.N VIOLATION OF OR INCONSISTENT PLANS, ANC THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH. THIS 07 GUARANTEE lily ::E PLANS ARE, IN ALL RESPECTS, IN CITY BUILDING, AN;.c.4G OR0IIIANCES, PLANS AND POLICIES. PIPORT BEACH RESERVE- r RIGHT TO REQUIRE ANY PERMITTEE TO LDING STRUCTURE OR T ROV. MENT AUTHORIZED BY THESE PLANS IIG 0,R AFTER CONSTRUCTION, IF NECESSARY TO COMPLY WITH THE ES. PLANS AND POLICIES OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH. PR'VA r.E'SACRNOWLEDGMENT: S SIGNATURE (SIGNATURE) DATE Attn: Mr. Scott Neiderhiser Subject: Change of Geotechnical Consultant of Record Geotechnical Observation and Testing Proposed Sound Wall Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian —Upper Campus Newport Beach, California APPROVAL TO ISSUE GATE: Dear Mr. Neiderhiser: We have reviewed the referenced plans and previous geotechnical reports for the site. We concur with the geotechnical conclusions and recommendations presented. Kleinfelder assumes the responsibility within its purview as the geotechnical consultant of record. Thank you for the opportunity to be of service. Yours truly, Kleinfelder West, Inc. Aced cgl/es Roy, I1.E., G.E. Principal Geotechnical Engineer Attachment: List of references 106934/IRV9L248 Copyright 20D9 Kleintelder 2 Ada, Suite 250, Irvine, CA 92618 p 1949.727.4466 f 1949.727.9242 Timothy Siegers, P.E. Project Manager November 19, 2009 List of References 1. Mactec, "Supplemental Geotechnical Consultation — Response to Review Comments, Proposed Sound Wall, Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian — Upper Campus, One Hoag Drive, Newport Beach, Califomia," report dated March 19, 2009, Mactec Project No.4953-08-1091. 2. Mactec, "Supplemental Geotechnical Consultation — Passive Resistance, Proposed Sound Wall, Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian — Upper Campus, One Hoag Drive, Newport Beach, California," report dated March 19, 2009, Mactec Project No.4953-08-1091. 3. Mactec, "Geotechnical Consultation — Proposed Sound Wall, Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian — Upper Campus, One Hoag Drive, Newport Beach, Califomia," report dated March 19, 2009, Mactec Project No.4953-08-1091. 4. Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc., "Hoag Sound Wall, Sheet Si to S16", dated March 24, 2009. 5. Halladay & Mimmadk, "125581 — Upper Campus Sound Wall, Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian, West Hoag Drive, Newport Beach, Califomia 92663", dated April 6, 2009. 106934JIRV91.248 Copyright 2t 9 K1einfelder KLEINFELDER 2 Ada, Suite 250, Irvine, CA 92618 p 1949.727.4466 f 1949.727.9242 November 19, 2009 065q• bing SSE Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. January 25, 2010 Matt Hazard Rabben Herman Design Office 833 Dover Drive, Suite 9 Newport Beach, CA 92663 consulting structural engineers Charles Gary Peterson, P.E. Erik W.B. Peterson, P.E. Travis G. McFeron, P.E. 5319 sw westgate drive, suite 215 portland, oregon 97221 503/292-1635 fax: 503/292-9848 Re: Hoag Sound Wall — Potential Impact on Existing Utility Pipe Dear Matt: File:Pse\08-132-14 This letter is to address City of Newport — Public Works Department's concern with the sound wall revisions potential impact with the city storm drain. None of the sound wall revisions, including changes made to moving caissons, and modifying the grade beam, will increase the load to the city storm drain more than previously stated in the structural addendum dated March 24, 2009. This conclusion is, "There is less than a 3% increase in additional load from the sound wall. Therefore, the forces from the sound wall have minimal to no impact on the existing utility pipe." Please contact us if you have any questions. Sincerely, Michael Schoch Submitted via email: Matt Hazard, matthe:setm-;3 na cc via email: Scott Neiderhiser, sr+P;derH gspital.or As dIWA 9NINNVId 9NIOV80 3813 S30IA83S1V83N3:) 31V0 (38010401S) S380M.011011d 38111VNOIS 1N31N18Vd30 1N31419031MONNOVS.331111183d 0 3H1 RPM A dLJ00 011 A81NSS303N AI ''N011011 1SN00 8313V 80V9J 18N0 '3803N8 SPJ'dld 3S31-f1 A8 03218031110V 1N36N2A08dNI 80 380101181S SNI01100 3H1 331J138 019311133834 ANY 3811038 011H9;8 3141 S3A83118 H0V38 180dM3N 40 A110 3111 8310110d 0NV SNVId 'S30NVN1080 S:N NOZ ONV'9NI01100 A!IO HIIM 30NVIldN00 NI 'S103d538 11V NI '38V SNV14 - 1 1VH1 331NV8V10 10N S300 1V108d3V SIH1'113V30180dM3N 30 A110 3H1 3N0033ONV'SNV1d .S30NVNI080 3311 H!IM 1N31SISN00NI 80 30 N011V101A t- - &NV 10+181SN00 01 NOI1V218033 0V Q311011 80 SS38dx3 310111S* SNVId 3S3H1 30 1YA08ddv 1N3W1dVd30 eNI' - - 13 Hoag Hospital Upper Campus Sound Wall 125881 City Submittal - Revision Narrative January 26, 2010 4404, flak tie .51 ( '1 rut0 The narrative provided below indicates revisions to the set of drawings for the Upper Campus Sound Wall that have occurred as a result of: a) field location of existing utilities or conditions that differ from those indicated on the permitted set of plans, b) revisions due to coordination with other project consultants. c) revisions due to coordination with Hoag Hospital REFCO staff and Deb Construction to either simplify construction or to provide clarify of intent. Sheet No. C1.00664111 1. Added Kleinfelder as Soils Engineer/ Geologist. 2. Added removal note 19 and construction notes 25, 26, 27 and 28. Sheet No. C2.00 1. Added Kleinfelder as Soils Engineer/ Geologist. Sheet No. C2.01 1. Added Kleinfelder as Soils Engineer/ Geologist . 2. Revised Expiration date on LS Stamp. of skee- F- CL Sheet No. C3.00 0 1. Added Kleinfelder as Soils Engineer/Geologist. 2. Revised wall and sidewalk location on Detail no, 5, curb ramp no. 1 per RFI 3. Revised detail No. 7, access ramp No. 3, 4. Revised Catch Basin Connection Detail. 5. Revised location of relocated 18" RCP in Section AA. 6. Revised Section EE. to reflect deletion of the grade beam. 7. Revised the bend angle in construction note No. 15. Sheet No. C3.01 1. Added Kleinfelder as Soils Engineer/Geologist. Sheet No. C4.00 1. Added Kleinfelder as Soils Engineer/ Geologist. 2. Added removal of existing ramp at north end of loading dock. 3. Labeled existing chilled and hot water lines in plan view for drawing clarifi 4. Revised removal limits on curb return at S. Hoag Dr. 5. Added removal of existing 18" storm drain, sly end of wall per RFI # 11. 6. Added demolition note No. 19. o'-=-mot !II!: w Zwww�KOO oowo¢6 cc -w-00UC0C zsw WStyKZWYiWOYL9- w 0 #10.' �.1KCCCirrAO .0 YO_�_a KJ f.tn ., p3ZW<9Wd.2U CL r¢z0-2 o ZOZ�ZUUO i NOw1,-,-!!!!!!!! j C r iL w a,y M u,4 K K 00,-O�Utn�z i 4 a ,aW>LL� w W ¢a3 COOI-WOO d 0 cation. WI 0 833 Dover Drive, Suite 9 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Phone: 949.548.3459 Fax: 949.548.5743 EM: design@rhdo.com 0 Mgr Page 1 of 4 California Landscape Architecture license q 2985 T Sheet No. C6.00 1. Revised location of caisson # 2 1.50' northerly per RFI #7. 2. Revised location of caisson # 4 1.67' southerly per RFI #12. 3. Deleted caisson # 10 per RFI #10. 4. Revised wall angle point to caisson # 9-11, Sta 1+93.38 per RFI #10. 5. Revised location of caisson-# 12 3.17' southerly per RFI #6. 6. "Revised location of caisson # 14 3.17' northerly per RFI #6. 7. Revised Sta of angle point 2+86.63 per RFI #10. 8. Raised elevation of top and bottom of grade beam 0.83' at caissons 1 & 2 per survey clarification. 9. Revised top of curb profile between caissons 1 & 6 per survey clarification. 10. Moved caisson # 2 1.50' northerly per RFI #7. 11. Moved caisson # 4 1.67' southerly per RFI #12. 12. Revised grade beam step location at caisson #7 as a drawing clarification. 13. Revised grade beam step location at caisson #11 as a drawing clarification. 14. Moved caisson # 12 3.17' southerly per RFI #6. 15. Revised top of grade beam step location at caisson #13 per RFI #6. 16. Moved caisson # 14 3.17' northerly per RFI #6. 17. Revised grade beam step location at caisson #19 as a drawing clarification. 18. Revised grade beam step location at caisson #3 as a drawing clarification. 19. Revised grade beam step location at caisson #33 as a drawing clarification. 20. Revised top of wall angle point Stas 1+93.38 & 2+05.86 per survey clarification. 21. Revised top of wall step location at Sta 2+37.50 per survey clarification; 22. Revised top of wall angle point Stas 2+80.34 & 2+86.63 per survey clarification. 23. Revised location of 15" Storm Drain between caissons #3 & #4 per RFI #11. 24. Revised grade beam step location at caisson # 36. 25. Deleted grade beam between caisson # 36 & 37. 26. Added stations for caissons 35, 36, 37 & 38 for clarity. 27. Revised end of wall station due to width of posts at the gates. 28. Added Kleinfelder as Soils Engineer/ Geologist. 29. Revised station for nt gate inplview. edir set, fi �' dam- S Sheet No. C5.00 1. Added Kleinfelder as Soils Engineer/Geologist. 2. Added construction notes 25 through 29. 3. Revised detail No. 23, access ramp No. 4. 4. Revised wall stations at centerline of gate and end of wall. 5. Revised wall location northerly of the backflow preventer per RFI #10. Sheet No. C5.01 1. Added Kleinfelder as Soils Engineer/Geologist. 833 Dover Drive, Suite 9 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Phone: 949.548.3459 Fax: 949.548.5743 EM: design@rhdo.com dsca eArcbicecwre licenseC Page 2 of 4 °2985 takito • (Okla,'$ lki/ es to Sheet L1.01 1. Root barriers added on all sides of the (3) new Ficus 'Green Gem' trees at southern end of the wall. Sheet L2.00 1. Removed Basket Strainer Assembly due to existing backflow preventer serving the finalized irrigation line for permanent connection. 2. Removed reference to water meter, and changed to 'system POC'. 3. Added note for filter fabric under valve boxes (drawing clarification derived from specification). Sheet L2.01 1. Relocated irrigation POC to final connection point per existing conditions. 2. Relocated Irrigation controller, master valve, and flow sensor per existing conditions. 3. Removed Basket Strainer Assembly due to existing backflow preventer serving the finalized irrigation line for permanent connection. 4. Added flood bubblers for (8) new trees at northern end of the wall. 5. Reconfigured sprinkler layout at curbside new road crossing per reconfigured sidewalk layout. Sheet L2.51 1. Detail A - Removed Basket Strainer Assembly. No longer required as noted in item 1, sheet t2.00. Sheet L3.01 1. (3) Ficus 'Green Gem' trees (1) 24" Box size and (2) 15 gal added at southern end of the wall. Sheet L3.11 1. (36) StarJasmine (1 Gal size) added at increased planter near the Back Flow Preventer east of caisson and revised layout of shrubs at northern end of the wall. 833 Dover Drive, Suite 9 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Phone: 949.548.3459 Fax: 949.548.5743 EM: design@rhdo.com Page 3 of 4 California Landscape Architecture license # 2985 Sheet E-0.01 1. Sound wall mounted light fixture detail have been revised per RFI #23. See detail #4 on sheet E0.01. Sheet E-1.00 1. Irrigation controller and sound wall mounted light fixtures have been relocated per RFI #15 and #26 respectively. See plan sheet E1.00. Sheet S1 1. End of wall station changed due to modified gate dimensions. 2. Stationing changes due to utility conflicts. 3. Grade beam and sound wall were relocated affecting caissons #9, 11, and eliminated #10, per RFI #21 (also noted on Sheet S2). Sheet S2 1. Grade beam and wall elevation moved upwards 10" at caissons #1 and 2, noted on RFI #22. 2. Caisson #2 moved 18" to the North per RFI #9. 3. The following caissons shifted: #4-2'0" South; #12-3'2" South, #14-3'0" North. Revisions shown on sheet S2, per teleconference on 11/17/09. 4. Revised all step locations to match Civil Engineer's drawings; C6.00. 5. Removed portion of grade beam at gate due to utility conflicts. Sheet S8 1. Added (2) #5 to grade beam between caissons #12 and 14, per RFI 24. Sheet S13 1. Changed gate details to reflect portion of grade beam that was removed. Sheet S15 1. Base channel on General Assembly Detail S15 changed from (2) 3x2x3/16 base angles to (2) C4x5.4 channels. This change was made to compensate for a new sound panel mold, which is consequently a 1/16" shorter. 833 Dover Drive, Suite 9 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Phone: 949.548.3459 Fax: 949.548.5743 EM: design@rhdo.com Page 4 of 4 California Landscape Architecture license 8 2985 coSti-Zoot OMACTEC engineering and constructing a better tomorrow November 25, 2009 Mr. Alan Kubitz Facilities Design and Construction Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive P.O. Box 6100 Newport Beach, California 92658-6100 CITY Or NEWPO1 _WIliG DEPARTMENT APPROVAL OF THESE PLANS V 'INSTITUTE EXPRESS OR IMPLIED "' ORIZATION TO CONSTRUCT A 'VIOLATION OE OR INCONSISTENT V:!1 THE ORDINANCES PLANS AXE TIE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH. THIS ASP :3VAL DOES NOT GUARANTEE RA • PLANS ARE, IN ALL RESPECTS, IN C' M LIANCE WITH CITY BUILDVAS ARKz '. ORDINANCES PLANS AND POLICIES. T - OE NEWPORT BEACH ' r: • S ;HI TOREQUIRE ANY PERMITTEE TO Pliti:XE 1HE BUILDING STRUCT " NPROVEMENT AUTHORIZED BY THESE PLANS B SORE. DURING OR AFTER CO-ICN !F NECESSARY TO COMPLY WITH THE OREM,NCES, PLANS AND POLid:ES OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH. PI ' :I TEESACKNOWLEDGMENT. DEAART /ENT P,9_L''--_ WORKS SIGNA: IRE (SIGNATURE) DATE G[ NERAL SERVICES FINE GRADING PLANNING EIM,P SY: Subject: Release as Geotechnical Engineer of Record Proposed Sound Wall Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian — Upper Campus One Hoag Drive Newport Beach, California MACTEC Project 4953-08-1091 Dear Mr. Kubitz: APPROVAL TO ISSUE DATE: Mr. Matt Hazard of,Rabben Herman Design Office has informed us that Kleinfelder is providing geotechnical inspection and testing services during construction of the proposed Sound Wall. We performed a geotechnical consultation for the site and submitted the results in a report. The inspection and testing of the earthwork and foundations are considered a continuation of the initial consultation, and permit the verification of the soil conditions established by the prior exploration borings at the site. For this reason, it is normal practice to engage the same geotechnical engineer that did theinitial investigation to perform the inspection and testing of the earthwork and foundations. Since Kleinfelder has been retained to perform geotechnical inspection and testing during construction, Kleinfelder is now the geotechnical engineer of record for the project. It is implicitly MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc. 5628 East Slauson • Los Angeles, CA 90040-1554 • Phone: 323.889.5300 • 323.889-5398 www.mactec.com- Hoag MemoHal Hospital Presbyterian— Release as Geotechnical Engineer of Record November 25, 2009 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 assumed that Kleinfelder's engineers have reviewed our report of geotechnical investigation and supplements thereto, and that they agree with the design recommendations for the project. It has become their responsibility to confirm that the subsurface conditions encountered do not deviate from the conditions indicated on the logs of the borings in the report. During construction, Kleinfelder, as the geotechnical engineer of record, assumes the responsibility for confirming the recommendations of our report, for confirming that the earthwork is performed as recommended, and for confirming that the foundations are constructed to provide proper support for the building. Furthermore, Kleinfelder's engineers should be consulted regarding any design modifications that may be required as a result of conditions encountered during construction. 1 Although we are disappointed in not having the opportunity to continue with this project to completion, we look forward to be of further service to you on other projects in the future. Sincerely, MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc. l Lan-Anh Tran Project Engineer PAnlitei Marshall Lew, PhD, G.E Senior Principal/Vice President PA4953 Geotech\2008 proj\81091 Hoag -Sound WalARelease as engineer of recond.docIML:It (2 copies submitted) cc Rabben Herman Design Office Attn: Mr. Matt Hazard 2 OMACTEC engineering and constructing a better tomorrow July 8, 2008 Mr. Alan Kubitz Facilities Design and Construction Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive P.O. Box 6100 Newport Beach, California 92658-6100 Subject: Geotechnical Consultation CITY OF. NEWPORT BEACH BUILDING DEPARTMENT APPROVAL OF THESE PLANS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE EXPRESS OR IMPLIED AUTHORIZATION TO CONSTRUCT ANY BUILDING IN VIOLATION OF OR INCONSISTENT WITH THE ORDINANCES, PLANS, AND POLICIES OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, THIS APPROVAL DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT THESE PLANS ARE, IN ALL RESPECTS, IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY. BUILDING, AND ZONING ORDINANCES, PLANS AND POLICIES. THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REQUIRE ANY PERMITTEE TO REVI;,E THE BUILDING STRUCTURE OR IMPROVEMENT AUTHORIZED BY THESE PLANS BEFORE. DURING OR AFTER CONSTRUCTION, IF NECESSARY TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCES, PLANS AND POLICIES OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH. PERMIT T EE'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT: DEPARTMENT PUEI. • NORKS (SIGNATURE) SIGNATURE DATE GENERAL SERVICES FIRE GRADING PLANNING E/MIP Proposed Sound Wall BY: Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbytenan — Upper Campus One Hoag Drive Newport Beach, California MACTEC Project 4953-08-1091 Dear Mr. Kubitz: APPROVAL TO ISSUE DATE: We are pleased to submit the results of our geotechnical consultation for the proposed sound wall located on the north campus of the Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian campus in Newport Beach, California. Our predecessor firm of LeRoy Crandall and Associates (LCA) previously performed geotechnical investigations for numerous buildings at the hospital campus; a number of our prior projects are in the immediate vicinity of the proposed sound wall. The results of the prior pertinent geotechnical investigations are presented in the following reports: • Parking Structure; report dated November 23. 1971 (LCA Project No. A- 71235). • Nursing Wing and Power Plant; report dated August 15, 1969 (LCA Project No. A-69080). Data from the prior pertinent subsurface explorations adjacent to the proposed sound wall as presented in the prior reports referenced above are considered applicable for the proposed wall. We accept responsibility for the use and interpretation of the data presented in these reports, and we concur with the interpretation of data as presented in the reports. No new borings were drilled for this geotechnical consultation. Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian —Geotechnical Consultation July 8, 2008 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc.. Project 4953-08-1091 PROJECT DESCRIPTION It is planned to construct a sound wall along West Hoag Drive at the Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian -Upper Campus. The height of the new sound wall will range from 14 feet to 23 feet as indicated Figure 1, Plot Plan. The proposed sound wall consists of segmented wall sections supported on posts that are 6 to 8 feet on center. SOIL CONDITIONS Our prior explorations show fill soils, 1 to 15 feet in thickness, in some of the borings previously drilled adjacent to the proposed sound wall project. Deeper fill may be encountered at locations not previously explored. The fill soils consist predominantly of silty sand, sandy silt, clay and clayey silt. The natural soils beneath the fill or beneath consist of silty sand, silt and clay, and sand. Shale was encountered in Boring 12 just north of the proposed wall. The upper natural soils are moderately firm. The siltstone has medium expansion potential. The expansion test results are attached in the Appendix. Water was encountered in the previous borings adjacent to the site as shallow as 141/2 feet (in Boring 19) below the ground surface. The logs of selected borings adjacent to the proposed sound wall are presented in the attached Appendix. RECOMMENDATIONS Drilled Pile Foundations The proposed sound wall may be supported on drilled cast -in -place concrete piles established in the natural soils. The allowable downward and upward capacities of 12-, 16- and 18-inch-diameter drilled cast in place concrete piles are presented as a function of penetration into natural soils on Figure 2, Drilled Pile Capacities. Please note that if uncertified fill soils are present below the pile caps at the proposed pile locations, the portions of the piles within the fill soils should be ignored in the support of the axial load based on Figure 2. The pile capacities shown on Figure 2 are dead- 2 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian —Geotechnical Consullation July 8, 2008 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, inc., Project 4953-08-1091 plus -live Toad capacities; a one-third increase may be used for wind or seismic loads. The capacities presented are based on the strength of the soils; the compressive and tensile strength of thepile sections should be checked to verify the structural capacity of the piles. Piles in groups should be spaced at least 3 pile widths on centers. If the piles are so spaced, no reduction in the downward capacities need be considered due to group action. Settlement We estimate the settlement of the proposed wall, supported on piles in the manner recommended, to be less that''/a inch and the differential settlement to be less than inch. Lateral Capacities Lateral loads may be resisted by the piles, by soil friction on the side of the pile caps and by the passive resistance of the soils on pile caps. We have computed the lateral capacities of the piles using the computer program LPILE by ENSOFT, Inc. Resistance of the soils adjacent to 12, 16, and 18-inch-diameter drilled concrete piles that are at least 30 feet long are shown in the following tables for top of pile deflection of'% and '/z inch. These resistances have been calculated assuming both fixed and five -head pile conditions for minimum pile lengths corresponding to the "Depth to Zero Moment" shown on the table below. The lateral resistance of other sizes of piles may be assumed to be proportional to the pile diameter. Lateral Capacity 12-inch-diameter Concrete Pile Pile Head Deflection (inches) % '/ Pile Head Condition Free Fixed Free Fixed Lateral Load (kips) 5 13 10 25 Maximum Moment (ft-kips) 15 45 30 90 Depth to Maximum Moment (ft) 5 - 0 5 0 Depth to Zero Moment (ft) 14 16 14 16 3 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian—Geotechnical Consultation MACTECEngineering and Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 Lateral Capacity 16-inch-diameter Concrete Pile July 8, 2008 Pile Head Deflection (inches) '/ % Pile Head Condition Free Fixed Free Fixed Lateral Load (kips) 8 21 16 43 Maximum Moment (ft-kips) 29 90 57 178 Depth to Maximum Moment (ft) 6 0 6 0 Depth to Zero Moment (ft) 17 20 17 20 Lateral Capacity 18-inch-diameter Concrete Pile Pile Head Deflection (inches) 1% Pile Head Condition Free Fixed Free Fixed Lateral Load (kips) 10 25 20 52 Maximum Moment (ft-kips) 38 118 75 235 Depth to Maximum Moment (ft) 6'% 0 6' 0 Depth to Zero Moment (ft) 19 22 19 22 Prepared by LT 7/3/08 Checked by: HP 7/8/08 Piles in groups are not anticipated; however if pile in groups are needed, the following recommendations apply. If piles in groups spaced at least 3 pile diameters on centers, no reduction in the lateral capacities need be considered for the first row of piles and the piles located in the direction perpendicular to loading. For subsequent rows in the direction of loading, piles in groups spaced closer than 8 pile diameters on centers will have a reduction in lateral capacity due to group effects. Therefore, the lateral capacity of piles in groups, except for the first row of piles, spaced at 3 pile diameters on centers, may be assumed to be reduced by half. The reduction of lateral capacity in the direction of loading for other pile spacing may be interpolated. The passive resistance of soils against pile caps may be assumed to be equal to the pressure developed by a fluid with a density of 200 pounds per cubic foot. A one-third increase in the passive value may be used for wind or seismic loads. The resistance of the piles and the passive 4 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian —Geotechnical Consultation July 8, 2008 MACTECEngineering and Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 resistance of the materials against pile caps may be combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance. Installation of Drilled Piling There could be some caving of the soils during drilling of the piles, especially within the existing fill soils and some of the natural sand deposits. Special techniques, such as casing, may be required to install the piles to the design lengths. Observation The drilling of the piles and the placing of the concrete shall be observed continuously by the Geotechnical Engineer of record or their representative. The Geotechnical Engineer of record or their representative should also verify that pile excavations have achieved at least the design diameters and design penetrations below the pile caps. Grading All required fill should be uniformly well compacted and observed and tested during placement. The on -site soils can be used in any required fill. Site Preparation After excavating as recommended, the exposed soils should be carefully observed for the removal of all unsuitable deposits. Next, the exposed soils should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, brought to near -optimum moisture content, and compacted with appropriate. At Least the upper 6 inches of the exposed soils should be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density obtainable by the ASTM Designation D1557-07 method of compaction. Excavations and Temporary Slopes Where excavations are deeper than about 4 feet, the sides of the excavations should be sloped back at 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) or shored for safety. Unshored excavations should not extend below a plane drawn at 1'/z:l (horizontal to vertical) extending downward from adjacent existing footings. 5 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian —Geotechnical Consultation July 8, 2008 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 Excavations should be observed by personnel of our firm so that any necessary modifications based on variations in thesoil conditions can be made. All applicable safety requirements and regulations, including OSHA regulations, should be met. Where there is not sufficient space for sloped embankments, shoring will be required. Comnaction Any required fill should be placed in loose lifts not more than 8-inches-thick and compacted. The fill should be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum density obtainable by the ASTM Designation D1557-07 method of compaction. The moisture content of the on -site soils at the time of compaction should vary no more than 2% below or above optimum moisture content. Backfill All required backfill should be mechanically compacted in layers; flooding should not be permitted. Proper compaction of backfill will be necessary to reduce settlement of the backfill and to reduce settlement of overlying slabs and paving. Backfill should be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density obtainable by the ASTM Designation D1557-07 method of compaction. The on -site soils can be used in the compacted backfill. Material for Fill The onsite soils, less any debris or organic matter, can be used in required fills. Cobbles larger than 4 inches in diameter should not be used in the fill. Any required import material should consist of relatively non -expansive soils with an expansion index of less than 35. The imported materials should contain sufficient fines (binder material) so as to be relatively impermeable and result in a stable subgrade when compacted. All proposed import materials should be approved by our personnel prior to being placed at the site. GENERAL LIMITATIONS Our professional services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants practicing in this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this letter. 6 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian—Geotechnical Consultation July 8, 2008 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 The scope of this consultation did not include geologic or seismic studies for the site. Accordingly, our conclusions and recommendations are for static loading conditions only; however, this does not imply that there is a geologic or seismic hazard affecting the site. Also, the assessment of general site environmental conditions for the presence of contaminants in the soils and ground water of the site was beyond the scope of this consultation. It has been a pleasure to be of professional service to you. Please call if you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, MAC'EC Engineering and Consulting, Inc. Lan-Anh Tran Project Engineer P:14953 Geotech12008 proj181091 (4 copies submitted) Attachment: Figure I Figure 2 Appendix Marshall Lew, Ph.D. Senior Principal Vice President Hoag -Sound Wa1I4,1 Repons14953-08-10911tr01.doc Vicinity Map Drilled Piles Capacities Previous Explorations vFOFESSipy9 4�?SHALL 4 No,522 Exp. 3-31-09 c �9 FeTECH%\* °f CAL \**P 7 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian —Geotechnical Consultation July 8, 2008 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 FIGURES FIGURES f, LEGEND: 19I PRIOR PROJECTAM9090 +� e PRIOR PROJECT 471235 BORtNMNG LOCATION AND NUMBER REFERENCE: �. SOUND WALL PLANTING DIAGRAM, HOAG MEMORIAL.. Q HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN DATED.APRIL 11 200S PENETRATION INTO NATURAL SOILS (in feet) 0 6 12 18 24 30 0 ALLOWABLE DOWNWARD PILE CAPACITY (kips) 10 20 30 40 50 11 — n \\ 1 1 III 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I _ — — 12-inch Diameter 16-inch Diameter 18-inch Diameter — - \ \ \ \ - \\ • 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 \ x. 1 \ 1 \ NN. _ 1 1'_I I 0 5 10 15 20 ALLOWABLE UPWARD PILE CAPACITY (kips) 25 NOTES: (I ) The indicated values refer to the total of dead plus live loads; a one-third increase may be used when considering wind or seismic loads. (2) Piles in groups should be spaced a minimum of 3 pile diameters on centers. (3) The indicated values are based on the strength of the soils; the actual pile capacities may be limited to lesser values by the strength of the piles. DRILLED PILE CAPACITIES Prepared/Date: LT 07/03/08 Checked/Date: HP 07/07/08 Proposed Sound Wall Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Newport Beach, California MACTEC Project No. 4953-08-1091 Figure 2 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian —Geotechnical Consultation July 8, 2008 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 APPENDIX PREVIOUS EXPLORATIONS Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian —Geotechnical Consu/tation - .luly 8, 2008 MACTECEngineering and Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION A-71235 oUts rt !J6J/ UMIG %/ - J `// "6(,y-7 U.t.E•.lq. CUHKU LEROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES NOTE. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES CNLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. r O O 9N1d09 AO C N 0 (,Ail '� 0 1 1 1 ij c("i, 1. 1 c • u p N AS A Oz -O. O N W co �W A cz — IV OD Oa V N (h V A .43 UI .Vq W O pc,�� P % O U P r �s * Elevations refer to datum of reference drawing; see Plate 1 for location of benchmark. tea ' X r r r $vv0-v; m -C ING w s Y H n2 D mm .1 D Z m co � N o�.g a +' =_0 0 s v •C a. p. d- - O Z cr.�e = 4 2 v 3: 0" g .3 -1D 1 I ` 1 i.. - �- 7 v as �. con. <° it > D Q 7 Z { 4 tel r —I R 'I Cr OFA Oy \ T� r 4O yf J oe • 9 a F • y s °� TA g4lq0 rn F \ 5 Q co z grn m zo c r N r rn rn 00CD XI t y ° m 0° co N C n UVo-n-.r / t_ J✓ Vk1I c / / .� t r V^, -r-i. V:Cplyr G i t .51 EROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES NOTE THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY, AT THE SPECIFIC BORING LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES, r 0 9NIdO8 AO -. N N 0 In h 0 N V 0 11.11 po O N UM OIL N. Xo.z6 'puoS autos- AYIJ JU IIS SANDY SILT - micaceous, greyish -brown Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian—Geotechnical Consultation July 8, 2008 MACThCEngineering and Consulting Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION A-69080 55 50 45 40 L 3.5 BORING 2 DATE DRILLED : April 28, 1969 EQUIPMENT USED:18"-Diometer Bucket i ,f- I ]F S FILL. - SILTY SAND end SANDY SILT MIXTURE - about 20% debris of wood, wire, rootlets, dark 12. • brown and grey 5 I 10. I/7 1 r 19. 105 ry,Cg l,l Clayey ,4 SILTY SAND - fine, brown 9,7 102 i 1 t3tj SILTY CLAY - jointed, mottled grey and brawn iv 29.2 95 SAND - fine, brown L o 4.9 99 Lenses of Silt .. . NOTE: Woter not encountered. No caving. PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (PROJECT No. A-69080) LOG OF BORING LEROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (PROJECT No. A-69080) — 1 { Altb '' ' ";/ti ak 1 Ob1[. p�Q • BORING 3 DATE DRILLED . April 28, 1969 EQUIPMENT USED. 18"-b; ,eter Bucket % `v ! / 7 - tLLVA1IUN OC.0 60 - 5 8.5 113 . s;' ^.Er_ •C FILL - CLAYEY SAND ond'SOY CLAY MIXTURE - brown 16-4 113 tr 55 -I L i0 8.5 113 If SAND - fine, some Cloy, brown • 1 50 6.7 4.5 101 109 a- Coarse, few gravel %/ SR.TY CLAY - mottled grey and brown I- // NOTE: Water encountered at a depth of 39'; water 1 ; 45 15 30.7 910 level of a depth of 40' 15 minutes after can- Pletion of drilling. No caving. 30.0 94 , 40 -jl r 7/ 25 7.8 88 SAND - fine, light grey 35 17.6 101 _ • Cemented layer r Layer of SILTY SAND 30 4.2 11 I N ' Few grovel 25 i I Layer SILTY SAND 19.5 106 of 20 - Clayey, mottled dory grey and brown 45 38.1 83 .111 NL SANDY SILT - mottled grey and brawn L'EROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATCS • 4,71 3.3- 0. I 29.31 95 501 1 1�29.7; 94 • 45 - L 1 8:31 105 9.8! 105' 1 I 104 100 20_ 6„,5' - 404 • 25: 5.0 I I 35 -r F j 242' 93 95 30-1 I I 3.4 12 7118 i 1 251 I i 1_ a1 14.3 117 1 1 1 ! 20 ff 1 45.I-42.3J 78 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (PROJECT No. A-69080) — BORING 5 DATE DRILLED: May 2, 1969 £OUIPMENT. USED: 18"-Diameter Bucket ELEVATION Q � FILL -Sp.TY SAND and CLAYEY SILTMV(1URE - brown CLAYEY SAND - fine, rootlets, brown l/. SAND - fine, some Clay, light brown SILTY CLAY - jointed, mottled grey and brown NOTE: Water encountered at a depth of 36'; water level at a depth of 38' 15 minutes after com- pletion of drilling. No caving: SILTY SEND - fine, light grey Brownish -grey Layer of CLAYEY SAND SANDY SILT - some mica, brownish -grey CLAYEY SAND - fine, few gravel, brownish -grey SAND - fine, few grovel, some Cloy, mottled brown . and grey SILTY CLAY - jointed, grey LOG OF BORING LEROT CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (PROJECT No. A-69080) 1 • `�O qJ Aa/? ol- •51 <V • cr 60 55 45 40 35 25 BORING 6 DATE DRILLED April 29, 1969 EQUIPMENT USED: 18"-Diameter Bucket lit MC SM FILL - CLAYEY SILT cad SILTY SAND MIXTURE - some organic matter, few pieces of concrete, 9.2 114 metal, mottled brown and grey { 5--� 12.6 103 a.* -�,. '- Pieces of asphaltic paving - 4 i0 !1I 10.6 102 $ 1. i } •: SP SAND - fine, light brownish -grey f 2UJ i 6.1 130 R Layer of SANDY SILT - light grey SANDY SILT - brownish -grey 12.91 115 i1 ML 11.01 117 1 2' SM SILTY SAND - fine, light brown 8.2 94 t Y MI SANDY SILT -sane mica, light brownish -grey 30 26.i 94 40.5 80 SILTY CLAY —jointed, grey / CL Cemented layer 35 45.0 78 / NOTE: W ter encountered at a depth of 35,5'; wade level at a depth of 35.5' 10 minutes after completion of drilling. - No caving. .n 59.0 63 LOG OF -BORING ii LEROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES 65 60 55 45 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (PROJECT No. A-69080) BORING 8 DATE DRILLED. May 7, 1969 EQu I PMENT USED: 18"-Dita,eter Bucket f 9.1 127 1.'. : 1 ; ; SM FILL - SILTY SAND and CLAYEY SILT MIXTURE - few pieces of concrete, wood, brown 5— 1© 10.1 123 1 -k 11.6 10.7 110 114 A SC SM CLAYEY SAND - fine; brown SILTY SAND - fine, brown - 1J 8.2 5.4 112 102 k SP SAND - fine, light brown 4.9 j�` 96 J 4; _ NOTE: Water not encountered. Raveling from 18' to 20' {to 24" in diameter). LOG OF BORING LEROY GRANDALL ANO ASSOCIATES �1 O. //ik e. / / tLc 55 - Y {; SM. a. 16.0 110 9= 5-- ; t SM 1' 12.i 95 i:.r 11 6 R9 • • ". t0 451 26.0 94 i.';• : 401 / CL 52.0 66 . 00♦. .� ♦O♦ 24 '1+. 35'' .43.1 75 ii • O♦ •# 41.5 74 �• ♦♦ 25 30- •• ♦�• ♦ * in 42.3 74 . t:£ BORING 12 DATE DR/LLED : May 7, 1969 EQUIPMENT USED :18"-0iameter Bucket VATION 56.0 FILL SILTY SAND and SILTY CLAY MIXTURE - brown SILTY SAND - fine, brown SAND - fine, yellowish -brown Lenses of Silt SANDY SILT - grey SILTY CLAY - brownish -grey SHALE - dark brown and black NOTE Slight water seepage encountered at a depth of 1713 no water in boring at completion of drilling. No. caving. PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (PROJECT No. A-69080) LOG OF BORING LEROY CRANDALL ANO ASSOCIATES `v .7 CAC S 30t 25- 20- 14.7 108 �liSM 6' ML 1; 1 14.6 116 e Jo 4 CL 16.4 1I3 �. 24.3 101 NOTE: BORING 19 DATE DRILLED. May 5, 1969 EQUIPMENT USED _ 18"-Diameter Bucket VATION 35.5 FI L - L D and SANDY 1LT M about 40% debris of convete, wood, metal and gloss, brown and grey SANDY CLAY - dark brown Very sandy Grey Water enoounterd at a depth of 14.5'; water level at a depth of 13.5' 15 minutes after aompleHon of drill- ing. Caving from 0' to 5' (to 36" in diameter). PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (PROJECT No. A_69030) LOG OF BORING LEROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES �JV `0?A�/Sa {/� 4yp�G / 0-/ ♦,4 �/ BORING 20 DATE DRILLED . May 7, 1969 EQUIPMENT USED. 18"-Diameter Bucket tLtVAHIUN *4.0 4CH 35-1 Lam- _ 5 11.6 12 118 Pain n I. - SILTY SAND - fine, some Coy, rootlets, brown SILTY CLAY - mottled brown and grey 13.4 23.4 117 103 1 ri 46.5 74doi ? CL 1 NOTE: Water seepage encountered at a depth of 14'; no water in _boring at completion of drilling. No caving. { - I PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (PROJECT No- A,69080) LOG OF BORING LEROY CR.ANDALL . AND ASSOCIATES MACTEC engineering and constructing a better tomorrow July 8, 2008 Mr. Alan Kubitz Facilities Design and Construction Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive P.O. Box 6100 Newport Beach, Califomia 92658-6100 005¢-?,00� I�+y pY Subject: Geotechnical Consultation Proposed Sound Wall Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian — Upper Campus One Hoag Drive Newport Beach, California MACTEC Project 4953-08-1091 Dear Mr. Kubitz: We are pleasedto submit the results of our geotechnical consultation for the proposed sound wall located on the north campus of the Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian campus in Newport Beach, California. Our predecessor firm of LeRoy Crandall and Associates (LCA) previously performed geotechnical investigations for numerous buildings at the hospital campus; a number of our prior projects are in the immediate vicinity of the proposed sound wall. The results of the prior pertinent geotechnical investigations are presented in the following reports: • Parking Structure; report dated November 23. 1971 (LCA Project No. A- 71235). • Nursing Wing and Power Plant; report dated August 15, 1969 (LCA Project Na A-69080). Data from the prior pertinent subsurface explorations adjacent to the proposed sound wall as presented in the prior reports referenced above are considered applicable for the proposed wall. We accept responsibility for the use and interpretation of the data presented in these reports, and we concur with the interpretation of data as presented in the reports. No new borings were drilled for this geotechnical consultation. Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian —Geotechnical Consultation July 8, 2008 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 PROJECT DESCRIPTION It is planned to construct a sound wall along West Hoag Drive at the Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian -Upper Campus. The height of the new sound wall will range from 14 feet to 23 feet as indicated Figure 1, Plot Plan. The proposed sound wall consists of segmented wall sections supported on posts that are 6 to 8 feet on center. SOIL CONDITIONS Our prior explorations show fill soils, 1 to 15 feet in thickness, in some of the borings previously drilled adjacent to the proposed sound wall project. Deeper fill may be encountered at locations not previously explored. The fill soils consist predominantly of silty sand, sandy silt, clay and clayey silt. The natural soils beneath the fill or beneath consist of silty sand, silt and clay, and sand. Shale was encountered in Boring 12 just north of the proposed wall. The upper natural soils are moderately firm. The sihstone has medium expansion potential. The expansion test results are attached in the Appendix. Water was encountered in the previous borings adjacent to the site as shallow as 14'% feet (in Boring 19) below the ground surface. The logs of selected borings adjacent to the proposed sound wall are presented in the attached Appendix. RECOMMENDATIONS Drilled Pile Foundations The proposed sound wall may be supported on drilled cast -in -place concrete piles established in the natural soils. The allowable downward and upward capacities of 12-, 16- and 18-inch-diameter drilled cast in place concrete piles are presented as a function of penetration into natural soils on Figure 2, Drilled Pile Capacities. Please note that if uncertified fill soils are present below the pile caps at the proposed pile locations, the portions of the piles within the fill soils should be ignored in the support of the axial load based on Figure 2. The pile capacities shown on Figure 2 are dead- 2 1 1 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian —Geotechnical Consultation July 8, 2008 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 plus -live Load capacities; a one-third increase may be used for wind or seismic loads. The capacities presented are based on the strength of the soils; the compressive and tensile strength of the pile sections should be checked to verify the structural capacity of the piles. Piles in groups should be spaced at least 3 pile widths on centers. If the piles are so spaced, no reduction in the downward capacities need be considered due to group action. Settlement We estimate the settlement of the proposed wall, supported on piles in the manner recommended, to be less than' 'A inch and the differential settlement to be Tess than ''A inch. Lateral Capacities Lateral loads may be resisted by the piles, by soil friction on the side of the pile caps and by the passive resistance of the soils on pile caps. We have computed the lateral capacities of the piles using the computer program LPILE by ENSOFT, Inc. Resistance of the soils adjacent to 12, 16, and 18-inch-diameter drilled concrete piles that are at least 30 feet long are shown in the following tables for top of pile deflection of 'A and' 'A inch. These resistances have been calculated assuming both fixed and free -head pile conditions for minimum pile lengths corresponding to the "Depth to Zero Moment" shown on the table below. The lateral resistance of other sizes of piles may be assumed to be proportional to the pile diameter. Lateral Capacity 12-inch-diameter Concrete Pile Pile Head Deflection (inches) '4 ,% Pile Head Condition Free Fixed Free Fixed Lateral Load (kips) 5 13 10 25 Maximum Moment (ft-kips) 15 45 30 90 Depth to Maximum Moment (ft) 5 0 5 0 Depth to Zero Moment (ft) 14 16 14 16 3 ,. 1 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian—Geotechnical Consultation MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 Lateral Capacity 16-inch-diameter Concrete Pile July 8, 2008 Pile Head Deflection (inches) ,% ya Pile Head Condition Free Fixed Free Fixed Lateral Load (kips) 8 21 16 43 Maximum Moment (ft-kips) 29 90 57 178 Depth to Maximum Moment (ft) 6 0 6 0 Depth to Zero Moment (ft) 17 20 17 20 Lateral Capacity 18-inch-diameter Concrete Pile Pile Head Deflection (inches) % 1% Pile Head Condition Free Fixed Free Fixed Lateral Load (kips) 10 25 20 52 Maximum Moment (ft-kips) 38 118 75 235 Depth to Maximum Moment (ft) 6'h 0 6'/ 0 Depth to Zero Moment (ft) 19 22 19 22 Prepared by LT 7/3/08 Checked by: HP 7/8/08 Piles in groups are not anticipated; however if pile in groups are needed, the following recommendations apply. If piles in groups spaced at least 3 pile diameters on centers; no reduction in the lateral capacities need be considered for the first row of piles and the piles located in the direction perpendicular to loading. For subsequent rows in the direction of loading, piles in groups spaced closer than 8 pile diameters on centers will have a reduction in lateral capacity due to group effects. Therefore, the lateral capacity of piles in groups, except for the first row of piles, spaced at 3 pile diameters on centers, may be assumed to be reduced by half. The reduction of lateral capacity in the direction of loading for other pile spacing may be interpolated. The passive resistance of soils against pile caps may be assumed to be equal to the pressure developed by a fluid with a density of 200 pounds per cubic foot. A one-third increase in the passive value may be used for wind or seismic loads. The resistance of the piles and the passive 4 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian—Geotechnical Consultation July 8, 2008 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 resistance of the materials against pile caps may be combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance. Installation of Drilled Piling There could be some caving of the soils during drilling of the piles, especially within the existing fill soils and some of the natural sand deposits. Special techniques, such as casing, may be required to install the piles to the design lengths. Observation The drilling of the piles and the placing of the concrete shall be observed continuously by the Geotechnieal Engineer of record or their representative. The Geotechnical Engineer of record or their representative should also verify that pile excavations have achieved at least the design diameters and design penetrations below the pile caps. Grading All required fill should be uniformly well compacted and observed and tested during placement. The on -site soils can be used in any required fill. Site Preparation After excavating as recommended, the exposed soils should be carefully observed tor the removal of all unsuitable deposits. Next, the exposed soils should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, brought to near -optimum moisture content, and compacted with appropriate. At least the upper 6 inches of the exposed soils should be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density obtainable by the ASTM Designation D1557-07 method of compaction. Excavations and Temporary Sloves Where excavations are deeper than about 4 feet, the sides of the excavations should be sloped back at 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) or shored for safety. Unshored excavations should not extend below a plane drawn at 1 %z:1 (horizontal to vertical) extending downward from adjacent existing footings. 5 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian —Geotechnical Consultation July 8, 2008 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 Excavations should be observed by personnel of our firm so that any necessary modifications based on variations in the soil conditions can be made. All applicable safety requirements and regulations, including OSHA regulations, should be met. Where there is not sufficient space for sloped embankments, shoring will be required. Compaction Any required fill should be placed in loose lifts not more than 8-inches-thick and compacted. The fill should be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum density obtainable by the ASTM Designation DI557-07 method of compaction. The moisture content of the on -site soils at the time of compaction should vary no more than 2% below or above optimum moisture content. Backfill All required .backfill should be mechanically compacted in layers; flooding should not be permitted. Proper compaction of backfill will be necessary to reduce settlement of the backfill and to reduce settlement of overlying slabs and paving. Backfill should be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density obtainable by the ASTM Designation D1557-07 method of compaction. The on -site soils can be used in the compacted backfill. Material for Fill The onsite soils, less any debris or organic matter, can be used in required fills. Cobbles larger than 4 inches in diameter should not be used in the fill. Any required import material should consist of relatively non -expansive soils with an expansion index of less than 35. The imported materials should contain sufficient fines (binder material) so as to be relatively impermeable and result in a stable subgrade when compacted. Alt proposed import materials should be approved by our personnel prior to being placed at the site. GENERAL LIMITATIONS Our professional services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants practicing in this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this letter. 6 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian—Geotechnical Consultation July 8, 2008 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 The scope of this consultation did not include geologic or seismic studies for the site. Accordingly, our conclusions and recommendations are for static loading conditions only; however, this does not imply that there is a geologic or seismic hazard affecting the site. Also, the assessment of general site environmental conditions for the presence of contaminants in the soils and ground water of the site was beyond the scope of this consultation. It has been a pleasure to be of professional service to you. Please call if you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, MACTEC Engineering and Consulting; Inc. 4Air— Lan-Anh Tran Project Engineer Marshall Lew, Ph.D. Senior Principal Vice President P:14953 Geotech12008proj181091 Hoag -Sound Wal114.1 Reports14953-08-10911tr01.doc (4 copies submitted) Attachment: Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Drilled Piles Capacities Appendix Previous Explorations 7 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian—Geotechnical Consultation July 8, 2008 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-I091 FIGURES NM M S NM -- M-_- NE NM MN r N I M NM S x I ;PH. j CON rf F. / r, / 1 N 36 55.6 8•. 6• LEGEND: \\ �5T Existing FenceX-� Property Easement Lin r -\,148.5' High Wald\; -' p' High Wall iz High Wall 14# Hiigh WWU Secondary \ iTreament Area \ \ w � o-r o 0a MACTEC 5520 E. &ANSON AVENUE LOB ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90046 (323)809-5300 FAX (323)8995395 PLOT PLAN PROPOSED SOUND WALL HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERUW ONE HOAG DRIVE - NEWPORT BEACH, CALWORNL PROJECT NO. 4953-08-1091 REVISION: CONC. ss — LEGEND: 19 • PRIOR PROJECT A-69080 1 e PRIOR PROJECT A-71235 FIGURE 1 BORINING LOCATION AND NUMBER Primary Treament Areas CONC. 62.9 �\ \ x :Sv \` Secondary Treament Area DATE: 6/19/08 SCALE: 1"= 40' DWG BY: TT CHECKED BY: 17 N REFERENCE: SOUND WALL PLANTING DIAGRAM, HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN, DATED APRIL 11, 2009 L.. I(`X) 0 20 40 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 w 6 rn a 0 12 0 18 0 tr.) W 24 30 0 0 ALLOWABLE DOWNWARD PILE CAPACITY (kips) 10 20 30 40 50 1 1 _ \\ 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I I l I 1 1 1 I l l l I- _ — — Diameter Diameter Diameter 12-inch 16-inch 18-inch _ — \\ \\ \ _ — \ I1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \ _ N- 1 1' .1. 1 5 10 15 20 ALLOWABLE UPWARD PILE CAPACITY (kips) 25 NOTES: (1) The indicated values refer to the total of dead plus live loads; a one-third increase may be used when considering wind or seismic loads. (2) Piles in groups should be spaced a minimum of 3 pile diameters on centers. (3) The indicated values arebased on the strength of the soils; the actual pile capacities may be limited to lesser values by the strength of the piles. DRILLED PILE CAPACITIES Proposed Sound Wall Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Newport Beach, California MACTEC Prepared/Date: LT 07/03/08 Checked/Date: HP 07/07/08 Project No. 4953-08-1091 Figure 2 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian —Geotechnical Consultation July 8, 2008 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 APPENDIX PREVIOUS EXPLORATIONS • Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian—Geotechnical Consultation July 8, 2008 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION A-71235 1 1 i 1 1 :J u 5 >.i j 1 w 0 z1 a0, 0 0 0R. za Q U ' 0 z J 0 I- Cr Q W 0 I- o0 zCD 1-7 mz 0 0 • 0 z aw0o N to.V xa rw m a0, m J 0) Z Ou 0 co ww J J 0- 4• - 2 w 0 W o� 0w L. Li z w. 3m 00 N r. 0 Nw z ; o17- Q cc o0 03 V O w Z t`,� / �� BORING I V `��/JQ. ��`a�\�\, DATE DRILLED : October 28 8 29, 1971 � .� s, 6 QF cam Q`' EQUIPMENT USED: 18"-Diameter Bucket / �Q iflk ° te) iyp� F ELEVATION 66-1* 65- FILL - SILTY SAND, SAND and SANDY SILT MIXTURE - mottled brown and grey 15.7 96 f SM SILTY SAND - fine, brown 60- 7.2 116 SC CLAYEY SAND - fine, reddish -brown 10 55 8.8 101 Light greyish -brown 15 �- 31 .2 89 1 Very clayey MI SANDY SILT - greyish -brown 34.8 86 SAND - fine and medium, few gravel, few shells, 20 . -: .. SP 45- patches of Silty Clay, brown 3.9 110 ;�. 25 40 Layer of Silt Light grey and brown 3.7 93 �. 30 35 * Elevations refer to datum of reference drawing; 6.2 95 • -•.. see Plate 1 for location of benchmark. 8.0 94 g.::•: 35 30- 12.4 99 1-Q:: Silty (CONTINUED ON FOLLOWING PLATE) LOG OF BORING LEROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES PI ATF A-1 I I I I I i I I I I I I I 1 LO • 2 • 2 2 0 2< Z Q 00 O 2 0 R 0 - O00 0 1- 2 a moo 0 IC LLa Z w O au co W wu S Q �cc m a au, J 2 O o 0 al J as Q Z w Z O CC mu w W 2° O • 0 a NW 2 G F- re • ce 03 u 1- w O • 2 0- - D 7 VI N a W O< V_ 0a O Z J N Li]e- F =a I- a � w F- O 2 BORING I (CONTINUED) `\\Q � • g\'L/ DATE DRILLED October 288.29, 1971 �j���,o•�Q�' EQUIPMENT USED: 18"-Diometer Bucket • .v 25 45 7.0 31.9 102 89 � 001 ML 20 IPVCL .2 1 � 1 al bra Ft SANDY SILT - micaceous, greyish -brown SILTY CLAY - some Sand, grey SAND - well graded, few gravel, grey (BORING TERMINATED DUE TO HEAVY SLOUGH- ING) NOTE: Water encountered at a depth of 54'; water level at a depth of 51' at completion of drilling. Heavy sloughing below 53'. LOG OF BORING I EROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES A -9 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian —Geotechnical Consultation July 8, 2008 MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., Project 4953-08-1091 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION A-69080 55 t 5o 45- L354.- 4.9 251 11 99 BORING 2 DATE DRILLED : April 28, 1969 EQUIPMENT USED: 'aft -Diameter Bucket FILL - SILTY SAND end SANDY SILT MIXTURE - about 20% debris of wood, wire, rootlets, dark brown and grey Clayey SILTY SAND - fine, brown SILTY CLAY - jointed, mottled grey and brown SAND - fine, brown Lenses of Silt NOTE: Water not encountered. No caving. PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (PROJECT No. A-69080) LOG OF BORING LEROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES i PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (PROJECT No. A-69080) P 5 •>, J? /Q p y BORING 3 DATE DRILLED . April 28, 1969 EQUIPMENT USED 18"-Diameter Bucket ELEVATION 62.0 60 - 50 4 f. 4 40 -I 35 - fr 30 5 10 8.5 113 16_4 8.5 113 113 C FILL - CLAYEY SAND and 'SILTY CLAY MIXTURE - brown 6.7 101 4.5 109 15 30.7 91 20 30.0 94 25 7.8 88 i : 17.6 101 400. 35 4.2 111 25 -I I Mt hI 9 5 1 j1it 20 i .. II 45 38.1 83 MIL SAND - fine, same Clay, brown Coarse, few gravel SILTY CLAY - mottled grey and brown NOTE: Water encountered at a depth of 39'; water level at a depth of 40' 15 minutes after com- pletion of drilling. No caving. SAND - fine, Tight grey Cemented layer Layer of SILTY SAND Few grovel Layer of SILTY SAND Clayey, mottled dory grey and brown SANDY SILT - mottled grey and brown L'EROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (PROJECT No. A-69080) — J e1 �' \,�iai0F. ic. i 1 8:3, 105 60 5= 9.8r 105' 4.71 104 ■. ti 551 3.3. 100 jar- 1 BORING 5 DATE DRILLED : May 2, 1969 EQUIPMENT USED : 18"—Diameter Bucket ELEVATION t FILL -SIETY SAND and CLAYEY SILTMIXTURE - brown CLAYEY SAND - fine, rootlets, brown 29.3 5.4 29.7 45j Y 20 6,5 9.44_11. 40 -1 25: 5.0 93 I { t r 20 j 95 401 14.3 117 45i .42_ _31_._78 NIL SAND - fine, some Clay, light brown SILTY CLAY - jointed, mottled grey and brown NOTE: Water encountered at a depth of 36';'water level at a depth of 38' 15 minutes after com- pletion of drilling. No caving. SILTY SAN D - fine, light grey Brownish -grey Layer of CLAYEY SAND SANDY SILT - some mica, brownish -grey CLAYEY SAND - Fine, few gravel, brownish -grey SAND —fine, few grovel, some Clay, mottled brown and grey SILTY CLAY - jointed, grey LOG OF BARING LEROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r� 6 5 50 45 40 35 30 25 `a /S/ a 4,4 (. - Q `� p�/etldOP PREVIOUS DATE EQUIPM INVESTIGATION (PROJECT No. A-69080) BORING 6 DRILLED April 29, 1969 ENT USED : 18"-Diameter Bucket 9.2 114 r `ir cirl ML SM FILL - CLAYEY SILT and SILTY SAND MIXTURE - some organic matter, few pieces of concrete, metal, mottled brown and grey 45 t+4: 12.6 103 Y. Pieces of asphaltic paving .4 10 10.6 102 :y 11.4 s 114.5 5P SAND - fine, light brownish -grey 6.1 130 1 �_L Layer of SANDY SILT - light grey t 20-1---- 12.91 115 1 SANDY SILT - brownish -grey ML 11.0 117 1 25 SM SILTY SAND - fine, light brown 8.2 94 l . ML SANDY SILT - some mica, light brownish -grey 26.i 94 40.5 80 CL SILTY CLAY —jointed, grey Cemented layer 35 45:0 78 % NOTE: W ter encountered at o depth of 35.5'; wotei level at a depth of 35.5' 10 minutes after completion of drilling. No caving. en 59 0 63 LOG OF BORING LEROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES 1 1 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (PROJECT No. A-69080) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 •�� BORING 9 �`�Jp� /�y`J��`v DATE DRILIEO May 7, 1969 ,� �,\� `ya{ .py� PQ EQUIPMENT USED :19 Diameter Bucket �Q poy�/ ELEVATION 69.0 651 60 -1 55 -)10.7 45 5-- F10 15 20 9.1 127 ~` i e' SM ML FILL - SILTY SAND and CLAYEY SILT MIXTURE - few pieces of concrete, wood, brown 10.1 123 11.6 8.2 5.4 4.9 110 114 (/ - �f�r SC CLAYEY SAND - fine; brown 112 102 1; r 1 -` SM SILTY SAND — fine, brown ' . • SP SAND - fine, light brown 96 NOTE: Water not encountered. Raveling from 18' to 20' (to 24" in diameter). LOG OF BORING LEROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 / BORING 12 Lt%*) 4° Cbikt�� F DATE DRILLED : May 7, 1969 ,s,0�`,c.T/\ter\ 44, c, Q" EQUIPMENT USED :18"-Diameter Bucket / Of f aC I° °izr ELE 6+v�.. 55 - {{;((�,.$$$� 16.0 110 f fg 1Ii1® _ SP 12.1 95 1- 1 45 i 26.0 94 401- 15 _22.-6. ._ - MID oils 52.0 66 „*' '•isi -20 p4v 35 - .43,1 75 ���i «' ►f�1 ►-t. - 25. 4i•5 74 li r• 4 . • ♦ t: Est: �4 zn 42.3 74 • i 4 VATION 36.0 FILL- SILTY SAND and SILTY CLAY MIXTURE - brown SILTY SAND - fine, brown SAND - fine, yellowish -brown Lenses of Silt SANDY SILT - grey SILTY CLAY - brownish -grey SHALE - dark brown and block NOTE: Slight water seepage encountered at a depth of 17'; no water in boring of completion of drilling. No caving. PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (PROJECT No. A-69080) LOG OF .BORING LEROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES 1 1 BORING 19 1 1 1 1 1. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (i. iQQ.��`1P{�`� ` /�� PF• 4%`. <��.� DATE DRILLED May 5, 1969 .o ..,t, / a`�„, GA �Q\ EQUIPMENT USED- 18"-Diameter Bucket 5P v CLt 35 /� 251WI 20- 14.7 . 100 1ihi lr S� d] f30 1 14.6 116 n pe / >% NOTE: CL 16.4 113 24.3 101 VATION 35.5 FILL - SILTY SAND and SANDY SILT MIXTURE - about 40% debris of concrete, wood, metal and gloss, brown and grey SANDY CLAY - dark brown Very sandy Grey Water encounterd at a depth of 14.5'; water level at I a depth of 13.5' 15 minutes after completion of drill- ing. Caving from 0' to 5' (to 36" in dlameter). PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (PROJECT No. A-69030) LOG OF BORING LEROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a , ` JQ 6/.' BORING 20 DATE DR It LED . May 7, 1969 EQUIPMENT USED. I8"-Diameter Bucket ELEVATION 44.0 1 I 40-j 5 i 11.6 17 7 118 122 ` : ML FELL _STET SILTY SAND - fine, sortie Clay, rootlets, brown SILTY CLAY - mottled brown and grey 1' 1: SM CL 351 }} 13.4 23.4 117 103 i II, s -= 1 ' 30 101 1- 46.5 74 NOTE: Water seepage encountered at a depth of 14'; no water in boring at completion of drilling. No caving. PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (PROJECT No. A-6908O) LOG OF BORING LEROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES GI .ENT HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL SOUND WALL Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian West Hoag Drive Newport Beach, CA 92663 STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS Scope: c PIRES 6/30/09 To provide construction drawings and structural calculations for the construction of a sound barrier wall. The sound wall consists of four wall segments each varying in length and height, the first segment is 55'9" feet long and 17' feet high, the second segment is 149'7" feet long and 23' feet high, the third segment is 117'3" long and 18'6" feet high, and the fourth segment is 151'5" feet long and 14' feet high. The total length of the wall will be approximately 474'. Its construction will consist of a line of steel wide -flange posts at a typical spacing of 6'2"• centers. Each post will be anchored to a continuous 24" deep grade beam that will be attached to caissons at 12'4" centers. Proprietary sound panels act as lagging fitting between the flanges of the posts. References: 1. 2007 California Building Code (CBC) 2. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE/SEI 7-05), American Society of Civil Engineers, 2005 3. Manual of Steel Construction, 13th Edition, American Institute of Steel Construction, 2006 4. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-05), American Concrete Institute, 2005 5. Geotechnical Report, MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., July 8, 2008, January 22, 2009, and March 19, 2009 their project no. 4953-08-1091 CITY OF hi. ii.PERGIVAL GE EnE PLANS P CONSTRUCT PIE ORDINANCES, FLV ANI (OVA._ DOES l T GUARANTEE EAT COMPLIANCE WILE LJiY. BUI_DN__ (HE (III;i iENEIAGRIET BErIS piRL_ REVISE. IIRE BUILDINGSTRLICILJ- BIR"CLR(L. OURING SIEI ELPTEIIId, iLWOM ii Id5_ ORGINAIiCES.PENS AI,D POLICIES OF THE CITY C7 UREVJSIONS TO ORIGINAL CALCULATIONS 'AA; ION OE OR slCIGNSIIPLILN) :ORIGINALLY DATED: October 2, 2008 INE ARE, It, ALL RES"I STE Li -Revision:1-12-09 RV,I I ; EE'SACKNOWiEDGMENT. _ RE) SIGN :URE Revision: 3 24 09 FIRL err ;WV,. 't,mast Peterson Structural te3ktn8ret Inc. 53195.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97221-2411 Phone (503) 292-1635 Fax: (503) 292-9945 —project File: PSE\calculations revised.doc date OCT 0;2.3008 designer Mrs sheet ' of 5 7 Table of Contents Wall Plan View and Elevation 3 Seismic Force 4 Wind Force 6 All Wall Segments 7 Sound Panel Description/Calculations 7 Support Channels 9 Wall Segment 1 16 Post 1 16 Base Plate 17 Cast -in -Place Anchor Bolts 17 Grade Beam 20 Caissons 21 Wall Segment 2 26 Post 2 26 Base Plate 26 Cast -in -Place Anchor Bolts 27 Grade Beam 30 Caissons 31 Wall Segment 3 36 Post 3 36 Base Plate 37 Cast -in -Place Anchor Bolts 37 Grade Beam 40 Caissons 41 Wall Segment 4 46 Post 4 46 Base Plate 47 Cast -in -Place Anchor Bolts 47 Grade Beam 50 Caissons 51 Utility Pipe Analysis 56 Deep Grade Beam A57 T ::::::::::::::""5 Phone (503) 292-1935 Fee: (503) 292-9846 Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. project 4,1C1:, --/ 3 .2. date OCT 0 2 20D8 designer sheet of s ps_1 SasNY Engineer;9m 5319 SW. Wnplo Mw, Sit 215 Papeµ Oragea/2413411 Mom OW 222-1935 PPE p09119341M6 Pros* Di — 132 date 1OCT O 2 2008 designer MP _5 sheet 3 of HOAG SOUND WALL One Hoag Drive Newport Beach CA 92663 2006 IBC, Section 1613, Earthquake Loads MCE Ground Motion Latitude = 33.6239 Longitude =-117.9303 Per ASCE 7-05 Ch 15 Seismic Design Requirements for Nonbuilding Structures Soil Site Class r o Response Spectral Acc. (0.2 sec) Ss = Response Spectral Acc.( 1.0 sec) Si _ Site Coefficient Fe Site Coefficient Fs= Max Considered Earthquake Acc. SMs= Max Considered Earthquake Acc. SM1= @ 5% Damped Design SDs = SD, = Pp. 11.4.2 - Class D is default 182.8 = 1.828g 68.5 = 0.685g 1.0 1.5 Fa.S,= F,.S, = 2/3(SMs) = 213(SM,) = 1.828 1.028 1.219 0.685 Building Categoriesffi standard Seismic Design Category: Seismic Design Category for 0.1sec D Seismic Design Category for 1 Osec D s1 <.75g NA 0 D Comply with Seismic Design Category D Basic Seismic Force Systems T.12.2-1 C1= Building ht. Hn= Approx Fundamental period, Ts = Use T Ta= 0.8Ts = Is structure Regular & <- 5 stories 7 Response Spectral Acc.( 0.2 sec) Ss = Response Spectral Acc.( 1.0 sec) S1= @ 5% Damped Design SDs = SD? Response Modification Coef. R = Over Strength Factor n0 = Importance factor I = Seismic Base Shear V= Controls Figure 1613.5(1) Figure 1613.5(2) Table 1613.5.3(1) Table 1613.5.3(2) Eq. 16-37 Eq. 16-38 Eq. 16-39 Eq. 16-40 ASCE 7-05 Table 1-1 ASCE 7-05 12.3 Table 1613.5.6(1) Table 1613.5.6(2) See Pp. 1613.5.6.1 Date: 7/30/2008 File: 08-132(Seismic) All other steel distributed mass cantilever structures 0.02 x = 0.75 ASCE7-05 Table 12.8-2 23 ft Limited Building Heigh[ (ft) = NP Ct(hn)x = 0.210 0.210 0.8(So,/SDs) = Yes V sec. , Eq. 12.8-7 sec. 0.548 Controls ASCE 7-05 12.8.1.3 1.5g Fa 1.00 0.685g Fy= 1.500 %(Fa.S,)= 1.000 2/aFP.S, = 0.685 3.5 1.75 1.00 C,W 0.8*S1 Cs or need not to exceed, Cs = Min Cs = 0.03, For Si > 0.6g, Min Cs = Use C, = LRFD Design base shear V = Design base shear uo = R/l SD, -0 156571 -0.932 (R/IE).T 8S, =0 157 R/I 0.348 0.348(W) 0.249 Eq. 16-39 Eq. 16-40 ASCE 7-05, TABLE 15.4-2 Signs & Billboards ASCE 7-05, TABLE 15.4-2 Signs & Billboards ASCE 7-05 - Table 11.5-1 ASCE 7-05 Eq 12.8-1 ASCE 7-05 Eq 15.4-2 ASCE 7-05 Eq 12.8-3 ASCE 7-05 Eq 12.8-5, 12.8-6 Strength Design Service Loads = V/1.4, 1605.3.2: Alt Basic Load Combinations nsz Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Orivc, SUIM 215 Ponlena, Oregon 97221-2411 Phone (503) 292-1635 Fax: (503) 292-9046 project I i2 date OCT 0 2 2008 designer P 5 sheet of Seismic Force Site Class D Importance Factor, IE = 1.0 Latitude = 3.16239° N. /\Longitude =—117.9303° W Response Spectral Acc., Ss = 1.828g, Si = 0.685g (MCE parameters) Design base shear coefficient, µ" = 0.249 (Sheet 5) Wall Segment 2 - Controls by Inspection Sound panels are approximately 6" wide, 10" high and 5' 11" long. Length, 1s = 6 feet Unit weight, ws = 5 psf Height of wall panels, hs = 23 feet Weight of one module of panels, Ws = ws*Hs*ls = 690 pounds This section consists of W12x19 with (2) 1/4"x2" F.B. welded to the web on each side. The post height is 23 feet. Their combined weight is 19 + 2*1.7 = 22.4 plf, say 23. Typical post weight, wp = 23 plf Post Height, hp = 23 feet Weight of one typical post, Wp = wp*hp= 529 pounds Two channels support the weight of the sound panels. The first is located at the base of the post and will be a C6x8.2 and the second one will be located around mid height and will be a C7x9.8. These channels extend 6'2" between pairs of posts. Length of Channel, lc = 6.2 feet Bottom channel weight, wct = 8.2 plf Intermediate channel weight, wc2 = 9.8 plf Weight of one pair of channels, We = (wci + wC2)*Ic = 111 pounds WDL = Ws+ Wp+ We = 1,330 pounds Base Shear Force per module, Vs = lb* WDL = 331 pounds Area of one wall module, Aw = LC*hp = 142 ft2 Unit seismic force, vs = Vs/Aw = 2 1fsf 'SE Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Portland Oregon 97221-2411 Phone (503) 292-1635 Far (503) 292-9646 project J _ date CCT0 2 2008 designer /v1 / J sheet 5 of Wind Force A Wind Speed = 85 mph (3-second gust) Exposure C ASCE 7-05 6.5.14, Design Wind Load on Solid Freestanding qh G CfAs Walls and Solid Signs Eq. 6-27 F = Wall height, h = s = 23 feet Figure 6-20 Wall length, B = 135 feet Figure 6-20 Aspect ratio, B/s = 5.870 Figure 6-20 Force coeff Cf = 1.34 Figure 6-20 Exposure coefficient K2= 0.93 6.5.6.6, Table 6-3 Topography factor lQ= 1.00 6.5.7.2 Directionality factor Kd = 0.9 Table 6-4 Wind Speed V = 85 mph Verified w/ building official Importance factor I = 1.00 Table 6-1 qh = 0.00256 K2 Kn Kd V2 I = 15.48 psf Eq. 6-15 Gust Effect factor G = 0.85 6.5.8 Design wind pressure, F/As = gh'G'Cf = 17.63 psf Design for p = 18 psf p = 18 psf > vs — Wind Controls SSE Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Porlen0, Oregon 97221.2411 Phone (503) 292-1635 Fax: (503) 292-9996 project date OCT 017000 designer sheet 5 of Calculations for All Wall Segments All Wall Segments Sound Panel Description/Calculations The spaces between vertical piles are infilled with sound panels which are dropped vertically between the flanges of adjacent piles. Each panel is about 10" high, 5.5" wide and 5' 1 l" long. The panels are configured as bins molded of HDPE (high density polyethylene), specifically, ExxonMobil HD 6908. To provide their sound absorption quality, the bins are filled with rock mineral wool and a layer of %x" sheathing board. Listed below are the amount of panels per wall segment. Wall Segment 1: Two stacks of 10 panels Wall Segment 2: Two stacks of 14 panels Wall Segment 3: Two stacks of 11 panels Wall Segment 4: One stack of 17 panels Structurally, the panels perform two basic functions: 1) they resist the wind forces and transfer those forces to the vertical piles and 2) they support their own gravity weight. SECTION A —A arrw.rNM_ Analysis of LSE 2000 Sound Panels Physical Properties (Sheet 10) Tensile Yield Stress, Fy = 4,070 psi Modulus of Elasticity, E= 171,800 psi Pants Stivatural Engingers,kw. 531. &W. Wes** Oda SS 2*5 Pansy; Owen .,22,44„ Reno OM) 292.1835 Fax: pm) 2024444 aroleot 03_H32 date OCT 02 2 designer Ai P5 sheet -7 of Loads Wind Load, p = 18 psf Dead Load, wp = 5 psf Panel Side Walls (cantilever up from panel bottom) Section Properties (Sheet 11) A = 1.2 in2/ft Ix = 0.029 in4/ft Sx = 0.12 in3/ft rx = 0.16 in Wind Force w = p = 18psf L=10/12=0.83 feet Flexure Murex = w*L2/2 = 6.2 ft-lb/ft FS=F41.4=6.6—OK fb = Mmax* 12/Sx = 620 psi Deflection Amax = 8 B4 * I2' — 0.37 inches x 4,11 is limited to movement inside of seat: 0.4895-0.11 = 0.3795 in 441> Aagn —DK Load Transfer to the Corrugated Ribs (Ref. "Formulas for Stress & Strain", Roark, 611' Ed., Table 26 Case la) p=l8psf=0.125psi t = 0.11 inches a = 9.5 inches b = 2 inches a/b = 4.75 = 5 inches ft = 0.7476 a = 0.1417 I3*p*b2 a= t2 =31 FS=Fia=131—OK Panel Bottom Section Properties A = 3.6 in2 Ix=41.4in4 S. = 5.9 in3 rx = 3.4 inches (Sheet13) A„ = 1.06 in2 Iy = 18.2 in4 Sy = 6.4 in3 Ty = 2.3 inches Wind Force w=p*10/12=15p1f L = 71/12 = 5.92 feet Flexure M. = w*L2/8 = 65.7 ft-lb fb = Mm,x* 12/Sy =148 psi FS = Fy/fk = 33 — OK, Deflection # # 4 # 3 A 5 w L 12=0.13"=1A546—OK 384*E*Iy '51E pitmen Wuebtal 6e00een, Inc. 53t9 SW. Mtn, 609.215 POe14M, Otero 972214411 Rims (1100 2112.n45 Roc 2926646 project $ -/32 date OCT 0 2 2008 designer 41 P J sheet 3 of on obil Chemical ExxonMobil TM HDPE HD 6908.19 Product Description HD 6908.19 is a homopolymer with outstanding stiffness with a good balance of processability and cold temperature impact performance. This resin is ideally suited for articles requiring very high stiffness or enable down -gauging. This material offers excellent performance In structural foam articles. General Availability.' • Latin America • North America • South America Additive • HD 6908.19: Antioxidant: Yes Revision Date • 2/2007 Resin Properties Typical Value (English) Typical Value (SI) Test Based On Melt Index (190°C/2.16 kg) 8.2 g/10 min 8.2 g/10 min ASTM D1238 Density _.._ 0.965 g/cm' 0.965 g/txn' _._. ASTM D4883 Thennal Typical Value (English) Typical Value (SI) Test Based On Deflection Temperature Under Load (DTUL) ASTM D648 at 66psi - Unannealed — 160 °F 71.0 °C Deflection Temperature Under Load (DTUL) ASTM D648 at 264psi - Unannealed 108 °F 42.0 °C Melting Temperature 277 °F 136 °C ASTM D3418 Molded Properties Tensile Strength at Yield Elongation at Break Flexural Modulus-1 % Secant (Procedure B) Environmental Stress -Crack Resistance Condition B, F50, 10% Igepal Typical Value (English) 4090 psi 48 % 172000 psi Typical Value (SI) 28.2 MPa 48% 1180 MPa <3.00 hr <3.00 hr Test Based On ASTM D638 ASTM D638 ASTM 13790 ASTM D1693 Impact Typical Value (English) Typical Value (SI) Test Based On Notched Izod Impact (-40 °F (-40 °C)) 1.44 ft.lbrin 76.9 J/m ASTM D256 Additional Properties Applications: - Pallets, Cases, Crates - Totes Bins - Materials Handling Articles - Hot Fill Packaging Palls - Structural Foam Articles Processing Statement 1. Properties are based on injection molded samples. 2. Test procedures may be modified to accommodate operating conditions or facility limitations. Typical properties: these are not to be construed as specifications. 02008 Exxon Mobil Corporation. To the extent the user is entitled to disclose and distribte this document, the user may forward, distribute, and/or photocopy this copyrighted document only if unaltered and complete, including all of its headers, footers, disclaimers, and other information. You may not copy this document to a Web site. ExxonMobil does not guarantee the typical (or other) values. Analysis may be performed on representative samples and not the actual product shipped. The information in this document relates only to the named product or materials when not in combination with any other product or materials. We based the information on data believed to be reliable on the date compiled, but we do not re warrant, or otherwise guarantee, expressly or impliedty, the merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, suitability, accuracy, reliability, or completeness tho ifp is information or the products, materials, or processes descried. The user is solely responsible for all determinations regarding any use of material or product and any process in Its territories of Interest. We expressly disclaim liability for any loss, damage, or injury directly or indirectly suffered or incurred as a result of or related to anyone using or relying on any of the information in this document. There Is no endorsement off any product or process, and we expressly disclaim any contrary implication. The terms, 'we', "our", •ExxonMobd Chemical', or •ExxonMobil• are used for convenience, and may include any one or more of ExxonMobil Chemical Company, Exxon Mobil Corporation, or any affiliates they directly or Indirectly steward. ExxonMobil, the ExxonMobll Chemical Emblem, the interlocking X" Device, Enable, Exceed, Exact, Exxco, Escorene, Esco, lotek, NIX, PoIyb10, Paxon and Optema are trademarks or service marks of Exxon Mobil Corporation. oownl°ad dahabeets et wwaeuamobtlpe.tom September 09.21108- Pape: 1 or 2 F Eelenan Struclatl Engineers, 6oera Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 SW Westgate' „ Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97ii., Phone: 503.292.1635 Fax: 503.292.9846 www.psengineers.com ectior Properties, Title : HOAG HOSPITAL SOUND WALL Dsgnr: CGP{ Project Desc.: Project Notes : Job # 08-132 Prnted, 2 SEP 2008, 8. Flies8198128.>o4iWgctl: .. ENtit ltcn x 1es3 i KW-0600240f1 License Owner : PETERSON STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS Description : LSE Vertical Side Final Section Pro r erties Total Area 1.1770 in"2 Calculated final C.G. distance from Datum : X cg Dist. 4.3384 in Y cg Dist. 0.22748 in Edge Distances from CG. : +X • -X +Y -Y Ixx= IYY= Sxx : -X Sxx:+X Syy: -Y Syy : +Y rxx YY GeneralShapes Rect :1 Area = 0.048 in"2 4.6216 in -4.3880 in 0.21915 in -0.23410 in 0.028559 in"4 8.0058 in"4 0.12199 inn 0.13032 inn 1.8245 inn 1.7323in"3 0.15577 in 2.6081 in Xcg = Ycg= Height = 0.110 in Width = 0.440 in Rotation = 78 dec CCW 0.050 in Ixx= 0.001 in"4 Sxx= 0.003 inn Rxx= 0.124in 0.220 in lyy = 0.000 in"4 Syy = 0.001 inn Ryy = 0.041 in Rect :2 Area= 0.165 in"2 Xcg Ycg = Height = 0.840 in 0.380 in 0.110 in Wdth = 1.500 in Ixx = 0.000 in"4 Sxx = Iyy = 0.031 in"4 Syy = Rotation = 0 dec CCW 0.003 in"3 0.041 inn Rxx = Ryy = 0.032 in 0.433 in Rect : 3 Area = 0.048 inn Xcg = Ycg = Height = 1.640 in 0.220 in 0.110 in Ixx = Iyy = Width = 0.440 in 0.001 in"4 Sxx = 0.000 in"4 Syy = Rotation = 102 dec CCW 0.003 in"3 0.001 inn Rxx= 0.124in Ryy = 0.041in Rect : 4 Area= 0.220 inn Xcg Ycg = Height = 2.680 in 0.060 in 0.110 in Width = 2.000 in Ixx = Iyy= 0.000 in44 Sxx = 0.073104 Syy = Rotation = 0.004 inn 0.073 in"3 0 dec CCW Rxx = 0.032in Ryy = 0.577 in Rect :5 Area= 0.048 inn Xcg = Ycg = Height = 3.730 in 0.220 in 0.110 in Width = 0.440 in Ixx = 0.001 in"4 Sxx = lyy = 0.000 in"4 Syy = Rotation = 78 dec CCW 0.003 in"3 0.001 in"3 Rxx= 0.124in Ryy= 0.041in Red : 6 Area= 0.165 inn Height = 0.110 in Width = 1.500 in Xcg = 4.520 in Ixx = Ycg = 0.380 in Iyy= 0.000 in"4 Sxx = 0.031 inA4 Syy = Rotation = 0 dec CCW 0.003 inn 0.041 in"3 Rxx= 0.032in Ryy = 0.433 in Rect : 7 Area = 0.048 inn Xcg = Ycg = Height = 5.320 in 0.220 in 0.110 in Width = 0.440 in Ixx = 0.001104 Sxx = Iyy = 0.000 in"4 Syy = Rotation = 102 dec CCW 0.003 in"3 0.001 in"3 Rxx= Ryy = 0.124 in 0.041 in Rect : 8 Area = 0.220 inn Xcg = Ycg = Height = 6.360 in Ixx = 0.060 in Iyy = 0.110 in Width = 2.000 in 0.000 inA4 Sxx = 0.073 in"4 Syy = Rotation = 0 dec CCW 0.004 inA3 0.073 inn Rxx = Ryy = 0.032 in 0.577 in Peterson Slrudvel Engineers, I Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 SW Westgate' 1, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97,.; Phone: 503.292.1635 Fax: 503.292.9846 www.psengineers.com neral Section Progert►es Description : LSE Vertical Side Rect : 9 Height = Area = 0.048 inA2 Xcg = 7.410 in Ycg = 0.220 in Title : HOAG HOSPITAL SOUND WALL Dsgnr. CGP{ Project Desc.: Project Notes : Job # 08-132 Primed: 2 SEP 2008, 8: Flk512oo'&1124m08t51R 32EEner�1atcpi.. ENHic?.0 1NG 75s52o& Yar License Owner ; PETERSON STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS 0.110 in Width = 0.440 in Ixx = 0.001 inA4 Sxx = lyy= 0.000 inA4 Syy = Rotation = 78 dec CCW 0.003 inA3 0.001 inA3 Rxx= 0.124in Ryy = 0.041in Rect : 10 Height = Area = 0.165 inA2 Xcg = 8.210 in Ycg = 0.380 in 0.110 in Width = 1.500 in Ixx = 0.000 inA4 Sxx = lyy = 0.031 inA4 Syy = Rotation = 0 dec CCW 0.003 inA3 0.041 inA3 Rxx = 0.032 in Ryy = 0.433 in 1.7 Peterson ffirvolwal E enera' Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 SW Westgate' , Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 972- Phone: 503.292.1635 Fax: 503.292.9846 wwwpsengineers.com ropeties Description : LSE Section Final Section Properties` Total Area 3.5661102 Calculated final C.G. distance from Datum : Xcg Dist. 0.0 in Y cg Dist. 3.4983 in Edge Distances from CG. : +X 2.8460 in -X -2.8460 in +Y 7.0022 in -Y -3.4983 in Ixx = 41.4816 inA4 lyy = 18.1914 inA4 Sxx : -X 11.8576 inA3 Sxx :+X 5.9241 inA3 Syy : -Y 6.3919 inA3 Syy : +Y 6.3919 inA3 r xx 3.4106 in r yy 2.2586 in Gene'ralr5hapes.' Rect :1 Area = 0.840 inA2 Xcg = Ycg = Title : HOAG HOSPITAL SOUND WALL Dsgnr: CGP{ Project Desc.: Project Notes : Job # 08-132 Panted: 2 SEP 2006, 8:56AM FOe'GINC;G9les12006W126ta 6&15810&9321Enerc408313246 r'"f ENEMALG iNG t883.2886, Ve`60.19- License Owner : PETERSON STRUCJ3JRAL ENGINEERS Height = 0.188 in Width = 4.470 in Rotation = 0 dec CCW 0.000 in Ixx = 0.002 inA4 Sxx = 0.026 inA3 Rxx = 0.054 in 0.094 in lyy = 1.399104 Syy= 0.626 inA3 Ryy = 1,290in Red : 2 Height = Area = 0.109 inA2 Xcg = 2.173 in Ycg = 0.438 in 0.875 in Width = 0.125 in Rotation = 0 dec CCW Ixx = 0.007 inA4 Sxx = 0.016 inA3 Rxx = 0.253 in lyy = 0.000 inA4 Syy = 0.002 inA3 Ryy = 0.036 in Rect : 3 Height = 0.875 in Width = 0.125 in Rotation = 0 dec CCW Area = 0.109 inA2 Xcg = -2.173 in Ixx = 0.007 inA4 Sxx = 0.016 inA3 Rxx = 0.253 in Ycg = 0.438 in lyy = 0.000 inA4 Syy = 0.002 inA3 Ryy = 0.036 in Red : 4 Area = Height = 0.875 in Width = 0.118 in Rotation = 0 dec CCW 0.103 inA2 Xcg = 2.783 in Ixx = 0.007 inA4 Sxx = 0.015 inA3 Rxx = 0.253 in Ycg = 0.438 in lyy = 0.000 inA4 Syy = 0.002 inA3 Ryy = 0.034 in Rect : 5 Area = 0.103 inA2 Xcg = Ycg = Height = 0.875 in Width = 0.118 in Rotation = 0 dec CCW -2.783 in Ixx = 0.438 in lyy = 0.007 inA4 Sxx = 0.000 inA4 Syy = 0.015 inA3 0.002 inA3 Rxx = Ryy = 0.253 in 0.034 in Rect : 6 Area = 0.092 inA2 Xcg = Ycg = Height = 0.125 in Width = 0.732 in Rotation = 0 dec CCW 2.480 in 0.906 in Ixx = lyy = 0.000 inA4 Sxx = 0.004 inA4 Syy = 0.002 inA3 0.011 103 Rxx= 0.036in Ryy= 0.211in Rect : 7 Area = 0.092 inA2 Xcg = -2.480 in lxx = Ycg = 0.906 in lyy = Height = 0.125 in Width = 0.732 in Rotation = 0 dec CCW 0.000 inA4 Sxx = 0.004 inA4 Syy = 0.002 inA3 0.011 inA3 Rxx= 0.036in Ryy= 0.211in Rect : 8 Height = 9,625 in Width = 0.110 in Rotation = 0 dec CCW Area = 1.059 inA2 Xcg = 2.480 in Ycg = 5.688 in Ixx = IYY = 8.174 inA4 Sxx = 0.001 inA4 Syy = 1.698 inA3 0.019 inA3 Rxx= 2.778in Ryy= 0.032in PeloRon Bliuclutl En Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 SW Westgate I Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 9724, Phone: 503.292.1635 Fax: 503.292.9846 www.psengineers.com Description : LSE Section Rect : 9 Title : HOAG HOSPITAL SOUND WALL Dsgnr: CGP( Project Desc.: Project Notes : Job # 08 132 Prinlerf: 2 SEP 2008, 8.56N I elPrelea+vest2D08F0&i26m,15D1, 3zgrermiw&l3zC" ENERC AGING 19§,.2908,)er,79„ - - License Owner : PETERSON STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS Height = 9.625 in Width = 0.110 in Area = 1.059 inA2 Xcg = -2.480 in Ixx = Ycg = 5.688 in Iyy = Rotation = 0 dec CCW 8.174 inA4 Sxx = 1.698 inA3 lbc< = 2.778 in 0.001inA4 Syy= 0.019InA3 Ryy = 0.032in Support Channels Wall Segment 4 Controls (highest sound panel stack) others OK by Inspection Base Channel - Intermediate Channel (similar) C6x8.2 w=17*wp+8.2=93p1f L=6'0" Sheet 15 — OK R = 279 pounds Clip Ange Support — Base Channel & Intermediate Channel L21/2 x 21/2 x 3/16" L = 0'3" Assume channel reaction occurs 1.5" from root of angle M = 1.5*R = 419 in -pounds S = L * 0.18752 — 0.0176 in3 6 Fb = 27,000 psi for flat plates Intermediate Channel Connection fb = M S =23807 s b—OK (2)3/8" dia. SAE J429 Gr. 5 (Fu = 120 ksi) Bolts Fv = 0.17* 120*n*(0.375/2)2 = 2.2 kips > R - OK Base Channel Connection 1" of 1/8" fillet weld on each side of angle — E70XX electrodes Capacity= 1*2*(1.8k' /h)=3.6king>R—O SSE Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97221.2411 Phone (503) 292.1635 Fax: (503) 292.9846 project designer date OCT0 2 2008 sheet 11.1 of I I BIerSOn Structural Inc Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 SW Westgate a, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 972[1 Phone: 503.292.1635 Fax: 503.292.9846 www.psengineers.com Steel Beam Design 0. KYY,06002409 Description : Base Channel Material Properties Analysis Method : Allowable Stress Design Beam Bradng : Bending Axis : Minor Axis Bending Load Combination 2006 IBC & ASCE 7-05 Applied Loads Load for Span Number 1 Uniform Load : D = 0.0930 kHt, Tributary Width = 1.0 fl DESIGN SUMMARY Maximum Bending Stress Ratio = Section used for this span Mu : Applied Mn / Omega : Allowable Load Combination +D Location of maximum on span 2.980ft Span # where maximum occurs Span # 1 Maximum Deflection Max Downward Live Load Deflection Max Upward Live Load Deflection Live Load Deflection Ratio Max Downward Total Deflection 0.138 in Max Upward Total Deflection 0.000 in Total Deflection Ratio 523 0.298 : 1 C6X8.2 0.418 k-ft 1.403 k-ft 0.000 in 0.000 in 0 <360 6.0 ft Title : HOAG HOSPIT"' SOUND WALL Dsgnr: CGP Project Desc.: Project Notes : Job # 08 132 Printed. 30 SEP 2008, 12'. 11PM F➢e: QlRoleltR 12610 09-1920&Ia2EieSd0&132ec8 ENBICALC, INC. 1883-2008, Vic tat Calculations per IBC 2006, CBS 2007, 13th AISC Fy : Steel Yield : E: Modulus : 36.0 ksi 29,000.0 ksi Service loads entered. Load Factors will be applied for calculations. Maximum Shear Stress Ratio = Section used for this span Vu : Applied Vn/Omega : Allowable Load Combination Location of maximum on span Span # where maximum occurs Desi•n OK,. 0.033 : 1 C6X8.2 0.2790 k 8.5179 k +D 6.000 ft Span # 1 IC) Calculations for Wall Segment 1 — 17' high Post 1 Wall Segment 1 W4x13 w/ WT4x6.5 Stiffener (Sh. 22) w=6.2*p=l11plf Li = 9' — height of post w/o stiffener L2 = 8' — height of post w/stiffener L = 17' — height of post 4.16 * 2 MCt = w 2L — 16,040 ft-lb — at base of post fbt — 12*M�) — 18,073 psi Sx) MC2 = w * L) — 4,496 ft-lb — at top of stiffener 2 fb2 12 * MC2 — 9,936 psi Sx2 =0.6*50ksi=30ksi>f Ltfb,—OK V = w*L = 1,887 nounds — OK by Inspection A = 1.84" = L/l11 — OK w/ stiffener Sxi = 10.65 in3 w/o stiffener Sx2 = 5.43 in3 See sheet 23 for deflection Connection to base plate Couple, C = 12 * MC, — 23.6 kips (4.16+4) 7" of 1/4" fillet weld to each side (mint Capacity = 7*(3.7 Ps/in) = 25.9 kips > C — OK Stiffener to Post Connection 2" of 1/4" Weld at 12" o.c. V9 = Lt *w = 999 pounds Vag = V9 + V" — 1,443 pounds 2 Q = A*d = 1.92*3.06 = 5.9 in3 I=46.80in4 q = Va"gQ — 182 pounds/in = 2.2 kips/ft I, V t 7 = L*w = 1,887 pounds See sheet 22 See sheet 22 2" of 1/4" fillet weld (effective) at 12" o.c. both sides Capacity = 2*(3.71'1's/in) = 7.4 kips > q - OK Lr5E Peterson Structural Engineers. Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Portland. Oregon 97221.2411 - Phone (503) 292-0635 Fa; (503) 292-9846 project q { 2 0 - date OCT 0 2 2008 designer fill 117 5 sheet I of Calculations for Wall Segment 1 - 17' high Base Plate 18"x 14"x 1" T = 12 * M�, - 12 kips Mp = 4.75*T = 57 in -kips 14+2 S = 1461 - 2.3 in3 fb = Sp = 24.8 ksi Fb = 0.75 *36 = 27 ksi > fh - OK Cast -in -Place Anchor Bolts f� = 2,500 psi (4) 3/4"dia headed bolts w/ 2" dia. x 1/4" washers her=16 in d0 = 0.75 in dW=2in Analyze Concrete for no cracking - 24"x24" grade beam fr = 7.5* fe = 3751b/in b yr==12in f I Mcr = r - 864,000 in -lb or 72 ft-kips 4Mcr = 0.75*Mcr = 54 ft-kips Yt Ip= —*b *h3=27,648in3 12 M = Mgt * 1.6 = 25.7 ft-kips • 1 PLAN VIEW 0 PROFILE VIEW O Paterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97221.2411 Phone (503) 292.1635 Fax: (503) 292.0006 project r) D _ i 2 date OCT 0 2 2008 designer M 1 7 sheet 7 of Calculations for Wall Segment 1 — 17' high Cal = 5 in Ca2 = 64 in s1=14in s2 = 10 in T = 12 kips — Govemed by wind V = 1.9 kips Check Four Cases in Tension 1) Steel Strength of Anchor in Tension n = 2 bolts lz A„= ft * ( a I = 0.44 in2 fate = 90,000 psi N. = n*Ase*fate = 79,200 lb ca = 0.75*Nsa = 59 4001b 2) Concrete Breakout Strength of Anchor in Tension AND = (Cal + (24-cal))*(1.5hd+s2+1.5hef) = 1,392 in2 ANea = 9*hef = 2,304 in2 'Yee;N = 1 — No Eccentricity 0.3ca"a" TTeo= 0.7 + '— 0.76 1.5hef 11'c,N = 1.25 — cast -in Y'ap,N = 1.0 Nb = 16 f[ her = 81,2751b Nap = ANC *WeC N*Y'ed N*Pc N*Wcp,N A Nco b9 = 0.70* NNr,... = 32.6541b 3) Pullout Strength of Anchor in Tension ( Ab�g = n* d2 = 3.14 in2 k tl'a,p = 1.0 Np = 8*Ab,g* f, = 62,800 lb Npa = Y'e,p*Np = 62,800 hN = 0.70*ND„ = 43.9601b Nb = 46,6481b SSE Peterson StrucWrel Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97221-2011 Phone (503) 292-1635 Fax: (503) 292.9908 project 0�-13 date OCT 0 2 2008 designer /1"1125 sheet of Calculations for Wall Segment 1 — 17' high 4) Concrete Side -Face Blowout Strength of a Headed Anchor in Tension cat = 5 in 0.4*hef = 6.4 in z Abe = 1t* (=" d= 3.14 in2 Nsb = 160*cal Abe T= 70,880 lb Nsbg = 1+ sz JNsb =94,5071b � cal <b = 0.70*Nee = 66.1551b ondition 21 Controls in Ten ion. AN.r... = 2.6 41b Check Three Cases in Shear 1) Steel Strength of Anchor in Shear n=4bolts r lz Ase = 7[ I d—L° I = 0.44 in2 fires = 90,000 psi Vsa = n*Ase*fats = 158,4001b i,Vsa= 0.65*Vsa=j02.9601b 2) Concrete Breakout Strength of Anchor in Shear le = 8*de Ave = [1.5*cat + s2 + 1.51/4a1]*(1.5*cat) = 193 in2 Avco = 4.5*cat2 = 113 in2 Wee,v = 1 — No eccentricity `Yea,v = Caz >_ 1.5*cal :. `f ed,v = 1.0 Tot =1.4 r lo.z Vb = 7* ae I * d° * f *cat t'S = 5,1371b l Vcbg = Av0 *iyee,v*Y'ed,v*'f c,v*Vb = 12,283 lb A vco AV = 0.7*Vr),o = 8.5981b �s Peterson Structural Engineers. Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97221-2411 Phone (502) 292.1035 Fax:(503) 292..9846 project 0 date OCT 0 2 2008 designer pi sheet 9 of Calculations for Wall Segment 1— 17' high 3) Concrete Pryout Strength of Anchor in Shear kep=2 Ncbg = 46,648 lb Vcpg = kcp*Ncbg = 93,2961b (Ws& = 0.7*Ve_. = 5 .307 lb ConditianalLwalnlaarSAR Interaction of Tensile and Shear Forces N = T = 12 kips = �1v6 g - 20.4 kips N 2imw,Asn V = 1.9 kips WVcbg V2iww,Asn = 1 6 — 5.4 kips N + V—0.9<1�2—OK Nallow,ASD Vallow,ASD Use (4) 3/4" diameter headed bolts w/2". x t/g" washers, embed 16" into grade beam Grade Beam Reinforcement for Grade Beam 24" x 24" w/ (8) #5 Longitudinal bars and #3 stirrups Ca, 8" o.c. At = 0.11 in2 At=0.31*8=2.48in s = 8 in Torsion fyt = 40 ksi fy = 60 ksi Ao = 0.85*(24-3)*(24-2) = 393 in2 — Area Enclosed by Reinforcing Bars T = Mct = 16,040 ft-lb 1.6 * T Tu 1.6*T = 25.7 ft-kips 1000 2AcAtfy T„ cot 0 = 432 in -kips = 36 ft-kips s ft-kips > Tu Longitudinal Reinforcement Ph = 2*[(24-(3+(3))+(24-(2+3))] = 74 in At.rea'd= StPhI fn lIcot29=068in2<At-OK SSE P eterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 P ortland, Oregon 97221-2411 Phone (503) 292-1635 Fax: (503) 292.9846 project designer 13 2- date OCT 0 2 2008 P5 sheet 2 0 of Calculations for Wall Segment 1 — 17' high Grade Beam to Caisson Connection #5 Bar fy = 60 ksi db = 5/8 in AS = 0.31 in2 Reinforcement in Tension T=2*Mcf*17 =22.6kips T = 3*0.6*60*0.31 = 33.5 kips > T - OK 1 ' "/ Development of deformed bars in tension i Wt=1 111e=1 %=1 Id = f"WtWe� db = 48db = 301r 25 fe Caissons 2'0" dia. x 10'-0" deep Foundation Pile Embedment wp=2*w=222p1f Passive Pressure, y = 200 psf/ft —1 /3 increase allowed (Geotechnical Report) 9 875 feet — Use 10'0" — OK Sheet 24 Flexural Bending in Pile M = 2*Mci = 32.1 ft-kips 81#7 V12" Lr5E Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate wive, Suls 215 Portland, Oregon 97221-2411 Phone (5031292-1635 Fax (503) 292-9806 project date OCT 0 2 1006 designer r7 sheet 2 / of Peterson Structural Fidnewa. Inc, Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 SW Westgate r Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 9i_ Phone: 503.292.1635 Fax: 503.292.9846 www.psengineers.com Description : WT4x6.5+W4x13 Final Section roperties Total Area 5.750 inA2 Calculated final C.G. distance from Datum : X cg Dist. 0.0 in Y cg Dist. -2.0337 in Edge Distances from CG. +X 2.030 in -X in +Y 4.3937 in <-- -Y 3.7663 in Ixx = lyy= Sxx : -X Sxx:+X Syy : -Y Syy : +Y xx ryy SteetShapes 46.8048 inA4 F- 5.220 inA4 12.4274 inA3 10.6526 inA3 2.5714 inA3 2.5714 inA3 2.8531 in 0.95280 in WT4x6.5 :1 Ixx = Area = 1.920 inA2 Iyy = Height 4.000 in Sxx= Width 4.000 in Syy = Title : HOAG HOSPITAL SOUND WALL Dsgnr: CGP{ Project Desc.: Project Notes : 2.890 inA4 1.360 inA4 2.806 inA3 0.680inA3 Printed: 12 AUG 2008 2erosm�tarFmMci2 ner:PETERSON STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS Rotation = Xcg = Ycg = 0 dec CCW 0.000 in 1.330 in F W4X13:2 Ixx= Area = 3.830 inA2 Iyy = Height 4.060 in Sxx = Width 4.160 in Syy = 1/.3937— 1e330= 3.06 r 11.300 inA4 3.860 inA4 5.433inA3 1.901 inA3 Rotation = Xcg = Ycg = 0 dec CCW 0.000 in -3.720 in Wednesday, September 17. 2008 Md frame40 Version 9.05 Page 1 G•1Projeot FNes12008108-126 to 08-150108.132MaamMo8.132-Wa01 Posted Joint 1 2 In 1dY, dt fie7F of In J In : [ . dress I deo I dim ..... 0.00 0.001 0.001 0.0: 0.0 i 0.0 -0.47 0.00I 0.001 0.01 0.0 j 0.5 -1.844 0.001 0.001 0,0 0.0, 0.8 Sections ■ W74x8.5 ■ W4x13 Frame 23 Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 SW Westgate - Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97a Phone: 503.292.1635 Fax: 503.292.9846 www.psengineers.com In Soil Lrc.# : KW-0600240E Description : Wall #1 - H = 1 General Information Pole Shape Circular Pole Diameter 24,0 in Calculate Min. Depth for Allowable Pressures No Lateral Restraint at Ground Surface Allow Passive Max Passive 200.0 Kt psf Controlling Values Governing Load Combination : +D+W+H Lateral Load 3.7740 k Moment 32.0790 k-ft NO Ground Surface Restraint Pressures at 1/3 Depth Actual Allowable Footing Base Area Maximum Soil Pressure /Ippfied totals... Lateral Concentrated Load 872.536 psf 873.583 psf 3.1416 ft^2 0.0 ksf Assumess Foolei. square Lateral Distributed Load Title : HOAG HOSPITAL SOUND WALL Dsgnr: CGP{ Project Desc.: Project Notes : Job# 08.132 Printed: 2 SEP 2008. 8:36AM 'file' d,T�1UoBA8-1ZBbn8-15010&13 Icws1"08,1 r. �... Z as, 9.. evrarcapa 1NG 1ass2ao4 Yer License Owner : PETERSON STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS'. Code References: 2006 IBC 1805.7.2, 1997 UBC 1806.8.2.1 Applied Moment D : Dead Load k k/ft k-ft Lr : Roof Live k k/ft k-ft L: Live k kilt k-fl S: Snow k k/ft k-ft W : Wind k 0.2220 klft k-ft E : Earthquake k k/fl k-ft H : Lateral Earth k k/ft k-ft Load distance above Base ft TOP of Load above ground 17.0 ft BOTTOM of Load above ground ft Load ConibinatiorcResults +o+L*H +D+Lr+H +D+W+H +0-1,0W+H +0+0, 750Lr+0.750L+0.750W+H +0+0.750Lr+0.750L-0.750W+H +D+0, 750 L+0.7 50 5+0.750 W+H +D 0.750L+0.750S-0,750W+H +0.60D+W+H +0.60D-1.0W+H 0.0 0.0 3.8 3.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 3.8 3.8 0.0 0.0 32.1 32.1 24.1 24.1 24.1 24.1 32.1 32.1 0.13 0.13 9.88 0.13 8.88 0.13 8.88 0.13 9.88 0.13 Vertical Load k k k k k k k 0.0 0.0 872.5 0.0 778.2 0.0 778.2 0.0 872.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 873.6 0.1 778.3 0.5 778.3 0.5 873.6 0.1 Peleson Si. e1. Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 SW Westgate r 1, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97. Phone: 503.292.1635 Fax: 503,292.9846 Title: HOAGH Dsgnr: CGP Project Desc.: Project Notes : www.psengineers.com Concrete Column Description : Wall #1 - H = IT General Information fc : Concrete 28 day strength E_ Density a Fy - Main Rebar E - Main Rebar Allow. Reinforcing Limits Min. Reinf. Max. Reinf. 2.50 ksi = 3,122.0 ksi 145.0 pcf 0.850 60,0 ksi 29,000.0 ksi ASTM A615 Bars Used 1.0% = 8.0 % Load Combination 2006 IBC & ASCE 7-05 Column Cross Section Circular Column Section : 24.0in diameter Rebar Sizes & Locations Total bars = Bar Size X Y # in in # 7 8.563 0.000 # 7 -8.563 0.000 Applied Loads Bar Size X Y in in # 7 6.055 6.055 # 7 -6.055 -6.055 Column self weight included :4,555.31 Ibs * Dead Load Factor BENDING LOADS... Moment acting about X-X axis, W = 32.10 k-fl DESIGN SUMMARY - Primed 11 SEP 20081037AM Fie' akPrge tF➢m2008W6-12Sid0&1w08-13aEnermIc10&132edi HiFAc c, ING 1B83-XOLvar. 8.Q18 Code Ref : 2006 IBC, ACI 318-05 Overall Column Height = 10.0 ft End Fixity Top Free, Bottom Fixed ACI Code Year ACI 318-05 Brace condition for deflection (buckling) along columns : X-X (width) axis : Fully braced against buckling along X-X Axis Y-Y (depth) axis :Fully braced against buckling along Y-Y Axis Type of Stirrups used : Fy - Stirrups E - Stirrups Bar Size #7 # 7 -0.000 -8.563 Spirals —die S 40,0 ksi 29,000.0 ksi 240in Circular Column Note: Bar distances are from column center. X Y in in 0.000 8.563 Bar Size X Y # in in # 7 - -6.055 6.055 # 7 6.055 -6.055 Entered loads factored per load combinations specified by user. Maximum Stress Ratio Load Combination Location of max.above base At maximum location values a Pu *Pn Mu-x (p• Mn-x : Mu-y W*Mn-y: Column Capacities ... Pnmax : Nominal Max. Compressive Axial Capacity Pnmin : Nominal Min. Tension Axial Capacity (p Pn, max : Usable Compressive Axial Capacity Pn, min : Usable Tension Axial Capacity 0.29358:1 +0.90D+1.60W+1.60H 9.5302ft re... 0 (2/—)= AJ 4.0998 k 4.0998 k 51.360 k-ft 174.946 k-ft 0.0 k-ft 0.o k-ft 1,239.13 k -288.0 k 737.281 k -201.60 k Maximum SERVICE Load Reactions .. Top along Y-Y 0.0 k Bottom along Y-Y 0.0 k Top along X-X 0.0 k Bottom along X-X 0.0 k Maximum SERVICE Load Deflections ... Along Y-Y -0.054181 in at 10,0ft above base for load combination : W Only Along X-X 0.0in at 0.0ft above base for load combination : or 65 General Section Information . = 948- B =0850 p : % Reinforcing 1.0610 % Rebar °o Ok Reinforcing Area 4.80 inA2 Concrete Area 452 389 inA2 CK 9 = 0.850 Calculations for Wall Segment 2 - 23' high Post 2 Wall Segment 2 W12x22 w/ (2) 2"x1/4" Stiffeners (Sh. 32) w = 6.2*p = 111 plf L = 23' - height of post * 2 Mc = w 2L - 29,360 ft-lb - at base of post fb = c - 14,177 psi Sx Fb = 0.6*50 ksi = 30 ksi > fb - OK V = w*L = 2 553 pounds - OK by Inspection = 1.46" = L/140 - OK See sheet 33 for deflection 12.31 in Connection to base plate 12 Mc - 28.6 kips Couple, C = 12.31 8" of 1/4" fillet weld to each side (min) Capacity = 8*(3.7k4Ps/;") = 29.6 kips > C - OK Flat Bar to Post Connection 2" of 1/4" Weld at 12" o.c. V = 66_2 * p * 1 = 56 pounds - OK by Inspecti. n 2 Base Plate 18"x 16"x 1.25" 12*M� T=-22.0kips Mp=4.7*T= 103.4in-kips 16 z S = 16* 16.25 - 4.1 in3 fb = SP = 25.2 ksi Fb = 0.75*36 = 27 ksi > fb - OK 1 1X4 in = 24.85 it 0. 4" 2" L 2" 0 f nag Peterson structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97221-2411 Phone (503) 292-1635 Fax: (503) 292.9846 project OS ? 3 date OCT 0 2 2008 designer 7v1 p < - sheet 1 67 of Calculations for Wall Segment 2 — 23' high Cast -in -Place Anchor Bolts fc = 2,500 psi (4) 1 "dia headed bolts w/ 3" dia. x 3/8" washers hef = 18 in d"=1in dw=3in Analyze Concrete for no cracking — 30"x24" grade beam fr = 7.5* fe = 375 lb/in Ig = 12 * b * h 3 = 34,560 in4 y, = b 2 = 15 in M" = Mc* 1.6 = 47 ft-kips f Mcr = g — 864,000 in 72 ft-kips = 0.75*Mer = 54 ft-kips >M„ OK -lb or tMDr — Yt a I a eta eke PLAN VIEW O q q' •- ` aq . a _4 c a a .q ' *7 4 i. s PROFILE VIEW in Cal =8in st=l4in cat = 62 in s2 = 12 in T = 22 kips — Governed by wind V = 2.6 kips SSE Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Portland. Oregon 97221-2411 Phone {503) 292.1635 Far: (503) 292.9846 project 32 date OCT 02 1008 designer sheet 27 of Calculations for Wall Segment 2 — 23' high Check Four Cases in Tension 1) Steel Strength of Anchor in Tension n = 2 bolts -.2 Ase=lt* Z° I=0.79in2 fats = 90,000 psi Nsa = n*Ase*futa = 142,2001b mN = 0.75*N<9 = 106.6501b 2) Concrete Breakout Strength of Anchor in Tension ANo = (cal + (30-cal))*(1.5hef+ s2+ 1.5hef) = 1,980 in2 ANeo = 9*h'ef = 2,916 in2 Tec,Nt = 1 — No Eccentricity 0.3c a Y'ed,N = 0.7 + , — 0.79 1.5hef `Pc,N = 1.25 Y'cp,N = 1.0 Nb = 16 f[ he fs'3 = 98,903 lb Ncbg = ANc *Wec,N*Ted,N*kc, A Nco ttiNe = 0.70*N P = 46.4221b *Wrg,N*Nb = 66,317 lb 3) Pullout Strength of Anchor in Tension 2 Abrg = nC dZ )= 7.07 in2 c,P = 1.0 Ng = 8*Abrg* = 141,4001b Ng„ = Ye,P*Np=141,4001b mN = 0.70*N0 = 989801b 4) Concrete Side -Face Blowout Strength of a Headed Anchor in Tension cal = 8 in 0,4*hef= 7.2 in < cal :. No Analysis Req'd Condition 2) Controls in Tension, = 46.422 lb SSE Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Weslgete Drive, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97221.2011 Phone (503) 292-1635 Fax,(503) 292-9508 project p 9, date OCT 0 2 2008 designer /,/� 175 sheetof Calculations for Wall Segment 2 — 23' high Check Three Cases in Shear 1) Steel Strength of Anchor in Shear n = 4 bolts l2 Ase = n* I 2° I = 0.79 inz fats = 90,000 psi Vsa = n*Ase*futa = 284,400 lb (1)V = 0.65* a = 184,860 lb 2) Concrete Breakout Strength of Anchor in Shear le = ado Ave = (1.5*cat + sz + 1.5*cal)*(1.5*cal) = 432 in2 Avco = 4.5*cat2 = 288 inz 'Pec,v = 1 — No eccentricity Ped,v = caz >-1.5*cal :. ` e,a,v = 1.0 Y'o,v = 1.4 Vb=7*�d * d° * fa *cat15= 12,004lb ° 30.2 Vabg = Av" *Wec v*'I'ed v*Wo v*Vb = 25,2081b Ave° ar P07*V g=17.6461b 3) Concrete Prvout Strength of Anchor in Shear kap=2 Nebg = 66,317 lb Van = kap*Nabs = 132,634 lb mVmg=0.7*Vilg =92.844 b Interaction of Tensile and Shear Forces N=T=22kips N an°w,ASD = _iN6 g — 29 kips N V N allow,ASD Vallow,ASD —1.0<1.2—OK V = 2.6 kips 'Know = �1 6g — 11 kips Use (4) 1" diameter headed bolts w/ 3" d) x 3/8" washers, embed 18" into erade beam MPeterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgateorlve, Suite 215 Pholeea, a) 292-16 5 xtl1 Phone 1509)292-1535 Fax: (503) 292 4905 project date OCT 0 2 2000 designer /lr1 f? sheet 2 q of Calculations for Wall Segment 2 — 23' high Grade Beam Reinforcement for Grade Beam 30" x 24" w/ (8) #5 Longitudinal bars and #4 stirrups aa, 12" o.c. A, = 0.20 in2 = 0.31*8 = 2.48 in s = 12 in Torsion fy, = 60 ksi fy=60ksi Ao = 0.85*(30-3)*(24-2) = 505 in2 — Area Enclosed by Reinforcing Bars T = Mc = 29,360 ft-lb _ 1.6 * T _ 47 ft-kips TD 1000 2A0A,fn T„ = cot 0 = 1,010 in -kips = 84.2 ft-kips s aTn = 0.75*Tn = 63.1 ft-kips > Tu — OK Longitudinal Reinforcement Ph = 2*[(30-(3+r3))+l(24-(2+3))] = 86 in Ai reed = s PhI fy, COt2 0 = 1.43 in2 <Ai —OK l v Grade Beam to Caisson Connection (6) #6 bars #6 Bar fy = 60 ksi db=3/4in A5=0.44in2 Reinforcement in Tension T=2*Mc*12* 1—41.4kips 17 1000 Tan = 3*0.6*60*0.44 = 47.5 kips > T - OK Development of deformed bars in tension Wt = 1 tye = 1 ld — fyWtt\ 6�db = 48db = 36" 25 fe j X = 1 j nsc Peterson Structural Engineers. Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Potlland, Oregon 97221-2411 Phone (503) 292-1635 Fax: 1503) 292-9806 project 0 -0 - J L designer 5 date OCT 0 2 2000 sheet j 0 of Calculations for Wall Segment 2 — 23' high Caissons 2'0" dia. x 12'-0" deep Foundation Pile Embedment wp = 2*w = 222 p1f Passive Pressure, y = 200 psf/ft —1/3 increase allowed (Geotechnical Report) 11.875 ' — Use 12'0" — OK, Sheet 4 Flexural Bending in Pile M = 2*Mc = 59.2 ft-kips Use (8) #7 Vertical bars w/ #3 ties (a� 12 OK Sheet 35 SSE Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Dried, sego 215 Portland, Oregon 97221-2411 Phone (503) 292-1635 Fax; (503) 292-9046 project 0� —13z date OCT 0 2 2000 designer M P5 sheet 7 of Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 SW Westgate , Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97221 Phone: 503.292.1635 Fax: 503.292.9846 www. • sen • ineers.com Description : W12x22 + 1/4"x3" FB Final Section PFopeities Total Area 7.480 inA2 Calculated final C.G. distance from Datum : XcgDist. 0.0in Y cg Dist. 6.3973 in Edge Distances from CG.: +X • 2.0150 in -X -2.0150 in +Y 5.9027 in -Y -6.3973 in Ixx = 158.970 in"4 Iyy = 57590 in"4 Sxx : -X 24.8495 inA3 Sxx : +X 26.9319 inA3 Syy : -Y 2.8580 inA3 Syy : +Y 2.8580 inA3 r xx 4.6101 in ryy 0.87745in Geirfi * Sh"epes . Title: HOAG HOSPIT"' SOUND WALL Dsgnr. CGP • Project Desc.: Project Notes : Job # 08-132 0SEP2008, 83 Rect :1 Height = 0.250 in Width = 2.000 in Rotation = 0 dec CCW Area = 0.500 inA2 Xcg = 0.875 in Ixx = 0.003 in"4 Sxx = 0.021 inA3 Rxx = 0.072 in Ycg = 8.000 in lyy = 0.167 inA4 Syy = 0.167 inA3 Ryy = 0.577 in Steelslz W12X22: 1 Area = Height Width Reci : 2 Area = 0.500 inA2 Xcg Ycg = 6.480 inA2 4.030 in 12.300 in Height = -0.875 in 8.000 in Ixx = Iyy = Sxx = Syy = 0.250 in Izx = Iyy = 156.000in"4 4.660 in"4 25.366in"3 2.313 inA3 Width = 2.000 in 0.003 in"4 Sxx = 0.167 in"4 Syy = Rotation = Xcg -- Ycg = Rotation = 0 dec CCW 0.021 inA3 0.167 inA3 0 dec CCW 0.000 in 6.150 in Rxx = Ryy = 0.072 in 0.577 in Wedneiday, September 17, 2008 MWIH4ame4D Version 9.06 Page 1 GPrefeet Fdes12008108-126 to 08-150108-1329,1dtlframe108-132-Wag 2 Post -Sankt m 13 ......_. 0x PY In In. I Inair I de. 1 den daa 0.00, 0.00 0.00 0.0, 0.0; 0.0' 1.46 0.00; 0.00 0.0; 0.0 0.4 Frame Sections ■ W12d2 wIFB 33 Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 SW Westgate' 1, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97._. Phone: 503.292.1635 Fax: 503.292.9846 www.psengineers.com Oil. Description : Wall #2 - H = 23' GeneralrinformatiOn Title : HOAG HOSPITAL SOUND WALL Dsgnr: CGP{ Project Desc.: Project Notes : Job # 08-132 Printed: 28 AUG 2008, 10:22PM ENERCAlC ING 98&3908,.Yer 60:19 License Owner : PETERSON STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS Code References: 2006 iBC 1805.7.2, 1997 UBC 1806.8.2.1 Pole Shape Circular Pole Diameter 24.0 in Calculate Min. Depth for Allowable Pressures No Lateral Restraint at Ground Surface Allow Passive 200.0 pef Max Passive pst Controlling Values Goveming Load Combination : +D+W+H Lateral Load Moment NO Ground Surface Restraint Pressures at 1/3 Depth Actual Allowable Footing Base Area Maximum Soil Pressure Apptied Loads Lateral Concentrated Load 5.060 k 58.190 k-ft 1,040.49 pst 1,042.40 P81 3.1416 ftA2 0.0 ksf Assumes po,e es square Lateral Distributed Load Applied Moment D : Dead Load k k/ft k-ft Lr : Roof Live k k/ft k-ft L:Uve k k/ft k-ft S: Snow k k/ft k-ft W : Wind k 0.220 k/ft k-ft E : Earthquake k k/ft k-ft H : Lateral Earth k k/ft k-ft Load distance above Base - ft TOP of Load above ground 23.0ft BOTTOM of Load above ground ft Load Combination Results Vertical Load +D+L+H +D+Lr+H +D+W+H +D-1.0W+H +D+0.750Lr+0.750L+0.750W+H +D+0.750Lr+0.750L-0.750 W+H +D+0.750L+0,7505+0.750W+H t D+0.750 L+0.7505-0.750 W+H +0.60D+W+H +0,60D-1.0W+H 0.0 0.0 5.1 5.1 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 5.1 5.1 0.0 0.0 58.2 58.2 43.6 43.6 43.6 43.6 58.2 58.2 0.13 0.13 11.88 0.13 10.50 0.13 10.50 0.13 11.88 0.13 k k k k k k 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,040.5 1,042.4 0.0 0.7 929.6 929.7 0.0 0.5 929.6 929 7 0.0 0.5 1,040.5 1,042.4 0.0 0.7 Peterson 51roelu,al Fnyems, In Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 SW Westgate " •e, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 9,. Phone: 503.292.1635 Fax: 503.292.9846 www.psengineers.com Concrete Column Description : Wall #2 - H = 23' General Information fc : Concrete 28 day strength = 2.50 ksi E = = 3,605.0 ksi Density = 150.0 pcf (3 = 0.850 Fy - Main Rebar = 60.0 ksi E - Main Rebar = 29,000.0 ksi Allow. Reinforcing Limits ASTM A615 Bars Used Min. Reinf. = 1.0 ok Max. Reinf. = 8.0 0/0 Load Combination 2006 IBC & ASCE 7-05 Column Cross Section Title : HOAG HOSPITAL SOUND WALL. Dsgnr: CGP Project Desc.: Project Notes : Job# 08-132 Frnte3: 30 SEP 2008, 4:05PM FHe GIPrgectalee 11-128te09-150108-197Ermmt10613Zed FHERCA+LC, MC. 1063-20 9; Vr 6.0.19 Code Ref : 2006 IBC, ACI 318-05 Overall Column Height = 12.0 ft End Fixity Top Free, Bottom Fixed ACI Code Year ACI 318-05 Brace condition for deflection (buckling) along columns : X-X (width) axis :Fully braced against buckling Song X-X Axis Y-Y (depth) axis :Fully braced against buckling along Y-Y Axis Type of Stirrups used : Spire1s VC 5 Fy - Stirrups = 40.0 ksi E - Stirrups = 29,000.0 ksi Circular Column Section : 24.0in diameter Rebar Sizes & Locations Bar Size X Y # in in # 7 8.563 0.000 # 7 -8.563 0.000 Applied Loads Total bars = 8 Bar Size X Y in in # 7 6.055 6.055 # 7 -6.055 -6.055 Column self weight included : 5,654.871bs • Dead Load Factor BENDING LOADS... Moment acting about X-X axis, W = 59.20 k-fi DESIGN SUMMARY Circular Column Note: Bar distances are from column center. Bar Size X Y Bar Size X Y # in in # in in # 7 0.000 8.563 # 7 -6.055 6.055 # 7 -0.000 -8.563 # 7 6.055 -6.055 Entered loads factored per load combinations specified by user. Maximum Stress Ratio 0.54132 : 1 Load Combination -0.90D+1,60W+1.6OH Location of max.above base 11.4362 ft Al maximum location values are ... Pu (p'Pn Mu-x N` Mn-x : Mu-y (I)* Mn-y : Column Capacities ... Pnmax : Nominal Max. Compressive Axial Capacity Pnmin : Nominal Min. Tension Axial Capacity (p Pn, max : Usable Compressive Axial Capacity N Pn, min : Usable Tension Axial Capacity 5.0894 k 5.0894 k 94.720 k-ft 174.981 k-ft 0.0 k-ft 0.0 k-ft 2 1,239.13 k -288,0 k 737.281 k -201.60 k Maximum SERVICE Load Reactions .. Top along Y-Y 0.0 k Bottom along Y-Y 0.0 k Top along X-X 0.0 k Bottom along X-X 0.0 k Maximum SERVICE Load Deflections . - - AlongY-Y-0,12461 in at 12.0ft above base for load combination : W Only Along X-X 0.Oin at 0.0ft above base for load combination : 0- 6 5 General Section Information . = 649 3 =0 850 0 = 0.850 p : % Reinforcing 1 0610 % Rebar % Ok Reinforcing Area 4.80 inA2 Concrete Area 452.389 inA2 35 Calculations for Wall Segment 3 — 18'6" high Post 3 Wall Segment 3 W4x13 w/ WT4x6.5 Stiffener (Sh. 42) w = 6.2*p = 111 plf Li = 6.5' — height of W4x 13 w/o stiffener L2 = 12'-height of W4x13 w/ stiffener L = 18.5' — total height of post Mc1 = w * L2 — 18,995 ft-lb — at base of post 2 12*Mr( _21,403psi Sxl w*L Mc2 = 2 f12 * Mc2 b2 — 5,182 psi = Sx2 Lti=06*50ksi=30ksi>fyt fb,—OK 4in 4.16 in — 2,345 ft-lb — at base of W4x13 w/o stiffener Iw/tiffener = 10.65 in3 stiffener = 5.43 in3 V = w*L = 2.054 nounds — OK by Ins eR.. ction A = 2.17" = L/102 — OK See sheet 43 for deflection Post to Base Plate Connection Couple, C = 12 * M01 — 27.9 kips (4.16+4) 8" of 1/4" fillet weld to each side (min) Capacity = 8*(3.71ups/0= 29.6 kips > C — OK Stiffener to Post Connection V6.5 = w*L1 = 722 pounds Vag = v6.5 + V18.5 — 1,388 pounds 2 Q = A*d = 1.92*3.06 = 5.88 in3 Ix = 46.8 in° q = Va"gQ — 174 lb/in or 2.1 kips/ft Ix 2" of 1/4" Weld at 12" o.c. V = V185= 2,054 pounds See sheet 42 See sheet 42 2" of 1/4" fillet weld (effective) at 12" o.c. both sides Capacity = 2*(3.71'P9;,,) = 7.4 kips > q — OK SSE Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97221-2911 Phone (503) 292.1635 Fe,: (503) 292-9846 project /% ; / 3 2, date OCT 0 2 2008 designer Al r sheet 2 6 of Calculations for Wall Segment 3 — 18'6" high Base Plate 18"x 12"x 1 1/4" T=12*16c'—14.2kips 12*1.252 5=—3.125in3 6 Mp = 4.75*T = 67.5 in -kips fb = SP = 21.6 ksi Fb=0.75*36=27 ksi> fb—OK Cast -in -Place Anchor Bolts fc = 2,500 psi (4) 3/4"dia Headed bolts w/ 2" dia. x 1/4" washers hef= 18 in do = 0.75 in dW=2in Analyze Concrete for no cracking — 24"x24" grade beam fr = 7.5* f = 3751b/in b Yt 2=12in 0 o c, --- j_ c t �� I `_8„ _ !„J.— Ig= 12*b*h3=27,648in° M" = Mc*1.6 = 30.4 ft-kips f MDr = r I — 864,000 in -lb or 72 ft-kips tMcr = 0.75*Mcr = 54 ft-kips >M, — OK yl 1 1 MAN VIEW O cal =5in Ca2 = 66 in = 14 in s2 = 8 in T = 14.2 kips — Governed by wind V = 2.1 kips SSE Peterson Structural Engineers. Inc. 5319 5.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97221-2411 Phone (503) 292-1635 Fax: (503) 292-9846 project /% — date OCT 0 2 2008 designer M rs sheet 3 7 of Calculations for Wall Segment 3 — 18'6" high Check Four Cases in Tension 1) Steel Strength of Anchor in Tension n = 2 bolts lz Ase = tt * I ° J = 0.44 in2 feta = 90,000 psi Nse = n*Asa*f„ts = 79,200 lb ihNe9 = 0.75*NeP = 59,4001, 2) Concrete Breakout Strength of Anchor in Tension ANc = (cal + (24-cat))*(1.Shef+ s2 + ] .Shef) = 1,488 in2 ANce = 991er = 2,916 in2 Tec,N = 1 — No Eccentricity 0.3*c 11ed,N= 0.7+ a'"" —0.76 1.5*hef `Pc,N = 1.25 — cast -in Y2cp,N = 1.0 Nb = 16* f[ * hef 13 = 98,903 lb Ncbg — ANc *Tee,N*`1'e t,N*`Pc,N*Y`cp,N*Nb = 47,946 lb A Nco thN� = 0 70*Ndg = 33 5621, 3) Pullout Strength of Anchor in Tension z Abrg = n * ( -) = 3.14 in2 `Pc,p = 1.0 Ji Nip = 8*Ab p* fe = 62,800 lb Np" = `Pe,p*Np = 62,800 lb NN n=0.70*N,=439601b NE Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5919 S.W. Westgate Drive, tulle 215 Portland, Oregon 97221 2411 Phone (503) 292-1635 Fax: (503) 292-9945 project date OCT 0 2 2000 designer Al 17.5 sheet 3% of Calculations for Wall Segment 3 — 18'6" high 4) Concrete Side -Face Blowout Strength of a Headed Anchor in Tension cal =5in 0.4*her = 7.2 in < cal .. Analysis Re q' d z Abrg = 7t * (2)= 3.14 in2 Nsb = 1r60*cal AbJNsb rg f = 70,800 lb Nsbg = 1 + s2 = 83,780 Ib Cal * ANsb = 0.70*Nebg = 58.6461b Check Three Cases in Shear 1) Steel Strength of Anchor in Shear n = 4 bolts 2 Ase = n * ( ) = 0.44 in2 futa = 90,000 psi Vsa = nAsefuta = 158,4001b Vsa =6 .0.5*Vsa = 102 9601b 2) Concrete Breakout Strength of Anchor in Shear le = 8da Ave = [1.5*cat + s2+ 1.5*cal]*(1.5*cal) = 173 in2 Aveo = 4.5*ca12 = 113 in2 tec,v = 1 — No eccentricity `Yed,v = Ca2 >_ 1.5*Cal .. tiled,v = 1.0 Wc,v = 1.4 ( 1 1'2 Vb = 7* —e do * f6 *call .5 = 5,137 lb \do Vcbg = Ave *tec.v*\ed,v*Wc,v*Vb = 11,010 Ib A Vco SSE Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Portland. Oregon 97221.2411 Phone (5031292-1635 Fax: (503) 292A646 project o' -132 date OCT 022008 designer ?� sheet f a of Calculations for Wall Segment 3 — 18'6" high 3) Concrete Prvout Strength of Anchor in Shear kcp=2 Ncbg = 47,9461b Vcpg = kcp*Ncbg = 95,892 lb mV„. = 0.7*V,.,. = 67.124 lb Interaction of Tensile and Shear Forces N = T = 14.2 kips V = 2 kips Nau"W,ASD = `bs O — 21 kips Vallow,ASD = 1.6 g 4.8 kips 1.6 N + V—1.1<1.2—OK N allow,ASD V3IIOW,ASD Use (4) 3/4" diameter headed bolts w/ 2"O t 4" washers. embed 18" into p ade beam Grade Beam Reinforcement for Grade Beam 24" x 24" w/ (8) #5 Longitudinal bars and #4 stirrups aa, 12" o.c. At=0.20in2 = 0.31*8 = 2.48 in s=12in Torsion fyt = 60 ksi fy = 60 ksi Ao = 0.85*(24-3)*(24-2) = 393 in2 — Area Enclosed by Reinforcing Bars T = Mct = 18,995 ft-lb _ 1.6 * T — 30.4 ft-kips T 1000 In 2A0A,fy, Cat = 786 in -kips = 65.5 ft-kips s ft-kites > Ta OK Longitudinal Reinforcement (8) # 5 Ok by Comparison to Wall 2 Lr9fl Peterson StrucWral Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Odes, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97221-2411 Phone (503) 292.1635 Fax; (503) 292-9846 project 0$ -/32 designer /1i°5 date OCT 0 2 2008 sheet Li-0 of Calculations for Wall Segment 3 — 18'6" high Grade Beam to Caisson Connection (3) #5 bars #5 Bar db = 5/8 in Reinforcement in Tension T=2*Mci*12 * 1 17 1000 fy = 60 ksi A5 = 0.31 in2 — 26.8 kips Tau = 3*0.6*60*0.31 = 33.5 kips > T - OK Development of deformed bars in tension yh = 1 We = 1 Id = (f>' tWeX do = 48db = 30" II`` 25 f', //II Caissons =1 2'0" dia. x 11'-0" deep Foundation Pile Embedment w, = 2*w = 222 plf Passive Pressure, y = 200 psf/ft — 1/3 increase allowed (Geotechnical Report) 10.375 feet — Use 11'0" — OK, Sheet 44 Flexural Bending in Pile M = 2*Mci = 38 ft-kips (8)#7 Vertical bars w/ #3 ties (&, 12"- OK, Sheet 45 SE Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Su6e 215 Portland. Oregon 97221-2411 Phone (503) 292-1635 Faux: (5031 292-9846 project 1 J /' date OCT 0 2 2008 designer 41 sheet of Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 SW Westgate t, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97.E Phone: 503.292.1635 Fax: 503.292.9846 www.psen ineers.com Lie. # :.KW-06002408 Description : WT4x6.5 + W4x13 Final Section Properties Total Area 5.750 inA2 Calculated final C.G. distance from Datum : X cg Dist. 0.0 in Y cg Dist. -2.0337 in Edge Distances from CG. : +X 2.030 in -X -2.030 in +Y 4.3937 in -Y-3.7663 in Ixx = 46.8048 inA4 F-.- Yy = 5.220 inA4 Sxx: -X Sxx :+X Syy: -Y Syy: +Y r xx ryy Steel 144 WT4x6.5 :1 Area= A Height Width 12.4274 inA3 10.6526 inA3 <- 2.5714 inA3 2.5714inA3 2.8531 in 0.95280 in 1.920 inA2 4.000 in 4.000 in Title : HOAG HOSPITAL. SOUND WALL Dsgnr: CGP{ Project Desc.: Project Notes : Job # 08-132 Printed: 2 SEP 2008. 9:05AM +uenxu08 1TWOe-rsoas a iax.a6 ENBICALC.INC.r983-200s, Ver fl419 ). License Owner: PETERSON STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS Ixx = Iyy = Sxx = Syy = 2.890 inA4 1.360 inA4 2.806 inA3 0.680 inA3 Rotation = Xcg = Ycg = 0 dec CCW 0.000 in 1.330 in W4X13 : 2 Ixx = 11.300 inA4 Rotation = 0 dec CCW Area = 3.830 inA2 Iyy = 3.860 inA4 Xcg = 0.000 in Height 4.060 in Sxx = 5.433 inA3 Ycg = -3.720 in Width 4.160 in Syy = 1.901 inA3 ci = 4.393 / -1.33 = 3.06 In Wednoiday, September 17, 2038 Multlfr'ame40 Version 9.05 Page I GAProject Flies12009108-128 to 08-150N08-1320Autt*ame509-132-Well 3 Poetmfd &HAWS • VVT4x6.5 E W4x13 y adat. Label 1 h in edra lett °z' deo . 1 1 i 0.00: 0.00; 0.00! 0.01 0.0: 0.0 2 . 2 -1.11 1 0.00 0.00 ; 0.01 0.0 . 0.7 3 3 0.00! 0.0 . '0.0 0.8 Frame if 3 Poke mbe Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 SW Westgate' 3, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 9? , Phone: 503.292.1635 Fax: 503.292.9846 www psengmeers com Title : HOAG HOSPITAL SOUND WALL Dsgnr: CGP{ Project Desc.: Project Notes : Job # 08-132 Printed: 29 AUG 20013 9:33AM Ms rmlegles2DoeW9-'Aga 7azlFnorciYLjO&lszet BYER&C,JNG 19$3�2000,Va; 8.019 Lic. # : KW-0600240E Description : Wall #3 H =18.5' General information Pole Shape Pole Diameter Calculate Min. Depth for Allowable Pressures No Lateral Restraint at Ground Surface Allow Passive Max Passive Controlling Values Goveming Load Combination : +1)+W+}1 Lateral Load Moment NO Ground Surface Restraint ' Pressures at 1/3 Depth Actual Allowable Footing Base Area Maximum Soil Pressure Apptietl;Loipls , Lateral Concentrated Load Circular 24,0 in 200.0 Pcf Psi 4.1070 k 37.9898 k-ft 916.950 psf 917.425 Psf 3.1416 ftA2 0.0 ksf AWFespole is square Lateral Distributed Load D : Dead Load Lr : Roof Live L : Live S : Snow W : Wind E: Earthquake H : Lateral Earth Load distance above Base Load CombinationResults +D+L+H +D+Lr+H +D+W1+H +D-1.0W+H +D+0.750Lr+0.750L+0.750W+H +D+0.750Lr+0.750L-0.750W+H +D+0.750 L+0.750 5+0.750 W +H +D+0.750L+0.7505-0.750W+H +0.60D+W+H +0.60D-1 OW+H k Idfl k k/ft klft k/ft k 0.2220 Mt kRt kilt ft TOP of Load above ground 18.50 ft BOTTOM of Load above ground ft 0.0 0.0 4.1 4.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 41 41 License Owner : PETERSON STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS Code References: 2006 IBC 1805.7.2, 1997 UBC 1806.8.2.1 Applied Moment 0.0 0.0 38.0 38.0 28.5 28.5 28.5 28.5 38.0 38.0 k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft k-ft 0.13 0.13 10.38 0.13 9.25 0.13 9.25 0.13 10.38 0.13 Vertical Load k k k k k k k 0.0 0.0 917.0 0.0 817.5 0.0 817.5 0.0 917.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 917.4 0.7 818.1 0.5 818.1 0.5 917.4 0.7 Peterson SWclucal Engineers. Inc Peterson Structural Fnnineers, Inc.. 5319 SW Westgate 3, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97221 Phone: 503.292.1635 Fax: 503.292.9846 wwwpsengineers.com Concrete Column Description : Wall #3 H = 18 5' General Information fc : Concrete 28 day strength = 2.50 ksi E = = 3,122.0 ksi Density = 150.0 pcf p = 0.850 Fy - Main Rebar = 60.0 ksi E - Main Rebar = 29,000.0 ksi AS TM A615 Bars Used Allow. Reinforcing Limits Min. Reinf. Max. Reinf. 1 0 0/0 8.0 0/0 Load Combination 2006 IBC & ASCE 7-05 Column Cross Section Title : HOAG HOSPI Dsgnr: CGP Project Desc.: Project Notes : SOUND WALL Job # 08-132 Printed 1 SEP 200E 8-34.1d Ale: elayed Fllaeww00019 -1a b 08-15P.S132iErw cW&132ece ENa1CALC, INC. 19535 2005, Ver.a0.19 Code Ref : 2006 IBC, ACI 318-05 Overall Column Height = 11.0 ft End Fixity Top Free, Bottom Fixed ACI Code Year ACI 318-05 Brace condition for deflection (buckling) along columns : X-X (width) axis : Fully braced against buckling along X-X Axis Y-Y (depth) axis :Fully braced against buckling along Y Y Axis Type of Stirrups used : Spirals- r/E s Fy - Stirrups = 40.0 ksi E - Stirrups = 29,000.0 ksi Circular Column Section : 24.0in diameter Rebar Sizes & Locations Bar Size X Y in in # 7 8.563 0.000 # 7 -8.563 0.000 Applied Loads Column self weight included : 5,183.63Ibs * BENDING LOADS... Moment acting about X-X axis, W = 38.0 k DESIGN SUMMARY Maximum Stress Ratio Load Combination +0.90D+ Location of max.above base At maximum location values are .. . Pu (p'Pn Mu-x tp' Mn-x Mu-y (p*Mn-y: Column Capacities... Pnmax : Nominal Max. Compressive Axial Capacity Pnmin : Nominal Min. Tension Axial Capacity (p Pn, max : Usable Compressive Axial Capacity N Pn, min : Usable Tension Axial Capacity Total bars = 8 Bar Size X Y # in in • 7 n • •»r Circular Column Note: Bar distances are from column center. Bar Size X Y Bar Size X in in # in Y in # 7 6.055 6.055 # 7 -6.055 -6.055 Dead Load Factor -ft # 7 0.000 8.563 # 7 -6.055 # 7 -0.000 -8.563 # 7 6.055 6,055 -6.055 Entered loads factored per load combinations specified by user. 0.34750 : 1 60W+1 60H 10.4832 ft 4.6653 k 4.6653 k 60.80 k-ft 174.966 k-ft 0.0 k-ft 0.0 k-ft 1,239-13 k -288.0 k 737 281 k -201 60 k 3975thi_ Maximum SERVICE Load Reactions .. Top along Y-Y 0.0 k Bottom along Y-Y 0.0 k Top along X-X 0.0 k Bottom along X-X 0 0 k Maximum SERVICE Load Deflections... Along Y-Y -0.077609 in at 1 1.0 ft above base for load combination : W Only Along X-X 0.0in at 0.0ft above base for load combination : p E 5 General Section Information . N = A 70— (3 =0850 e = 0.850 p : % Reinforcing 1.0610 % Rebar 4 Ok Reinforcing Area 4.80 inA2 Concrete Area 452 389 inA2 _OK✓ Post 4 Calculations for Wall Segment 4 — 14' high wall Wall Segment 4 W4x13 w/ 1/2"x4" F.B. Stiffener (Sh. 52) 4 in w = 6.2*p = 111 plf Li = 9' — height of W4x13 w/o stiffener L2 = 5' — height of W4x13 w/ stiffener L = 14' — Total height of post 4.16 in w*L2 Mci 2 fb)= 12*Mc, Sx, w*L; Mc2 — 2 12 * Mc2 fb2 = Sx2 — 10,878 ft-lb — at base of post — 12,673 psi — 4,496 ft-lb — at base of W4x13 w/o stiffener — 9,935 psi Fb = 0 6*36 ksi =21.6 ksi > fbi &fb2—OK V = w*L = 1 554 pounds — OK by Inspection A = 1.21" = L/139 — OK See sheet 53 for deflection Connection to base plate Couple, C = 12 * M c, — 21.2 kips 4.16+4/2 6" of 1/4" fillet weld to each side (min) Capacity = 6*(3.710P5/in) = 22.2 kips > C — OK Stiffener to Post Connection V9 = w*Li = 999 pounds Vag = V9 + V14 — 1,277 pounds 2 Q = A*d = 2*2.68 = 5.36 in3 Ix = 35.84 in* V*Q q = — 191 lb/in or 2.3 kips/ft Ix 2" of 1/4" Weld at 12" o.c. V,4= w*L = 1,554 pounds See sheet 52 See sheet 52 2" of 1/4" fillet weld (effective) at 12" o.c. both sides Capacity = 2*(3.7"/in) = 7.4 kips > q - OK w/ stiffener Sxi = 10.3 in3 w/o stiffener Sx2 = 5.43 in3 Lr9fl Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 6319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Penland. Oregon 97221-2411 Phone (503) 292-1835 Fax: (503) 292-9846 project 6 5, _ date OCT 0 2 2000 designer Al f j sheet Lt6 of 1 Calculations for Wall Segment 4 - 14' high wall Base Plate 12"x 8"x 1" r.. 8" T = 12 * M a_ 12.1 kips Mp = 2.75*T = 33.3 in -kips M i ° ° —_.r 1 1/4" 10.75 re3 M Q„ 9 1/2., S = 6 - 1.33 in fb = SP = 25 ksi f 1 0 0 i 1 1/4,. t Fb=0.75*36=27kai>f'-OK Cast -in -Place Anchor Bolts Pc = 2,500 psi (4) 3/4"dia Headed bolts w/ 2" dia. x 1/4" washers he= 12 in d" = 0.75 in da,=2in Analyze Concrete for no cracking - 24"x24" grade beam OK_ by Comparison to Wall 1 5 1/2" eJ cal =6.25in c� = 68.5 in sI=9.5in s2 = 5.5 in T = 12.1 kips - Governed by wind V = 1.5 kips PUN Vxw O Lgti, PROrILE VIEW O. 5319 &W Wn*S$* 0S . &B" 215 PS Oregon 972118411 Phone loon 212.19a Fat 20241146 project ($1-13z date OCT 0 2 2008 designer M 95 sheet !1 of Calculations for Wall Segment 4 — 14' high wall Check Four Cases in Tension 1) Steel Strength of Anchor in Tension n = 2 bolts lz Aso= n*� ZDl=0.44in2 futa = 90,000 psi Nse = n*Ase*fine = 79,200 lb �Ne, = 0.75*Na, = 59.400 Ib 2) Concrete Breakout Strength of Anchor in Tension ke=24 ANe = (cat + (24-cat))*(1.5hef+ s2 + 1.5hef) = 996 in2 AND„ = 9*hef2 = 1,296 in2 tPec,N = 1 — No Eccentricity 0.3*ca,mD `1'edN = 0.7 + — 0.80 1.5 * h0f Tc,N = 1.25 `Ycp,N -= 1.0 Nb = ke fT het." = 49,883 lb Ncbg — ANC *tee,N*ted.N*`I'c,N*Wep,N*Nb = 38,336 lb A Nco QN = 0.70*Na 3) Pullout Strength of Anchor in Tension z Ab,g= n*(a2=3.14in2 To, = 1.0 Np = 8*Ab,g* = 62,800 lb Np„ = `Pe,p*Np = 62,800 tbNpp = 0.70*N „ = 43.960 lb LID5E Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97221-2411 Phone (503) 292-1635 Fax: (503) 2929946 project v � - i 3 z date OCT 0 2 2008 designer ) 5 sheet T 92 of Calculations for Wall Segment 4 — 14' high wall 4) Concrete Side -Face Blowout Strength of a Headed Anchor in Tension cat = 6.25 in 0.4*hef= 4.8 in < cat .. AnalysisReq'd d z Abrg = tC * 2 = 3.14 inz Nsb = 160*cal A brs Vic = 88,600 lb Nsbg= [i+J�Nsb =101,5951b = 0,71 *Nt = 71,1171b Check Three Cases in Shear 1) Steel Strength of Anchor in Shear n = 4 bolts r lz Ase= 1C*I ° I=0.44inz. 2 fa. = 90,000 psi Vsa = n*Ase*fDta = 158,4001b V a = 0.65 * Vsa = 102,960 Ib 2) Concrete Breakout Strength of Anchor in Shear le=8do Avc = [ 1.5*cat + sz+ 1.5*call*(1.5*cai) = 227 inz Avco = 4.5*caiz = 176 inz `Yec,v = I — No eccentricity `1'ed,V = cat >_ 1.5*cai : , tea,v = 1.0 = 1.4 o.z Vb=7*[ * d * fc t.5=7,1791b ° Vcbg_ Ay' *Peers*Pears*Wc•v*Vb= 12,963 lb A vet, cba=O.7*V_g=9074Ib SSE Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 972214011 Phone (503) 292-1635 Fait: (503) 292.9846 project designer %17 /2 date OCI021008 sheet l� 9 of Calculations for Wall Segment 4 — 14' high wall 3) Concrete Pryout Strength of Anchor in Shear key =2 Ncbg = 38,3361b VDpg = kcp*Ncbg = 76,672 lb mVc.=0.7*Vjag =aW_O_Lb Interaction of Tensile and Shear Forces N = T = 12.1 kips NituOW,ASD = °N6 g — 16.8 kips N + V—1<1.2-OK Nallow,ASD Vallow,ASD Grade Beam Reinforcement for Grade Beam 24" x 24" w/ (8) #5 Longitudinal bars and #3 stirrups @ 12" o.c. Ar = 0.11 in2 At=0.31*8=2.48in s=12in Torsion Ao = 0.85*(24-3)*(24-2) = 393 in2 — Area Enclosed by Reinforcing Bars fyt=40ksi fy = 60 ksi T = Mc = 10,878 ft-lb 1.6 * T TD — 17.4 ft-kips 1000 2A0A,fy, TD = cot 0 = 288.2 in -kips = 24 ft-kips s ,4,T„ = 0.75*Tn = 18 ft-kips > T„ — OK Longitudinal Reinforcement (8) # 5 Ok,� Comparison to Wall 2 CASE Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Portland. Oregon 97221-2411 Phone (503) 292-1635 Fax: (503) 292.9846 project 09 -/3 - date OCT 0 2 2000 designer 4� p r sheet E (-7 of Calculations for Wall Segment 4 — 14' high wall Grade Beam to Caisson Connection #5 Bar db = 5/8 in (4) #5bars fy=60ksi As=0.31 in2 Reinforcement in Tension T = 2*Mci* 12 * 1 — 15.4 kips 17 1000 Tag = 2*0.6*60*0.31 = 22,3 kips > T - OK Development of deformed bars in tension Wt=1 We=1 = [f,.x)d b48dk3025 =I Caissons 2'0" dia. x 9'-0" deep Foundation Pile Embedment wp = 2*w = 222 plf Passive Pressure, y = 200 psf/ft —1 /3 increase allowed 8.875 feet — Use 9'0" — OK. Sheet 54 Flexural Bending in Pile M = 2*Mci = 21.8 ft-kips (81 #7 Vertical bars w/ #3 ties iii 12 — OK_ Sheet 55 (Geotechnical Report) num Paterson Mniettral Enginelino, Inc 5319 S.W. ~Oats Dire, Slab 215 Pa"WW, Orogel 972214411 Phone (261) 222•N22 Fat (60A 20c081e project c2 -/3z date OCT 0 2 2 designer NIPS sheet 5 1 of r:SE Paterson 9VUYYY L,p—m M Peterson Structural tural Engineers, Inc. 5319 SW Westgate. 3, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 9Tat Phone: 503.292.1635 Fax: 503.292.9846 wwW w.psengineers.m General Section •Propertte> Lic. # : KW-06002408 Desoiption : F(nal Section Total Area 5.830 inA2 Calculated final C.G. distance from Datum : X cg Dist. 0.0 in Y cg Dist -0.68034 in Edge Distances from CG. : +X • 2.030 in -X -2.030 in +Y 4.6803 in -Y 3.4797In U2x4 F.B. ' W4x13 hoc = lyy = Sxx:-X Sxx:+X Syy: -Y Syy:+Y rxx ryy General Shape* 35.838311144 3.9017 inM 10.2994 InA3 7.6572 InA3 1.92201nA3 1.9220 In43 2.4794 in 0.81807 in The : HOAG HOSPF" SOUND WALL Dsgnr. CGP Project Desc.: Project Notes : Job*, 08-132 PBnted:30S@ 2008, 7:34AM Rif3WipJi fISC AVISW0045N8731Eusa 0111a 00104404.114** ,Y4r.0A10 License Owner : PETERSON STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS 7z d /— _ Red :1 Height = 4.000 in Width = 0.500 in Rotation = 0 dec CCW Area = 2.000 inA2 Xog = 0.000 in hoc = 2.667 InM Sxx = 1.333 InA3 Roc = 1.1551n Ycg= 2.000 in Iyy= 0.042lnM Syy= 0.1671nA3 Ryy= 0.1441n Steel Shapes W4X13 :1 hoc = 11.300 in*4 Rotation = 0 dec CCW Area = 3.830inA2 lyy = 3.860inM Xcg= 0.000 in Height 4.060 in SIa = 5.433 in43 Ycg = -2.080 in Width 4.160 in Syy= 1.901 In43 4. 6g - 2 r 2.C8 er 52 Tuespay, September 30, 2008 kkiltiframe4D Version 9.05 Pape 1 GAProject Files12008108-126 to 08-150108-1329A4titramM08-132-Wall 4 Post - F.13..mar ;1 12 13 so jcsint I Label I (be I • In In I in I- . daa • I ditz' I 1 0.00,. 0.00 0.00 0.0. dee 0.01 0.0 2 -0.181 0.00 8.801 15! • oil • • 3 -1.21 • 0.00 0 00 . 0.0 0.0 0.61 Sections • 1/2k4*F.13. • W4x13 Frame 53 Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 SW Westgate' Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97a_ . Phone:503.292.1635 Fax: 503.292.9846 www.psengineers.com Pole Embedded in Soil Description : Wall #4 . H = 14 General Information Pole Shape Circular Pole Diameter 24 0 in Calculate Min Depth for Allowable Pressures No Lateral Restraint at Ground Surface Allow Passive 200.0 Oct Max Passive P f Controlling Values Goveming Load Combination : +D+W+11 Lateral Load 3.1080 k Moment 21 7560 k-ft NO Ground Surface Restraint Pressures at V3 Depth Actual Allowable Footing Base Area Maximum Soil Pressure Applied Loads 776.676 Psi 776.717 pst 3.1416fr2 0.0 ksf Assumes pore IS square Title : HOAG HOSPITAL SOUND WALL Dsgnr: CGP Project Desc.: Project Notes : Job # 08-132 Pnnled: 11 SEP 2008, 9.53AM Matt esproxa a asans-intaisot,W-a132ec8 emrcnue.we 1e43-mace,Vet eats Liam se.Owner; PETERSON STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS;, Code References: 2006 IBC 1805.7.2, 1997 UBC 1806.8.2.1 Lateral Concentrated Load Lateral Distributed Load Applied Moment D : Dead Load k Idft k-ft Lr: Roof Live k kift k-ft L: Live k k/ft k-ft S : Snow k Idft k-ft W : Wind k 0 2220 Idft k-ft E : Earthquake k Idft k-ft H : Lateral Earth k Idft k-ft Load distance above Base ft TOP of Load above ground 14.0 ft BOTTOM of Load above ground ft Load Combination Results +D+L+H +01-Lr+H +D+W+41 +D,1 0W+H +0+0 750Lr+0.750L10.750W+H 40+0 750Lr+0.750L-0.750W+H +0+0 750L+0 7505+0 750W+H +D+0 750E+0.750S-0 750W+1-I +0.600+W H-I +0 60D-10W+H Vertical Load k k k k k k k 0.0 0.0 0.13 00 0.0 0.0 00 013 0.0 0.0 31 218 8.88 776 7 776 7 31 218 0.13 0.0 0.3 2.3 16 3 7 88 690.6 692.3 2.3 16 3 013 0.0 0.0 2 3 16 3 7,88 690.6 692 3 2 3 16 3 013 0.0 0.0 31 21 8 8.88 776 7 776 7 3.1 218 013 00 08 5'4 Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 SW Westgate' Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97.- Phone: 503.292.1635 Fax: 503.292.9846 www.psengineers.com Concrete Column Lie #=kW-06002408 - • Description : Wall #4 - H = 14 General Information fc : Concrete 28 day strength = E= _ Density = Q Fy - Main Rebar E - Main Rebar Allow. Reinforcing Limits Min. Reinf. Max. Reinf. 2,50 ksi 2,850.0 ksi 150.0 pcf = 0.850 = 60.0 ksi = 29,000.0 ksi ASTMA615 Bars Used ▪ 1.0% • 8,0 Load Combination 2006 IBC & ASCE 7-05 Column Cross Section Tale : HOAG HOSPITAL SOUND WALL Job # 08-132 Dsgnr: CGP Project Desc.: Project Notes : Printed. 11 SEP 2008. &53MPo1 it elPlgrEAee1i00B08-1ffitDa&15010&1narne.: 813ace ENERCALC, LNG 1882008, Vat toia STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS. Code Ref : 2006 IBC, ACI 318-05 Overall Column Height = 9.0 ft End Fixity Top Free, Bottom Fixed ACI Code Year ACI 318-05 Brace condition for deflection (buckling) along columns : X-X (width) axis : Fully braced against buckling along X-X Axis Y-Y (depth) axis :Fully braced against buckling along Y-Y Axis Type of Stirrups used : Spireis T; e 5 Fy - Stirrups = 40.0 ksi E - Stirrups = 29,000.0 ksi Circular Cclumn Section : 24.0in diameter Rebar Sizes & Locations Bar Size X Y Bar Size X Y # in in # in in # 7 8.563 0.000 # 7 -8.563 0.000 Applied Loads Total bars = 8 # 7 6.055 6.055 # 7 -6.055 -6.055 Column self weight included : 4,241.15Ibs *Dead Load Factor BENDING LOADS... Moment acting about X-X axis, W = 21.80 k-fi DESIGN SUMMARY Circular Column Note: Bar distances are from column center. Bar Size X Y in in # 7 0.000 8.563 # 7 -0.000 -8.563 Bar Size X Y # in in # 7 -6.055 6.055 # 7 6.055 -6.055 Entered loads factored per load combinations specified by user. Maximum Stress Ratio = 0.19939 : 1 Load Combination +0,90D+1 60W+1.60H Location of max.above base 8,5772 ft At maximum location values are ... Pu cp*Pn Mu-x cp* Mn-x Mu-y c*Mn-y: Column Capacities .. . Pnmax : Nominal Max. Compressive Axial Capacity Pnmin : Nominal Min. Tension Axial Capacity cp Pn, max : Usable Compressive Axial Capacity cp Pn, min : Usable Tension Axial Capacity 3.8170 k 3,8170 k 34.880 k-ft 174.936 k-ft 0.0 k-ft 0.0 k-ft 1,239.13 k -288.0 k 737.281 k -201.60 k Maximum SERVICE Load Reactions .. Top along Y-Y 0.0 k Bottom abng Y-Y Top along X-X 0.0 k Bottom Song X-X Maximum SERVICE Load Deflections ... Along Y-Y -0.032649 in at 9.0 ft above base for load combination : w Only Along X-X 0.0 in at 0.0 ft above base for load combination : p. 6 5 General Section Information . = -9-7fr % =0.850 p : % Reinforcing 1,0610 % Rebar ° 0k Reinforcing Area 4.80 in^2 Concrete Area 452.389 inA2 O. 9t6v.S5 0.:2 <1 0.0 k 0.0 k = 0.850 Utility Pipe Analysis Utility Pipe Analysis Analyzed using the Concrete Pipe Design Manual (CPDM) 36" dia. R.C.P., Assumed Class III Type IV installation, Assumed Calculate Load on Pipe: w = 110 pcf — Assumed weight of soil H = 15 feet — Distance between top of soil to utility pipe Bd = 6 feet — Assumed trench width at time of installation Kµ' = 0.110 — Load Coefficient per Figure 214, Saturated Clay per geotechnical report D = 36 in — Inside diameter of pipe Do = 3 + 12) 4 —3.67 ft — Outside diameter of pipe Weight of Soil ZrKµ B Load Coefficient, Cd = 1 2 * K d —1.92 µ Wdl =Cd *w*Bd+Do2(g—�)*w=7,647lbs (CPDM eq. 4-3) (CPDM eq. 4-4) Weight from Sound Wall Worst Case: Caisson is located, Hears = 5' above Storm Drain Wsw = 1,3301b — avg weight of sound wall (sh 3) wconc = 145 pcf — Unit weight of concrete Le,* = 12.17 ft — Distance between grade beams +pipe = 2 ft — Diameter of Caisson Aseam=4 ft2 Wd2 (ws W *A *( cats +LCaia)'\ cunt Beam 2 *Do = 214 lbs (Hon, +Oppa + Hoots )2 Percent Increase from Sound Wall Wdtot = Wdl + Wd2 = 7,861 lbs Percent Increase — Wd2 * 100 = 3% Wdtm Summary — There is less than a 3% increase in additional load from the sound wall. Therefore the forces from the sound wall will have minimal to no impact on the existing utility pipe. pSE Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5919 S.W. Westgate Dove, Suite 215 Portland, Oregon 97221-2411 Phone (509) 292-1535 Fax: (503) 292.9946 project designer date sheet OCT 0 2 2008 56 of n Deep Grade Beam To eliminate the need for off -site grading an alternate deep grade beam is being proposed to retain soil. The maximum amount of soil to be retained is three feet and will be located two feet away from the curb (As shown). L = 12'- 4" ft (distance between piers) b=42" d = 24-3 = 21" Total Reinforcement = 10-#5, (4 in tension) Loading Fill material consists of silty sand (per geotechnical report) At -rest pressure = 60 psf/ft w = 60*3*3/2 = 270 plf Check beam for minor axis bending w' = 1.4*270 = 378 plf 2 Mma3 = 11 = 5,224 ft-lb As=4*0.31=1.24in2 a = A3fY = 0.69 0.85f'cb 4Mg =SbAgfy(d_21 AM,n > Mn,„ — OK )l 12 115,255 ft-lb Check Caisson for Additional Point Load R = w*L = 3,3291b The Geotechnical Engineer provided a provision regarding the allowable passive pressure that requires no increase in depth to the caisson embedment. NOISE SOURCE PROPOSED SOUND WALL tO 2'-0\\_( URB 10) #5 CONTINUOUS AISSQN Peterson Structural Engineers, Inc. 5319 S.W. Westgate Drive, Suite 215 Poruana, Oregon 97221Q411 Phone (503) 292-1635 Fain (503) 292-9846 project date OCT 0 2 2006 designer sheet IT,✓ •f of