Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPA2022-0281_20221122_Geotechnical investigation report dated 04-30-22I EGA consultants GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL RE-DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 2508 MARINO DRIVE NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA Presented to: GROSS RESIDENCE c/o: Eric Olsen, AIA 2728 E. Coast Hwy, Suite "A" Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 Prepared by: EGA CONSULTANTS, Inc. 375-C Monte Vista Avenue Costa Mesa, California 92627 ph (949) 642-9309 fax (949) 642-1290 April 30, 2022 Project No. EO372.1 engznccrmg geotechnical applications 375-C Monte Vista Avenue • Costa Mesa, CA 92627 • (949) 642-9309 • FAX (949) 642-1290 PA2022-0281 consultants Site: Proposed Single Family Residence -2508 Marino Drive Newport Beach, California Executive Summary April 30, 2022 Project No. EO372.1 engineering geotechnicai applications Based on our geotechnical study of the site, our review of available reports and literature and our experience, it is our opinion that the proposed residen1ial development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. There appear to be no significant geotechnical constraints on-site that cannot be mitigated by proper planning, design, and utilization of sound construction practices. The engineering properties of the soil and native materials, and surface drainage offer favorable conditions for site re-development. The following key elements are conclusions confirmed from this investigation: The site is located in the seismically active Southern California area, and within 2 kilometers of the Type B Newport-Inglewood Fault. As such, the proposed development shall be designed in accordance with seismic considerations specified in the 2019 California Building Code (CBC) and the City of Newport Beach requirements. Foundation specifications herein include added provisions for potential liquefaction on-site per City policy CBC 1803.11-12. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Design Item Foundations Footing Bearing Pressure Passive Lateral Resistence: Perimeter/Interior Footing Widths: Perimeter/Interior Footing Depths: Coefficient of Friction: Mat Slab (Optional): Soil Expansion: Soil Sulfate Content: Upper Pad (Street Level) Removals: Sandy Soil Max. Density: Building Slab: Recommendations 1,750 psf -building, continuous; 2,250 psf -columns 250 psf per foot min. 15 inches with two No. 5 bars top and bottom min. 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade 0.30 min. 12 inches with thickened edges(+ 6 inches) with no. 5 bars@ 12" o.c. each way, top and bottom Non-Expansive Beach Sands Negligible, 5 ppm [SO) min. 2½ ft. overexcavation, with 2½ ft. envelope 108.0 pcf@ 11.5 % Opt. Moisture * Concrete slabs cast against properly compacted fill materials shall be a minimum of 5 inches thick (actual) and reinforced with No. 4 rebar at 12 inches on center in both directions. * Dowel all footings to slabs with No. 4 bars at 24 inches on center. * Concrete building slabs shall be underlain by 1" to 2" clean sand, underlain by a min. 15 mil thick moisture barrier, with all laps sealed, underlain by 4" of ¾-inch gravel (capillary break). Seismic Values : Site Class Definition (Table 1613.5.2) Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period, s. Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 1 s Period, S, Short Period Site Coefficient at 0.2 Period, Fa Long Period Site Coefficient at 1 s Period, F v Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period, SMs Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at 1 s Period, SM, Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period, Sos Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 1 s Period, S01 D 1.383 g 0.492 g 1.2 1.8 1.659 g 0.886 g 1.1 06 g 0.590 g PGAm= 0.726 g 375-C Monte Vi sta Avenue• Costa Mesa, CA 92627 • (949) 642-9309 • FAX (9 49) 642-1290 PA2022-0281 consultants engineering geotechnical applications Eric Olsen, Architect April 30 , 2022 Project No. EO372.1 2728 E. Coast Hwy, Suite "A" Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 Subject: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL RE-DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 2500 MARINO DRIVE NEWPORT BEACH , CALIFORNIA Dear Team, In accordance with your request and with the 2019 CBC, we have completed our Geotechnical Investigation of the above referenced site. This investigation was performed to determine the site soil conditions and to provide geotechnical parameters for the proposed re-grading and construction at the subject site. It is our understanding that the proposed re-development shall include the demolition of the existing residence and the construction of a new residential dwelling with associated improvements. This report presents the results of the investigation (including Liquefaction Computations) along with grading and foundation recommendations pertaining to the proposed residential development. This opportunity to be of service is appreciated. If you have any questions, please call. Very truly yours, EGA Consultants, Inc. DAVID A. WORTHINGTON, CEG 2124 Principal Engineering Geologist/CEO T~ JOHN F. EGGE S Staff Geologist Copies: (3) Addressee PAUL Sr. Proje Jl!o. C 5 EXP o\ iS'~lt '·c-- 375-C Mon te Vista Aven ue • Costa Mesa, CA 92627 • (949) 642-9309 • FAX (949·) 642-1290 PA2022-0281 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION April 30, 2022 Project No. EO372.1 FOR PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL RE-DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 2508 MARINO DRIVE NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION In response to your request and in accordance with the City of Newport Beach Building Department requirements, we have completed a preliminary geotechnical irivestigation at the subject site located at 2508 Marino Drive, in the City of Newport Beach, State of California (see Site Location Map, Figure 1). The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the existing geotechnical conditions at the subject site and provide recommendations and geotechnical parameters for site re- development, earthwork, and foundation design for the proposed re-construction. We were also requested to evaluate the potential for on-site geotechnical hazards. This report presents the results of our findings, as well as our conclusions and recommendations. SCOPE OF STUDY The scope of our investigation included the following tasks: • Review of readily available published and unpublished reports; • Geologic reconnaissance and mapping; • Excavation and sampling of two (2) exploratory borings (B-1 and 8-2) to a total depth of 10 feet below existing grade; • Continuous Cone Penetration Test (CPT) sounding to a depth of 50½ feet below grade (results of the CPT sounding are included herein); • Laboratory testing of representative samples obtained from the exploratory borings; • Engineering and geologic analysis including seismicity coefficients in accordance with the 2019 California Building Code (CBC); • Seismic and Liquefaction analysis and settlement computations (in accordance with California Geological Survey, SP 117A); • Preparation of this report presenting our findings, conclusions, and recommendations. 2 PA2022-0281 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS The subject bayfront property is a wedge-shaped, approximately 60 to 104 ft. wide by 124 to 142 ft. long lot located at 2508 Marino Drive in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, California (see Site Location Map, Figure 1). For the purpose of clarity in this report, the lot is bound by Marino Drive to the west, and by alleyways and similar single family dwellings to the north, east, and south (see Plot Plan, Figure 2). The lot is located within the Bayshores Community. Channel waters of the Newport Bay are located approximately 300 feet southwest of the subject site. The Pacific Ocean shoreline is located approximately 0. 75 miles to the southwest. The lot is legally described as Lot 8 of Tract No. 1140, Unit Three of Bay Shores, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, California (APN 049-173-17). The subject property consists of a relatively flat, planar lot with no significant slopes on or adjacent to the site. Currently, the lot is occupied by a single family, one-story residence situated on a graded level pad. An attached garage is located in the eastern portion of the of the property and is accessed by a common area alley. The residence is supported on continuous perimeter footings with slab-on-grade floors. The current lot layout is presented in Figure 2, Plot Plan. PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL RE-DEVELOPMENT Based on our discussions with the project architect, Eric Olsen, the proposed residential development shall include the demolition of the existing structures, and the construction of a new two-story residential dwelling in its place. It is our understanding that the grade of the site is not expected to vary significantly, with maximum regrades consisting of approximately 1 to 2 feet in the building areas. We assume that the proposed building will consist of wood-frame and masonry block construction or building materials of similar type and load. The building foundations will consist of a combination of isolated and continuous spread footings. Loads on the footings are unknown, but are expected to be less than 2,250 and 1,750 pounds per square foot on the isolated and continuous footings, respectively. If actual loads exceed these assumed values, we should be contacted to evaluate whether revisions of this report are necessary. No basements or retaining walls are proposed for the residential development. Based on NAVD88, the site elevation is approximately 12 ft. above MSL. Based on the preliminary plans, the proposed finish floor elevation shall be 9+ ft. above mean sea Proposed Residential Development -Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr, Newport Beach, CA Project No. E0372. I April 30, 2022 3 PA2022-0281 level (MSL) to conform with City and United States FEMA flood elevation requirements. Note: The precise determination, measuring, and documenting of the site elevations, hub locations, property boundaries, etc., is the responsibility of the project licensed land surveyor. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Our subsurface exploration consisted of the excavation of two exploratory borings (B-1 and B-2) and one CPT probe to 50½ ft. below grade. Prior to drilling, the underground detection and markup service (Underground Service Alert of Southern California) was ordered and completed under DigAlert. Representative bulk and relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained for labora- tory testing. Geologic/CPT logs of the soil boring/probes are included in Appendix A. The borings were continuously logged by a registered geologist from our firm who obtained soil samples for geotechnical laboratory analysis. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2, Plot Plan. Geotechnical soil samples were obtained using a modified California sampler filled with 23/a inch diameter, 1-inch tall brass rings. Bulk samples were obtained by collecting representative bore hole cuttings. Locations of geotechnical samples and other data are presented on the boring logs in Appendix A. The soils were visually classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System. Classifications are shown on the boring logs included in Appendix A. LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory testing was performed on representative soil samples obtained during our subsurface exploration. The following tests were performed: * * * * Dry Density and Moisture Content (ASTM: D2216) Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content (ASTM: D1557) Direct Shear (ASTM D3080) Sulfate Content (CA 417, ACI 318-14) Proposed Re~idential Development -Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr., Newport Beach, CA Project No. E0372.1 April 30, 2022 4 PA2022-0281 * Soil Classification (ASTM 02487) All laboratory testing was performed by our sub-contractor, G3SoiIWorks, Inc., of Costa Mesa, California. Geotechnical test results are included in Appendix B, herein. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS The site soil and geologic conditions are as follows: Seepage and Groundwater Seepage or surface water ponding was not noted on the subject site at the time of our study. Groundwater was encountered in our test excavations at a depth of approximately 6½ feet below existing grade. According to the Orange County Water District (OCWD), there are no water wells located within the general vicinity of the subject property. Channel waters of the Newport Bay are located approximately 250 feet southwest of the subject site. The Pacific Ocean is located approximately 0.75 miles to the southwest (see Figure 1, Site Location Map). Depths to groundwater are influenced by tidal fluctuations. A tidal chart for March 9, 2022 is presented as Figure 4, herein. Geologic Setting Regionally, the site is located within the western boundary of the Coastal Plain of Orange County. The Coastal Plain lies within the southwest portion of the Los Angeles Basin and consists of semi-consolidated marine and non-marine deposits ranging in age from Miocene to recent. The western boundary of the Coastal Plain, in which the site is located, is referred to as the Tustin Plain. It is bound by the Santa Ana Mountains to the northeast and the San Joaquin Hills to the southeast. Based on available geologic maps the site is underlain by a thin mantle of estuarine/hydraulic sands and/or engineered fill. The shallow soil layer is underlain by Quaternary-age old paralic/terrace deposits (Qop/Qtm) which are described as medium dense to very dense, oxidized, fine to medium grained, moderately to well-cemented sand, silty sand and thin silt/clay layers (see reference No. 2). The old paralic deposits are underlain by massive bedrock of the Monterey Formation (Tm). Roadside exposures of massive bedrock of the Monterey Proposed Residential Development -Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr., Newport Beach, CA Project No. E0372. l April 30, 2022 5 PA2022-0281 Formation (Tm) are visible on the inland side of side of Pacific Coast Highway approximately 750 feet north of the site (Dover Shores bluffs). A Geologic Map is presented as Figure 3, herein (reference: Morton, D.M., and Miller, F.K., 2006). Based on the geologic map (Figure 3) correlation with the on-site CPT probe, bedrock of the Monterey Formation (Tm) was likely encountered approximately 25 feet below grade. Faulting A review of available geologic records indicates that no active faults cross the subject property (reference No. 2). Seismicity The seismic hazards most likely to impact the subject site is ground shaking following a large earthquake on the Newport-Inglewood (onshore), Palos Verdes (offshore), Whittier-Elsinore, or San Joaquin Blind Thrust, or Cucamonga Faults. With respect to this hazard, the site is comparable to others in this general area in similar geologic settings. The grading specifications and guidelines outlined in Appendix C of the referenced report are in part, intended to mitigate seismic shaking. These guidelines conform to the industry standard of care and from a geotechnical standpoint, no additional measures are warranted. Based on our review of the "Seismic Zone Map," published by the California Department of Mines and Geology in conjunction with Special Publication 117, there are no earthquake landslide zones on or adjacent to the site. The proposed development shall be designed in accordance with seismic considerations contained in the 2019 CBC and the City of Newport Beach requirements. Based on Chapter 16 of the 2019 CBC and on Maps of Known Active Near- Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada (ASCE 7-16 Standard), the following parameters may be considered: 2019 CBC Seismic Design Parameters (Equivalent Lateral Force Method) SI DRESS D. h TEAD : 2508 Marino nve, Newport Beac , CA Site Latitude (Decimal Degrees) Site Longitude(Decimal Degrees) Site Class Definition Proposed Re~idential Development• Gross Residence Soil~ Report • 2508 Marino Dr., Newport Beach, CA Project No. E0372. I April 30, 2022 6 33.6149791 -1 17.9112722 D PA2022-0281 Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period, S5 1.382 g Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at Is Period, S1 0.492 g Short Period Site Coefficient at 0.2 Period, Fa 1.2 Long Period Site Coefficient at Is Period, Fv 1.8 Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period, SMs 1.659 g Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at Is Period, SM1 0.886 g Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period, S0 s I. I 06 g Design Spectral Response Acceleration at Is Period SDI 0.590 g In accordance with the USGS Design Maps, and assuming Site Class "D", the mean peak ground acceleration (PGAm) per USGS is 0.725 g. The stated PGAm is based on a 2% probability of exceedance in a 50 year span (see copies of the USGS Design Maps Detailed Report, Appendix D, herein). Other Geologic Hazards Other geologic hazards such as landsliding, or expansive soils, do not appear to be evident at the subject site. FINDINGS Subsurface Soils As encountered in our test borings, the site is underlain by, fill and native materials as follows: Fill (Af} Fill soils were encountered in each of the borings to a depth of approximately 2½ feet below existing grade. The fill soils consist generally of medium brown, moist, loose to medium dense, fine-grained silty sand with trace shell fragments. The expansion potential of the fill soils was judged to be very low (E.I. = 0) when exposed to an increase in moisture content. Based on the laboratory results dated March 31, 2022, the site maximum dry density is 108.0 pcf at an optimum moisture content of 11 .5 % (per ASTM D 1557). The complete laboratory reports are presented in Appendix B, herein. Proposed Residential Developmenl -Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr, Newport Beach, CA Projecl No. E0372. l April 30, 2022 7 PA2022-0281 Hydraulic-Native Sands (Qe), Terrace Deposits (Qtm) and Bedrock (Tm) Underlying the fill materials are hydraulic and native sands and silty sands encountered in each of the test borings (B-1, B-2, and CPT-1). A thin layer (less than 12" thick) of silts/clays was encountered at approximately 6 feet below grade. The terrace deposits are underlain by bedrock of the Monterey Formation (Tm) consisting of dense to very dense, sand and siltstone to the maximum depths explored (50½ ft. below existing grade). Based on the geologic map (Figure 3) correlation with the on-site CPT probe advanced to 50½ feet, bedrock of the Monterey Formation (Tm) was likely encountered at approximately 25 feet below grade. LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS (Per SP117A) Liquefaction of soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion in response to earthquakes. Both research and historical data indicate that loose, granular sandy soils are susceptible to liquefaction, while the stability of rock, gravels, clays, and silts are not significantly affected by vibratory motion. Liquefaction is generally known to occur only in saturated or near saturated granular soils. The site is underlain by fill/eolian sands, old paralic deposits, and bedrock of the Monterey Formation. It is our understanding that the current City policy, has assigned a seismic settlement potential of one (1.0) inch in the upper ten feet, and three (3.0) inches for soil depths of ten to fifty feet. In the event settlement values exceed these threshold values, then additional analysis and/or additional mitigation is required. The CPT testing was performed in accordance with the "Standard Test Method for Performing Electronic Friction Cone and Piezocone Penetration Testing of Soils," (ASTM D5778-12). The seismically induced settlement for the proposed structure was evaluated based on the "Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes" by I.M. Idriss and R.W. Boulanger, dated September 8, 2008 as well as the "CPT and SPT Based Liquefaction Triggering Procedures" by R.W. Boulanger and I.M. Idriss, dated April 2014. The analysis was provided by two 10-feet deep 4 " diameter hand-auger borings, and a 50+ feet deep 1.7" diameter CPT probe advanced in the street adjacent to the subject site. The exploratory borings and probe locations are shown in the Plot Plan, Figure 2, herein. The CPT test consists of a sounding to the specified depth using an integrated Proposed Residential Development -Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr., Newport Reach, CA Project No. E0372. I April 30, 2022 8 PA2022-0281 cone system manufactured by Vertek. The cone penetrometer was pushed using a 30-ton CPT rig, with samples taken approximately every 2.5 cm, or 0.98 inches. The following parameters are measured: Cone Resistance (qc), Sleeve Friction (fs), Dynamic Pore Pressure (u), Inclination, and Penetration Speed. The parameters were recorded using a laptop computer, and compared with baseline readings to adjust for temperature or zero load offsets. The Ishihara and Yoshimine 1992 paper titled "Evaluation of Settlements in Sand Deposits Following Liquefaction During Earthquakes" was reviewed. The paper discusses that if given the factor of safety and the density in each layer of a sand deposit at a given site, the volumetric strain can be calculated , and then by integrating the volume changes through the depth, the amount of settlement at the ground surface can be estimated . The liquefaction analysis is based on the accepted document of Idriss and Boulanger (2014), which integrates the findings established by Ishihara and Yoshimine (1992). The total value for seismic induced settlement due to liquefaction is calculated in the last three columns of the spreadsheet in Appendix D herein. The computations and results of our Liquefaction Analysis, based on CPT blow counts of Boring CPT-1 (Appendix E). The seismically induced settlement analysis was evaluated based on methods published in the references Nos. "a" through "I" (see "Associated References", herein). The liquefaction and seismic settlement calculations indicate seismic settlement (includes dry and saturated sands) in the upper 50 feet is less than 3.0 inches, and in the upper 10 feet is less than 1.0 inch (post soil cement treatment -see page 5 of Plate A). Therefore, shallow mitigation methods for liquefaction may be implemented per City Code Policy (No. CBC 1803.5.11-2 last revised 7/3/2014). Based on our liquefaction analysis, and in accordance with the City of Newport Beach Policy No. CBC 1803.5.11-12 (NBMC, Chapter 15), we recommend the following mitigative methods to minimize the effects of shallow liquefaction: 1. Tie all pad footings with grade beams. 2. All footings should be a minimum of 24 inches deep, below grade. 3. Continuous footings should be reinforced with two No. 5 rebar (two at the top and two at the bottom). 4. Concrete slabs cast against properly compacted fill materials shall be a minimum of 5 inches thick (actual) and reinforced with No. 4 rebar at 12 inches on center in both directions. The reinforcement shall be supported on chairs to insure positioning of the reinforcement at mid-center in the slab. Proposed Residential Development -Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr., Newport Beach. CA Project No. E0372. I April 30, 2022 9 PA2022-0281 5. Dowel all footings to slabs with No. 4 bars at 24 inches on center. 6. Additionally, to further reduce the effects of the thin shallow zones of potentially liquefiable soils, the building slab shall include 15" w by 24" d interior grade beams ("cross beams") to be reinforced with two No. 5 rebars (two at the top and two at the bottom). The foundation specifications outlined above will act to decrease the potential settlement due to liquefaction and/or seismically induced lateral deformation to tolerable amounts. If the above specifications are incorporated, the proposed structure shall be stable and adequate for the intended uses and the proposed construction will not adversely impact the subject or adjacent properties. CONCLUSIONS Based on our geotechnical study of the site, our review of available reports and literature and our experience, it is our opinion that the proposed improvements at the site are feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. There appear to be no significant geotechnical constraints on-site that cannot be mitigated by proper planning, design, and utilization of sound construction practices. The engineering properties of the soil and native materials, and the surface drainage offer favorable conditions for site re- development. RECOMMENDATIONS The following sections discuss the principle geotechnical concerns which should be considered for proper site re-development. Earthwork Grading and earthwork should be performed in accordance with the following recommendations and the General Earthwork and Grading Guidelines included in Appendix C. It is our understanding that the majority of grading will be limited to the re-grading of the building pad for the proposed construction. In general, it is anticipated that the removal of the upper 2½ feet within the building footprint (slab-on-grade portion) will require removal and recompaction to prepare the site for construction. Additionally, the bottom of the excavation shall be scarified a minimum 6 inches. The removals should be accomplished so that all fill and backfill existing as part of the previous site use and demolition operations are removed. Where feasible, the limits of the pad fill shall be defined by a three (3) feet envelope encompassing the building footprint. Care should be taken to protect the adjacent property improvements. A minimum one foot thick fill blanket should be placed throughout the exterior Proposed Residential Development -Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr., Newport Beach, CA Project No. J.;0372. l April 30, 2022 1 0 PA2022-0281 improvements (approaches, hardscape, etc.). The fill blanket will be achieved by re-working (scarifying) the upper 12 inches of the existing grade. Site Preparation Prior to earthwork or construction operations, the site should be cleared of surface structures and subsurface obstructions and stripped of any vegetation in the areas proposed for development. Removed vegetation and debris should then be disposed of off-site. A minimum of 2½ feet (+6 inches of scarification) of the soils below existing grade will require removal and recompaction in the areas to receive building pad fill. Following removal, the excavated surface should be inspected by the soils engineer or his designated representative prior to the placement of any fill in footing trenches. Holes or pockets of undocumented fill resulting from removal of buried obstructions discovered during this inspection should be filled with suitable compacted fill. Soil Cement For the building pads, due to in situ dry, cohesion less soils, we recommend approximately four (4) pallets (40 bags dry mix, each weighing 94 pounds and approximately 1.33 cubic yards) of Portland cement be blended into the newly- placed fill. The first application of the Portland Cement shall be placed on the bottom of the scarified over-excavation(s). This remedial specification may be eliminated or reduced if suitable import fills are trucked-in. Fills The on-site soils are suitable for reuse as compacted fill, provided they are free of organic materials, debris, and materials larger than four (4) inches in diameter. After removal of any loose, compressible soils, all areas to receive fill and/or other surface improvements should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches, brought to at least 2 percent over optimum moisture conditions and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM: D 1557). If necessary, import soils for near-surface fills should be predominately granular, possess a very low expansion potential, and be approved by the geotechnical engineer. Lift thicknesses will be dependent on the size and type of equipment used. In general, fill should be placed in uniform lifts not exceeding 6 inches. Placement and compaction of fill should be in accordance with local grading ordinances under the observation and testing of the geotechnical consultant. We recommend that fill soils be placed at moisture contents at least 2 percent over optimum (based on ASTM: D 1557). We recommend that oversize materials (materials over 4 inches) should they be Proposed Re~idential Development -Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr., Newport 13each. C/\ Project No. EO3 72.1 April 30, 2022 11 PA2022-0281 encountered, be stockpiled and removed from the site. Trench Backfill The on-site soils may be used as trench backfill provided they are screened of rock sizes over 4 inches in dimension and organic matter. Trench backfill should be compacted in uniform lifts (not exceeding 6 inches in compacted thickness) by mechanical means to at least 90 percent relative compaction (ASTM: D 1557). Geotechnical Parameters The following Geotechnical parameters may used in the design of the proposed structure (also, see "Liquefaction Analysis" section, above): Foundation Design Structures on properly compacted fill may be supported by conventional, continuous or isolated spread footings. All footings should be a minimum of 24 inches deep (measured in the field below lowest adjacent grade). At this depth (24 inches) footings founded in fill materials may be designed for an allowable bearing value of 1,750 and 2,250 psf (for dead-plus-live load) for continuous wall and isolated spread footings, respectively. These values may be increased by one-third for loads of short duration, including wind or seismic forces. Reinforcement requirements may be increased if recommended by the project structural engineer. In no case should they be decreased from the previous recommendations. Optional: Mat Foundation Design A mat slab foundation system is an option for the proposed residential structure. Mat slabs founded in compacted fill may be designed for an allowable bearing value of 800 psf (for dead-plus-live load). These values may be increased by one-third for loads of short duration, including wind or seismic forces. The actual design of the foundation and slabs should be completed by the structural engineer. MIN. DESIGN ITEM Mat foundations: allowable bearing pressure: passive lateral resistance: mat slab thickness: steel reinforcement: coefficient of friction: Proposed Residential Development -Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr., Newport Beach, CA PrOJCCI No 1;;03 72. I Apnl 30, 2022 RECOMMENDATIONS 800 psf 250 psf per foot min. 12 inches with thickened edges (+ 6 inches) no. 5 bars@ 12" o.c. each way, top and bottom 0.30 12 PA2022-0281 Modulus of Subgrade Reaction: ks = 90 lbs/in3 Reinforcement requirements may be increased if recommended by the project structural engineer. In no case should they be decreased from the previous recommendations. Interior Slabs-on-grade -conventional Concrete slabs cast against properly compacted fill materials shall be a minimum of 5 inches thick (actual) and reinforced with No. 4 rebar at 12 inches on center in both directions. The slabs shall be doweled into the footings using No. 4 bars at 24 inches on center. The reinforcement shall be supported on chairs to insure positioning of the reinforcement at mid-center in the slab. Interior slabs shall be underlain by a minimum 15 mil plastic vapor barrier, with all laps sealed, over 4 inches¾ -inch crushed rock (see "Capillary Break," below). Some slab cracking due to shrinkage should be anticipated. The potential for the slab cracking may be reduced by careful control of water/cement ratios. The contractor should take appropriate curing precautions during the pouring of concrete in hot weather to minimize cracking of slabs. We recommend that a slipsheet (or equivalent) be utilized if crack-sensitive flooring is planned directly on concrete slabs. All slabs should be designed in accordance with structural considerations. Capillary Break Below Interior Slabs In accordance with the 2019 California Green Building Standards Code Section 4.505.2.1 , we provide the following building specification for the subject site (living area slabs): New concrete building slabs shall be directly underlain by 1 to 2 inches of clean sand, underlain by a min.15 mil-thick moisture barrier (e.g. "Stego Wrap"), with all laps sealed, underlain by 4 inches of ½-inch or larger clean gravel. Cement Type for Concrete in Contact with On-Site Earth Materials Concrete mix design should be based on sulfate testing with Section 1904.2 of the 2019 CBC (in the event of soil import, soils shall be tested a specified accordingly). Preliminary laboratory testing indicates the site soils possess negligible sulfate exposure (5 ppm). Proposed Residential Development -Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr., Newpon Beach, CA Project No. E0372. l April 30, 2022 13 PA2022-0281 ACI 318 BUILDING CODE -Table 19.3.1.1 REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCRETE EXPOSED TO SULFATE-CONTAINING SOLUTIONS Sulfate Water soluble Sulfate (SO,) in Cement Type Maximum water-Minimum fc1 , Exposure sulfate (SO,) in soil water, ppm cementitious material normal-weight percent by weight ratio, by weight, normal and light weight weight concrete concrete, psi Negligible 0.00 s so,< 0.10 0 s SO,<150 ----- [SO] Moderate 010 < SO,< 0.20 150 <so,< 1500 11,IP(MS), 0.50 4000 [S1) IS(MS),P(MS) l(PM)(MS), l(SM)(MS) Severe 0.20 ~ so,< 2.00 1500 < SO,< V 0.45 4500 [S2J 10,000 Very Severe SO,> 2.00 SO,> 10,000 V plus 0.45 4500 [S3] pozzalan As a conservative approach, and due to the marine environment, we recommend cement with a minimum strength fc of 3,000 psi be used for concrete in contact with on-site earth materials. Settlement Utilizing the design recommendations presented herein, we anticipate that the majority of any post-grading settlement will occur during construction activities. We estimate that the total settlement for the proposed structure will be on the order of 1 inch. Differential settlement is not expected to exceed 1 inch in 20 feet. These settlement values are expected to be within tolerable limits for properly designed and constructed foundations. Lateral Load Resistance Footings founded in fill materials may be designed for a passive lateral bearing pressure of 250 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. A coefficient of friction against sliding between concrete and soil of 0.30 may be assumed. Exterior Slabs-on-grade (Hardscape) Concrete slabs cast against properly compacted fill materials shall be a minimum of 4 inches thick (actual) and reinforced with No. 3 rebar at 18 inches on center in both directions. The reinforcement shall be supported on chairs to insure positioning of the reinforcement at mid-center in the slab. Control joints should be provided at a maximum spacing of 8 feet on center in two directions for slabs and at 6 feet on center for sidewalks. Control joints are intended to direct cracking. Proposed Residential Development -Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr., Newport Beach. C/\ Projec1 No. E0372. I April 30. 2022 PA2022-0281 Expansion or felt joints should be used at the interface of exterior slabs on grade and any fixed structures to permit relative movement. Some slab cracking due to shrinkage should be anticipated. The potential for the slab cracking may be reduced by careful control of water/cement ratios. The contractor should take appropriate curing precautions during the pouring of concrete in hot weather to minimize cracking of slabs. Surface Drainage Surface drainage shall be controlled at all times. Positive surface drainage should be provided to direct surface water away from structures and toward the street or suitable drainage facilities. Ponding of water should be avoided adjacent to the structures. Roof gutter discharge should be directed away from the building areas through solid PVC pipes to suitable discharge points. Area drains should be provided for planter areas and drainage shall be directed away from the top of berms or slopes. Review of Plans The specifications and parameters outlined in this report shall be considered minimum requi rements and incorporated into the Grading, Foundation and Landscape plans if applicable. This office should review the Plans when available. If approved, the geotechnical consultant shall sign/stamp the applicable Plans from a geotechnical standpoint. GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATION AND TESTING DURING CONSTRUCTION We recommend that a qualified geotechnical consultant be retained to provide geotechnical engineering services, including geotechnical observation/testing, during the construction phase of the project. This is to verify the compliance with the design, specifications and or recommendations, and to allow design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated. Geotechnical observations/testing should be performed at the following stages: • During ANY grading operations, including excavation, removal, filling, compaction, and backfilling, etc. After excavations for footings (or thickened edges) and/or grade beams verify the adequacy of underlying materials. After pre-soaking of new slab sub-grade earth materials and placement of capillary break, plastic membrane, prior to pouring concrete. After excavation for retaining wall footings (if any) to verify the adequacy of underlying earth materials. During/after installation of water proofing for retaining walls (if any), prior to installation of sub-drain/backfilling. During/after installation of retaining wall sub-drain (if any), prior to backfilling. Proposed Residential Development -Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr., Newport Beach, Ct\ Project No. E03 72.1 April 30, 2022 15 PA2022-0281 • During compaction of retaining wall backfill materials (if any) to verify proper compaction. • During backfill of drainage and utility line trenches, to verify proper compaction. • When/if any unusual geotechnical conditions are encountered. Please schedule an inspection with the geotechnical consultant prior to the pouring of ALL interior and exterior slabs (includes waste and protection slabs). LIMITATIONS The geotechnical services described herein have been conducted in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the geotechnical engineering profession practicing contemporaneously under similar conditions in the subject locality. Under no circumstance is any warranty, expressed or implied, made in connection with the providing of services described herein. Data, interpretations, and recommendations presented herein are based solely on information available to this office at the time work was performed. EGA Consultants will not be responsible for other parties' interpretations or use of the information developed in this report. The interpolated subsurface conditions should be checked in the field during construction by a representative of EGA Consultants. We recommend that all foundation excavations and grading operations be observed by a representative of this firm to ensure that construction is performed in accordance with the specifications outlined in this report. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for the safety of others. The contractor should notify the owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. Proposed Residential Development -Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr .. Newport Beach. CA Project No. E0372. I April 30, 2022 16 PA2022-0281 Associated References re: Liquefaction Analysis a. "Special Publication 117 A: Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California," by the California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey, dated March 13, 1997; Revised September 11 , 2008. b. "Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117 Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction Hazards in California," by G.R. Martin and M. Lew, University of Southern California Earthquake Center dated March, 1999. c. "Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes" by I.M. Idriss and R.W. Boulanger, dated September 8, 2008. d. "Soils and Foundations, 8th Edition," by Cheng Liu and Jack 8. Evett, dated August 4, 2013. e. "Evaluation of Settlement in Sands due to Earthquake Shaking" by Kahaji Tokimatsu and H. Bolton Seed, Dated August 1987. f. "Guidelines for Estimation of Shear Wave Velocity Profiles" By Bernard R. Wair, Jason T. Jong, Thomas Shantz Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Dated December, 2012. g. "Subsurface Exploration Using the Standard Penetration Test and the Cone Penetrometer Test," by J_ David Rogers, Environmental & Engineering Geoscience, pp. 161 -179, dated May, 2006. h. "Handbook of Geotechnical Investigation and Design Tables" By Burt G. Look, Dated 2007. I. "Use of SPT Blow Counts to Estimate Shear Strength Properties of Soils: Energy Balance Approach," by Hiroshan Hettiarachi and Timothy Brown, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, pp. 830-834, dated June, 2009. j. "Standard Test Method for Performing Electronic Friction Cone and Piezocone Penetration Testing of Soils," (ASTM 05778-12), dated 2012. k. "Evaluation of Settlements in Sand Deposits Following Liquefaction During Earthquakes," by Ishihara and Yoshimine, dated 1992. I. "CPT and SPT Based Liquefaction Triggering Procedures" by R.W. Boulanger and I.M. Idriss, dated April 2014. REFERENCES 1. "USGS Topographic Map, 7 5 minute Quadrangle, Newport Beach OE S, California Quadrangle," dated December 12, 2021. 2. "Geologic Map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30' X 60' Quadrangles, California," Version 1.0, compiled by Douglas M. Morton and Fred K. Miller, dated 2006. 3. "Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes in California," by Roger W. Reensfelder, dated 197 4. 4. Maps of Known Active Fault Near-Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada," prepared by California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology, published by International Conference of Building Officials, dated February, 1998. 5. "Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction," by American Concrete Institute, ACI 302.1 R- 04, dated 2004. 6. "California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2," by California Building Standards Commission, 2019. 7. "Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Newport Beach 7.5-Minute Quadrangles, Orange County, California," by the California Department of Conservation, 1997. 8. "2015 International Building Code," by the International Code Council, dated June 5, 2014. 9. "Geologic Map of California, Santa Ana Sheet," Compilation by Thomas H. Rogers, 1965, fifth printing 1985. 10. "Digital Elevation Model NAVD88 Mosaic," by NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI), Created August 20, 2015, last modified September 23, 2016. Proposed Residential Development - Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr., Newport Beach, CA Project No. E03 72.1 April 30, 2022 17 PA2022-0281 IFF DR I -- or:t:B~ay~~~l CRES I ' Linda1'fsle ~ owe~ ) ' •. -_ port Ba ~' Harbor Island Source: USGS US Topo 7.5-minute map for Newport Beach OE S, CA, Published December 12, 2021. EGA Consultants engineering geotcchnical applications SITE LOCATION MAP 2508 MARINO DRIVE NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA Project No: E0372.1 Date: APRIL 2022 Figure No: 1 PA2022-0281 CPT-1 lU > -ex: a 0 2 -ex: <t. ~ Source: I ' ' I ' I ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I I ' <D a'. -, u EXISTING RESIDENCE 142' \ LEGEND -$-GEOTECHNICAL BORINGS BY EGA CONSULTANTS 0-CONE PENETRATION TEST BY KEHOE TESTING AND ENGINEERING P.L. "Topographic Map, 2508 Marino Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92663," by Apex Land Surveying, Inc., dated January 14, 2022. EGA Consultants engineering geotechnical applications PLOT PLAN 2508 MARINO DRIVE NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA Project No: Date: Figure No: E0372.1 APRIL 2022 2 PA2022-0281 ~:;:\:9.·~·}:'.n Eolian depo_sits {late Holocene)-Active or · · '"'· · recently active sand dune deposits; unconsolidated. t: om .. :1 Marine deposits {late Holocene)-Active or ~~...._J recently active beach deposits; sand, unconsolidated. j · Cle~ , ·1 Estuarine deposits {late Holocene)-Sand, silt, ...._ __ '-..J. and clay; unconsolidated, contains variable Qyt Sources: amounts of organic matter. Young alluvial fan deposits {Holocene and late Pleistocene)-Gravel, sand, and silt, mixtures, some contain boulders; unconsolidated. Qvop Tes Tm Old paralic deposits, undivided {late to middle Pleistocene)-Silt, sand and cobbles. lnterfingered strandline, beach, estuarine, and colluvial deposits. Very old paralic deposits {middle to early Pleistocene)-Silt, sand and cobbles on emergent wave-cut abrasion platforms. Capistrano Formation {early Pliocene and Miocene) Siltstone fades-Siltstone and mudstone; white to pale gray, massive to crudely bedded, friable. Monterey Formation {Miocene)-Marine siltstone and sandstone; siliceous and diatomaceous. Morton, D.M., and Miller, F.K. Preliminary Geologic map of the San Berncrdino and Santa Ana 30' x 60' quadrangles, California. U.S. Geological Survey. Published 2006.1:100,000scale. EGA Consultants engineering geotechnical applications GEOLOGIC MAP 2508 MARINO DRIVE NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA Project No: Date: Figure No: E0372.1 APRIL 2022 3 PA2022-0281 Newport Beach, Newport Bay Entrance, Corona del Mar Tide Chart for March 9, 2022 Moonset 12:05A 11oonrise 10:14A 8 7 6 5 -:;:- QJ QJ 4 !:t:, -.c ll0 3 ·w I QJ -0 2 i= 1 0 -1 -2 ,..__ __________________ ___J -3 Tides.net station (1788) Newport Beach, Newport Bay Entrance, Corona del Mar Wednesday, March 9, 2022 Sun 6:09am-5:54pm high tide 12:51am (4.32ft) low tide 9:21am (1.11ft) EGA TIDE CHART Consultants 2508 MARINO DRIVE engineering geotechnical applications NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA Project No: E0372.1 Date: APRIL 2022 Figure No: 4 PA2022-0281 APPENDIX A GEOLOGIC LOGS and CPT Data Report by Kehoe Drilling & Testing (B-1, B-2, and CPT-1) PA2022-0281 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM ASTM D-2457 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION AND SYMBOL CHART COARSE-GRAINED SOILS (more than 50% of matenal Is larger than No. 200 sieve size.) GRAVELS More U1an 50% of coarse fraction larger than No. 4 sieve size SANDS 50% or more or coarse fraction smaller than No. 4 sieve size Clean Gravels (Less than 5% fines) , ..• ...-•·~ Well-graded gravels. gravel-sand I:••• GW mixtures. little or no fines ...-•·~ GP Poorly-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures. little or no fines Gr~vels wit~ fines (More than 12% finesl_ • <l GM Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures Q GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures Clean Sands (Less than 5% fines SW SM SC Well-graded sands. gravelly sands, little or no fines Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands:-·1 little or no fines ·-"---------------...J More than 12% fines Silty sands, sand-Slit mixtures Clayey sands. sand-clay mixtures FINE-GRAINED SOILS (50% or more of material Is smaller than No. 200 sieve size.) Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock ML flour, silty or clayey fine sands or clayey SILTS silts with slight plasticity AND CLAYS "°"""'""'' of low <o m,di,m ~ Uquid limij CL plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, less than silty clays, lean clays 50% OL Organic silts and organic sllty clays of low plasticity Inorganic silts, micaceous or MH diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, SILTS elastic silts AND CLAYS CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat Liquid limit clays 50% or greater T Organic clays of medium to high Ji: OH plasticity, organic silts ~~- HIGHLY ORGANIC PT Peat and other highly organic soils SOILS RELATIVE DENSITY Cohesionless Blows/ft* Blows/ft .. Sands and Silts Very loose 0-4 0-30 Loose 4·10 30-60 Medium dense 10-30 80-200 Dense 30-50 200-400 Very dense Over50 Over 400 LABORATORY CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA cu Dso D30 GW = --greater than 4, Cc = ---between 1 and 3 D10 D10 xDso GP Not meeting all gradation requirements for GW GM Atterberg limits below "A" Above "A" line with Pl. between line or P.I. less than 4 4 and 7 are bordertine cases GC Atterberg limits above "A" requiring use of dual symbols line with P. I. greater than 7 cu 0 60 030 = --greater than 4. Cc = ---between t and 3 SW D10 O10xD50 SP Not meeting all gradation requirements for GW SM Atterberg limits below "A" Limits plotting in shaded zone line or P.1. less than 4 with P. I. between 4 and 7 are Atterberg limits above "A" borderline cases requiring use SC line with P.1. greater than 7 of dual symbols. Determine percentages of sand and gravel from grain-s,ze curve Depending on percentage of fines (fraction smaller than No. 200 sieve size), coarse-grained soils are classified as follows: Less than 5 percent . . .. . . .. . . . . . ............. GW, GP. SW, SP More than 12 percent .................................. GM, GC, SM, SC 5 to 12 percent .......... , ..•..... Borderline cases requinng dual symbols PLASTICITY CHART 60 l 50 .,v ~ CH V / )( 40 .,. ALINE: w 0 I/ Pl = 073(LL-20I ~ 30 .,v MH&OH ~ CL u 20 V ;:: / rn 5 10 Cl. i:L .... L / ML&pL 00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 LIQUID LIMIT (LL) (¾) CONSISTENCY Cohesive Soils Blows/ft* Blows/ft** Very soft 0·4 0-4 Soft 2-4 4-11 Firm 4-8 11-50 Stiff 8-16 50-110 Very stiff 16-32 110-220 Hard Over 32 Over 220 • Blows/foot for a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches to drive a 2-inch O.D., 1-3/8 inch I.D. Split Spoon sampler (Standard Penetration Test). • • Blows/foot for a 36-pound hammer falling 24 inches to drive a 3.25 O.D., 2.411. D. Sampler (Hand Sampling). Blow count convergence to standard penetration test was done i, accordance with Fig. 1.24 of Foundation Engineering Handbook by H.Y. Fang, Von Nostrand Reinhold, 1991. PA2022-0281 LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING Sheet 1 of 1 Job Number: EO372.1 Boring No: B-1 Project: 2508 Marino Drive, Newport Beach, CA Boring Location: See Figure 2 Gross Residence Date Started: 3/9/2022 Rig: Mob. 4" augers Date Completed: 3/9/2022 Grnd Elev. +/-12 ft. NAVD88 Sample ~ u Direct Type X a. Shear <ii C: 'ti Q) ~ (/) ■ThinWall C8]2.5"Ring a. "O I-Q) Q) $ ii-E ·;;; (/) lL a. "O Tube Sample C: C: 1ii w >, Q) 0 ·;;; C: Q) I-£ e 0 a. I-(.) C: 0 0 .... a:: .c :, ~ [ZI Bulk [D standard Spl~ static Water Q) ·;;; a. ·o -~ "3 ~ ~ Cl C: E (.) w (/) CD Sample Spoon Sample Table :, co :, J: Q) "O cii c':' a. E I-Cl C: X :::) ·o 0 w ·x 0 :; co C::()11 nl=C::r.RIPTlf"l"I :; I FILL: Medium tan brown, fine silty sand with mica Opt.% 1 SM and rootlets, shell fragments, loose to medium 8.6 94.9 108.0 30.0 72 11 .5% 5<: dense, moist. Sult ._ At 2.75 ft.: Tan brown, fine silty sand with 5ppm SM z shell fragments, moist, damp, medium dense. 5.4 5 -At 4 ft.: Becomes more dense, damp to moist. MU \I 7 At 6 ft.: Approx 10" layer of dark gray, fine silty clay 32.8 CL and clayey silt, firm, saturated, no organics. SM At 7 ft.: Medium gray fine silty sand, saturated, more dense with depth. 10 Total Depth: 10 ft. Groundwater at 6.5 ft. No Caving (sleeved). Backfilled and Compacted 3/9/2022. 15 - 20 - 25 30 - 35 - 40 I EGA Consultants II ':";· I PA2022-0281 LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING Sheet 1 of 1 Job Number: EO372.1 Boring No: B-2 Project 2508 Marino Drive, Newport Beach, CA Boring Location: See Figure 2 Gross Residence Date Started: 3/9/2022 Rig: Mob. 4" augers Date Completed: 3/9/2022 Grnd Elev. +/-12 ft. NAVD88 Sample ,fl u Direct Type X C. Shear Q) C: u Q) ~ (/) ■ThinWall i:gj 2 .5" Ring C. "O f-Q) Q) .2! ~ E V) (/) IL C. "O Tube Sample C C -UJ >, Q) 0 ·.; C Q) V) f-.!: € 0 C. f-(.) C 0 a X'. ·.; -& a: .c ·5 :, '3 IZJ Bulk [I] standard Split ~ static Water i!! Q) E UJ a. vi a C (.) Q) (/) '5 CX) Sample Spoon Sample Table 3 "' :, :r: ~ C. E f-0 C V) X ::J ·5 a UJ ·x 0 ~ "' ~/"\II ni::~r<>1PTl/"\I\.I ::'? I FILL: Medium tan brown, fine silty sand with mica Opt% 1 SM and rootlets, shell fragments, loose to medium 6.3 97.4 108 0 30.0 72 11.5% x dense drv to moist. Sulf At 2.5 ft.: Tan brown, fine silty sand with 4.9 5ppm SM z shell fragments, moist, damp, medium dense. 5 --At 4 ft.: Becomes more dense, damp to moist. MU V 7 At 6 ft.: Approx 10" layer of dark gray, fine silty clay CL and clayey silt, firm, saturated, no organics. 41.8 SM At 7 ft.: Medium gray fine silty sand, saturated, more dense with depth. 10 Total Depth: 10 ft. Groundwater at 6.5 ft. No Caving (sleeved). Backfilled and Compacted 3/9/2022. 15 - 20 - 25 - 30 - 35 - 40 I EGA Consultants II ':~~· I PA2022-0281 K~ Project: EGA Consultants, Inc. Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 rich@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Location: 2508 Marino Drive, Newport Beach, CA Cone resistance qt Sleeve friction 0 2 4 4 6 6 8 8 10 10 12 12 14 14 16 16 18 18 20 20 ,....._ 22 ,....._ 22 .u .u ..... ..... ___. 24 ___. 24 ..c:. .u 0. 26 £ 0. 26 (l) 0 28 ~ 28 30 30 32 32 34 34 36 36 38 38 40 40 42 42 44 44 46 46 48 48 50 so 0 100 200 300 400 500 0 1 2 3 4 5 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pore pressure u o I J 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 ,....._ 22 ..., ...... ___. 24 £ 0. 26 ~ 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 so 6 -5 0 5 10 15 Pressure (psi) CPeT-IT v.3.3.2.15 -CPTU data presentation & interpretation software -Report created on: 4/5/2022 Friction ratio o I I 0 I :=:, 4 4 6 6 8 8 10 10 12 12 14 14 16 16 18 18 20 20 ,....._ 22 ,....._ 22 ...., ...., ..... ..,_ ___. 24 ___. 24 £ 0. 26 £ 0. 26 ~ 28 ~ 28 30 30 32 32 34 34 36 36 38 38 40 40 42 42 44 44 46 46 48 48 50 so 20 a 2 4 6 Rf(%) 2 CPT-1 Total depth: 50.81 ft, Date: 4/5/2022 Cone Type: Vertek Soil Behaviour Type 4 6 8 Silly sam & sarrly silt S c11d & silty sam Sill sam & samy silt Sil sam& samy silt Cl y & silty clay S c11d & siltv sam Silly sam & samy silt Sc11d & silty sam Sc11d Sc11d Sand Sc11d Sc11d & silty sam Sc11d & silty sam Sand Sc11d & silty sam Sc11d Sand Sfd,& fil~ Sfn<: 1 , 10 12 14 16 SBT (Robertson, 2010) I 18 PA2022-0281 Depth (ft) qc (tsf) fs (tsf) SBTn Ksbt (ft/s) 1 38.22 0.94 5 2.81E-05 2 90.64 0.52 6 8.21E-04 3 79.99 0.42 6 5.54E-04 4 69.86 0.42 6 2.65E-04 5 49.39 0.52 6 4.13E-05 6 31.64 0.31 5 1.43E-05 7 24.23 0.31 5 4.20E-06 8 109.86 0.42 6 7.02E-04 9 46.89 0.42 6 2.32E-05 10 99.21 0.52 6 2.65E-04 11 118.94 0.73 6 2.78E-04 12 232.87 1.25 6 1.43E-03 13 243.73 1.67 6 8.95E-04 14 250.42 1.57 6 1.06E-03 15 241.64 1.36 6 1.14E-03 16 262.95 1.88 6 7.75E-04 17 306.91 1.67 6 1.81E-03 18 286.03 1.46 6 1.66E-03 19 316.94 1.67 6 1.86E-03 20 301.27 1.57 6 1.61E-03 21 326.65 1.57 6 2,17E-03 22 315.16 1.46 6 2.03E-03 23 319.65 1.36 6 2.39E-03 24 327.9 1.36 6 2.54E-03 25 364.87 1.46 7 3.37E-03 SPTN60 Constrained (blows/ft) Mod. (tsf) 10 421.39 17 543.05 15 514.14 16 512.59 12 506.04 10 390.38 12 333.54 21 674.92 20 530.17 21 725.6 25 863.27 41 1259.26 45 1434.84 46 1428.84 44 1361.19 49 1587.89 53 1590.42 so 1505.06 55 1634.54 53 1593.68 56 1636.37 54 1598.06 54 1574.08 55 1595.97 60 1687.68 2508 Marino Drive, Newport Beach, CA EO372.1 April 2022 Raw Data, CPT-1 Dr(O/o) Friction Es (tsf) angle (0 ) 77 43 336.22 79 43 433.29 70 42 410.22 63 41 408.98 54 40 403.75 42 37 311.47 36 36 296.16 66 42 538.5 45 38 423.01 60 41 578.94 64 41 688.78 87 44 1004.73 87 44 1144.82 87 44 1140.03 84 44 1086.06 86 44 1266.94 92 45 1268.95 87 44 1200.85 91 45 1304.15 87 44 1271.55 90 45 1305.61 88 44 1275.05 87 44 1255.91 88 44 1273.38 92 45 1346.56 CPT-1 advanced to 50.81 ft. on 4/5/2022 by Kehoe Testing and Engineering PA2022-0281 26 384.19 1.46 7 4.07E-03 27 379.91 1.46 7 3.70E-03 28 373.12 1.57 7 2.83E-03 29 346.59 1.36 6 2.58E-03 30 317.67 1.46 6 l.42E-03 31 306.39 1.36 6 1.33E-03 32 253.24 1.46 6 4.47E-04 33 292.29 1.78 6 5.54E-04 34 310.78 1.78 6 7.0SE-04 35 322.05 1.46 6 1.20E-03 36 298.56 1.15 6 1.29E-03 37 272.03 1.25 6 6.66E-04 38 201.44 1.04 6 2.14E-04 39 232.25 0.94 6 4.89E-04 40 265.98 1.15 6 6.13E-04 41 218.57 0.73 6 5.12E-04 42 176.48 0.73 6 1.74E-04 43 172.83 0.84 6 l.18E-04 44 201.96 0.94 6 1.93E-04 45 244.26 1.25 6 2.69E-04 46 344.51 2.3 6 3.87E-04 47 346.18 3.03 6 2.00E-04 48 352.96 1.67 6 8.0lE-04 49 335.42 1.67 6 5.94E-04 50 316.83 0.1 0 O.OOE+OO 2 62 1717.82 62 1727.92 62 1781.06 58 1681.56 56 1716.24 55 1674.27 so 1682.46 57 1869.46 59 1903.42 58 1792.61 53 1639.23 52 1681 43 1523.33 45 1514.65 51 1666.79 43 1411.95 38 1381.47 39 1450.75 43 1553.81 51 1773.03 69 2349.22 74 2660.81 66 2110.02 64 2115.07 50 1364.43 2508 Marino Drive, Newport Beach, CA EO372.1 April 2022 Raw Data, CPT-1 94 45 1370.6 92 45 1378.66 90 45 1421.06 86 44 1341.67 81 44 1369.34 79 43 1335.86 70 42 1342.39 74 43 1491.59 76 43 1518.69 78 43 1430.27 74 43 1307.9 69 42 1341.22 58 40 1215.42 63 41 1208.49 67 42 1329.89 60 41 1126.56 52 39 1102.24 50 39 1157.51 55 40 1239.74 60 41 1414.65 72 42 1874.38 70 42 2122.99 73 43 1683.53 70 42 1687.55 0 0 1088.64 CPT-1 advanced to 50.81 ft. on 4/5/2022 by Kehoe Testing and Engineering PA2022-0281 APPENDIX B LABO RA TORY RES UL TS PA2022-0281 GEOLOGY·GEOTECH ·GROUNDWATER EGA Consultants 375-C Monte Vista Avenue Costa Mesa, California 92627 Attention: Subject: Mr. David Worthington, C.E.G. Laboratory Test Results 2508 Marino Drive Newport Beach, California Dear Mr. Worthington: March 31 , 2022 Project No. 114-754-1 0 G3SoiIWorks, Inc. performed the requested laboratory tests on the soil specimens delivered to our office for the subject project. The results of these tests are included as an attachment to this report. We appreciate the opportunity of providing our services to you on this project. Should you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, G3Soi1Works, Inc. 350 Fischer Ave. Front • Costa Mesa. CA 92626 • P: 714 668 5600 • www.G3Soi1Works.com PA2022-0281 EGA Consultants Laboratory Test Results 2508 Marino Drive Newport Beach, California March 31 , 2022 Project No. 114-754-1 o Page 2 of 3 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Summarized below are the results of requested laboratory testing on samples submitted to our office. Dry Density and Moisture Content Tabulated below are the requested results of field dry density and moisture contents of undisturbed soils samples retained in 2.42-inch inside diameter by 1-inch height rings. Moisture only results were obtained from small bulk samples. Sample Dry Density Moisture Content Identification (pcf) (%) 8-1@ 2.5' 94.9 8.6 8-2@ 2.5' 97.4 6.3 Notes: (*) Denotes small bulk sample for moisture content testing only. Soil Classification Requested soil samples were classified using ASTM D2487 as a guideline and are based on visual and textural methods only. These classifications are shown below: Sample Identification Soil Description Group Symbol B-1 @ 0-3' Silty sand with shell fragments, light SM brownish gray Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content test was performed on the subm itted bulk soil samples in accordance with ASTM D 1557. The results are shown below: Sample Identification Maximum Dry Density Optimum Moisture (pcf) Content(%) 8-1 @ 0-3' 108.0 11.5 350 Fischer Ave. Front • Costa Mesa. CA 92626 • P: 714 668 5600 • www.G3Soi1Works.com PA2022-0281 EGA Consultants Laboratory Test Results 2508 Marino Drive Newport Beach, California Sulfate Content March 31 , 2022 Project No. 114-754-10 Page 3 of 3 A selected bulk sample was tested for soluble sulfate content in accordance with Hach procedure. The test result is shown below: Sample Identification Water Soluble Sulfate in Soil Sulfate Exposure (PPM} (ACI 318-08, Table 4.2.1) B-2@ 0-3' 5 so Direct Shear The results of direct shear testing (ASTM D3080) on sample identified as B-1 @ 2.5 feet are plotted on Figure S-1. Soil specimen was soaked in a confined state and sheared under varied loads ranging from 1 .0 ksf to 4.0 ksf with a direct shear machine set at a controlled rate of strain of 0.01 inch per minute. 350 Fischer Ave. Front • Costa Mesa, CA 92626 • P: 714 668 5600 • www.G3Soi1Works.com PA2022-0281 4,000 3,750 3,500 'l' ,, ... • .. . . 3,250 ' ........ --.. 3,000 2,750 LL 2,500 r/) Cl. Cf) 2,250 r/) w 0::: 2,000 I-r/) 0::: <( 1,750 ..... w :c en 1,500 1,250 1,000 750 500 250 0 0 500 1,000 DIRECT SHEAR TEST Undisturbed 1,500 2,000 2,500 NORMALSTRESS,PSF 3,000 3,500 4,000 2508 Marino Drive, Newport Beach COHESION 72 psf. symbol boring depth (ft.) symbol boring depth (ft.) • 8-1 2.5 FRICTION ANGLE 30.0 degrees FIGURE S-1 DIRECT SHEAR TEST PN: 114-754-10 REPORT DATE: 3/31/2022 3SO F1$Cher Ave. Front Costa Mesa. CA 92626 Phone. (714) 668 5600 www.C,SSc,.IWorks.corn FIG. S-1 PA2022-0281 MOISTURE CONTENT WORKSHEET PROJECT LOCATION: 2508 Marino Drive, Newport Beach, CA BORING ID B-1 B-1 SAMPLE DEPTH (ft.) 4' 6' MOISTURE CAN ID y A WET SOIL AND TARE (g) 225.1 DRY SOIL AND TARE (g) 216.1 MOISTURE LOSS (g) 9.0 MOISTURE CAN TARE (g) 49.8 DRY SOIL ONLY (g) 166.3 MOISTURE CONTENT(%) 5.4 BORING ID SAMPLE DEPTH (ft.) MOISTURE CAN ID WET SOIL AND TARE (g) DRY SOIL AND TARE (g) MOISTURE LOSS (g) MOISTURE CAN TARE (g) DRY SOIL ONLY (g) MOISTURE CONTENT (%) moisture loss Moisture Content= m =Wt.of Dry Soil 300.4 238.6 61.8 50.0 188.6 32.8 B-2 4' s 225.2 217.1 8.1 50.1 167.0 4.9 Ywet Ydry = m + 1 B-2 6' K 308.0 232.0 76.0 50.0 182.0 41.8 DATE: Drilled 3/9/2022 SHEET 1 OF 1 EGA CONSULTANTS, INC. PA2022-0281 APPENDIX C GENERAL EARTHWORKS AND GRADING GUIDELINES PA2022-0281 GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES I. GENERAL These guidelines present general procedures and requirements for grading and earthwork including preparation of areas to be filled, placement of fill, installation of subdrains, and excavations. The recommendations contained in the geotechnical report are a part of the earthwork and grading specifications and should supersede the provisions contained herein in the case of conflict. Evaluations performed by the consultant during the course of grading may result in new recommendations which could supersede these specifications or the recommendations of the geotechnical report. II. EARTHWORK OBSERVATION AND TESTING Prior to commencement of grading, a qualified geotechnical consultant should be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report and these specifications. The consultant is to provide adequate testing and observation so that he may determine that the work was accomplished as specified. It should be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the consultant and keep him apprised of work schedules and changes so that the consultant may schedule his personnel accordingly. The contractor is to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes or agency ordinances, and these specifications. If in the opinion of the consultant, unsatisfactory conditions are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, the consultant may reject the work and recommend that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. Maximum dry density tests used to determine the degree of compaction should be Proposed Residential Development -Gross Residence Soils Rcpon -2508 Marino Dr., Newpon Beach, CA Project No. E0372. I April 30, 2022 PA2022-0281 111. performed in accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials Test Method ASTM: D 1557. PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED 1. Clearing and Grubbing: All brush, vegetation, and debris should be removed and otherwise disposed of. 2. Processing: The existing ground which is evaluated to be satisfactory for support of fill should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground which is not satisfactory should be overexcavated as specified in the following secti on. Scarification should continue until the soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and until the working surface is reasonably uniform and free of uneven features which would inhibit uniform compaction. 3. Overexcavation: Soft, dry, spongy, or otherwise unsuitable ground, extending to such a depth that surface processing cannot adequately improve the condition, should be over excavated down to firm ground, approved by the consultant. 4. Moisture Conditioning: Over excavated and processed soils should be watered, dried-back, blended, and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a uniform moisture content near optimum. 5. Recompaction: Over excavated and processed soils which have been properly mixed and moisture-conditioned should be recompacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. 6. Benching: Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), the ground should be benched. The lowest bench should be a minimum of 15 feet wide , and at least 2 feet deep, expose firm material, and be approved by the consultant. Other benches should be excavated Proposed Residential Development -Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr . Newport 13each, CA Project No. E03 72.1 2 /\pril 30. 2022 PA2022-0281 in firm material for a minimum width of 4 feet. Ground sloping flatter than 5: 1 should be benched or otherwise over excavated when considered necessary by the consultant. 7. Approval: All areas to receive fill, including processed areas, removal areas, and toe-of-fill benches should be approved by the consultant prior to fill placement. IV. FILL MATERIAL 1. General: Material to be placed as fill should be free of organic matter and other deleterious substances, and should be approved by the consultant. Soils of poor gradation, expansion, or strength characteristics should be placed in areas designated by the consultant or mixed with other soils until suitable to serve as satisfactory fill material. 2. Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 12 inches, should not be buried or placed in fill, unless the location, materials, and disposal methods are specifically approved by the consultant. Oversize disposal operations should be such that nesting of oversize material does not occur, and such that the oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material should not be placed within 10 feet vertically of finish grade or within the range of future utilities or underground construction, unless specifically approved by the consultant. 3. Import: If importing of fill material is necessary for grading, the import material should be approved by the geotechnical consultant. V. FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION 1. Fill Lifts: Approved fill material should be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 6 inches in compacted thickness. The Proposed Residential Development -Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr., Newporl Beach, CA Project No. EO372. l April 30, 2022 3 PA2022-0281 consultant may approve thicker lifts if testing indicates the grading procedures are such that adequate compaction is being achieved with lifts of greater thickness. Each layer shall be spread evenly and should be thoroughly mixed during spreading to attain uniformity of material and moisture in each layer. 2. Fill Moisture: Fill layers at a moisture content less than optimum should be watered and mixed, and wet fill layers should be aerated by scarification or blended with drier material. Moisture-conditioning and mixing of fill layers should continue until the fill material is at a uniform moisture content at or near optimum. 3. Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been evenly spread, moisture- conditioned, and mixed, it should be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density. Compaction equipment should be adequately sized and either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability, to efficiently achieve the specified degree of compaction. 4. Fill Slopes: Compacting of slopes should be accomplished, in addition to normal compacting procedures, by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at frequent increments of 2 to 3 feet in fill elevation gain, or by other methods producing satisfactory results. At the completion of grading, the relative compaction of the slope out to the slope face shall be at least 90 percent. 5. Compaction Testing: Field tests to check the fill moisture and degree of compaction will be performed by the consultant. The location and frequency of tests should be at the consultant's discretion. In general, the tests should be taken at an interval not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise and/or 1,000 cubic yards of embankment. VI. SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION Subdrain systems, if required, should be installed in approved ground and should not Proposed Residential Development -Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr., Newport Beach, CA Project No. E0372. l April 30, 2022 4 PA2022-0281 VII. be changed or modified without the approval of the consultant. The consultant, however, may recommend and upon approval, direct changes in subdrain line, grade, or material. EXCAVATION Excavations and cut slopes should be examined during grading. If directed by the consultant, further excavation or overexcavation and refilling of cut areas should be performed, and/or remedial grading of cut slopes performed. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, unless otherwise approved, the cut portion of the slope should be made and approved by the consultant prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope. Proposed Residential Development -Gross Residence Soils Report -2508 Marino Dr., Newport Beach, CA Project No. E0372. I 5 April 30, 2022 PA2022-0281 APPENDIX D USGS Design Maps Detailed Report PA2022-0281 L\TC Hazards by Location Search Information Address: Coordinates: Elevation: Timestamp: 2508 Marino Dr, Newport Beach, CA 92663, USA 33.6143775, -117.9110548 13 ft 2022-04-29100:53:22.981 Z o---- 0 V = Santa Monica .... Riversideo V Long Bea, 0 Catalina Island Essential F.lsh Habitat... 13 ft 1heim 'Jne ii ~Beman National \ ,~ "-t I Temecula 0 Hazard Type: Seismic Go gle Map data -©2022 Google, INEGI Reference Document: Risk Category: Site Class: ASCE?-16 II D-default Basic Parameters Name Value Ss 1.383 S1 0.492 SMs 1.659 SM1 * null Sos 1.106 So1 * null * See Section 11.4.8 Description MCER ground motion (period=0.2s) MCER ground motion (period=1.0s) Site-modified spectral acceleration value Site-modified spectral acceleration value Numeric seismic design value at 0.2s SA Numeric seismic design value at 1.0s SA •Additional Information Name Value Description SDC * null Seismic design category Fa 1.2 Site amplification factor at 0.2s Fv • null Site amplification factor at 1.0s CRs 0.907 Coefficient of risk (0.2s) CR1 0.92 Coefficient of risk (1.0s) PGA 0.605 MCEG peak ground acceleration FPGA 1.2 Site amplification factor at PGA PGAM 0.726 Site modified peak ground acceleration PA2022-0281 TL 8 SsRT 1.383 SsUH 1.525 SsD 2.612 S1RT 0.492 S1UH 0.535 S1D 0.825 PGAd 1.055 * See Section 11.4.8 Long-period transition period (s) Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion (0.2s) Factored uniform-hazard spectral acceleration (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) Factored deterministic acceleration value (0.2s) Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion (1.0s) Factored uniform-hazard spectral acceleration (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) Factored deterministic acceleration value (1.0s) Factored deterministic acceleration value (PGA) The results indicated here DO NOT reflect any state or local amendments to the values or any delineation lines made during the building code adoption process. Users should confirm any output obtained from this tool with the local Authority Having Jurisdiction before proceeding with design. Disclaimer Hazard loads are provided by the U.S. Geological Survey Seismic Design Web Services. While the information presented on this website is believed to be correct, ATC and its sponsors and contributors assume no responsibility or liability for its accuracy. The material presented in the report should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without competent examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability and applicability by engineers or other licensed professionals. ATC does not intend that the use of this information replace the sound judgment of such competent professionals, having experience and knowledge in the field of practice, nor to substitute for the standard of care required of such professionals in interpreting and applying the results of the report provided by this website. Users of the information from this website assume all liability arising from such use. Use of the output of this website does not imply approval by the governing building code bodies responsible for building code approval and interpretation for the building site described by latitude/longitude location in the report. PA2022-0281 APPENDIX E LIQUEFACTION ANALYSES/SETTLEMENT COMPUTATIONS PA2022-0281 2508 Marino Drive, Newport Beach, CA EO372.1 April 2022 ln12111 farameters: Peak Ground Acceleration: 0.726 Earthquake Magnitude: 7.2 Water Table Depth (m): 0.66 Average y above water table (kN/mA3): 16 Average y below water table (kN/mA3): 18 Borehole diameter (mm): 34.925 Requires correction for Sample Liners (YES/NO): NO Sample Depth Measured (N) Soil Type Flag "Clay" Fines Energy CE CB CR cs N60 <JVC oVC' CN Number (m) (USC$) "Unsaturated" Content Ratio "Unreliable" (%) (ER)% 1 0.30 10 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.75 1 8.13 4.88 4.88 1.70 2 0.61 17 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.75 1 13.81 9.75 9.75 1.70 3 0.91 15 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.75 1 12.19 15.14 12.64 1.70 4 1.22 16 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.75 1 13.00 20.63 15.14 1.70 5 1.52 12 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.8 1 10.40 26.11 17.64 1.70 6 1.83 10 ML/CL Clay 50 65 1.08 1 0.8 1 8.67 31.60 20.13 1.70 7 2.13 12 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.8 1 10.40 37.08 22.63 1.70 8 2.44 21 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.8 1 18.20 42.57 25.13 1.70 9 2.74 20 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.85 1 18.42 48.06 27.62 1.70 10 3.05 21 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.85 1 19.34 53.54 30.12 1.70 11 3.35 25 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.85 1 23.02 59.03 32.61 1.70 12 3.66 41 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.85 1 37.75 64.52 35.11 1.70 13 3.96 45 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.85 1 41.44 70.00 37.61 1.64 14 4.27 46 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.85 1 42.36 75.49 40.10 1.59 15 4.57 44 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 45.28 80.98 42.60 1.54 16 4.88 49 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 50.43 86.46 45.10 1.50 17 5.18 53 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 54.55 91.95 47.59 1.46 18 5.49 50 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 51.46 97.44 50.09 1.42 19 5.79 55 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 56.60 102.92 52.58 1.39 20 6.10 53 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 54.55 108.41 55.08 1.36 21 6.40 56 SW 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 57.63 113.89 57.58 1.33 22 6.71 54 SW 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 55.58 119.38 60.07 1.30 23 7.01 54 SW 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 55.58 124.87 62.57 1.27 24 7.32 55 SW 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 56.60 130.35 65.07 1.25 25 7.62 60 SW 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 61.75 135.84 67.56 1.22 engineering geotechnical applications PLATE A CPT-1 advanced to 50.81 ft. on 4/5/2022 consultants Page 1 PA2022-0281 2508 Marino Drive, Newport Beach, CA E0372.1 April 2022 26 7.92 62 SW 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 63.81 141.33 70.06 1.20 27 8.23 62 SW 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 63.81 146.81 72.56 1.18 28 8.53 62 SW 3 65 1.08 1 1 1 67.17 152.30 75.05 1.16 29 8.84 58 SW 3 65 1.08 1 1 1 62.83 157.79 77.5S 1.14 30 9.14 56 SM 13 6S 1.08 1 1 1 60.67 163.27 80.04 1.13 31 9.45 SS SM 13 65 1.08 1 1 1 S9.58 ,168.76 82.54 1.11 32 9.75 50 SM 13 6S 1.08 1 1 1 54.17 174.24 8S.04 1.09 33 10.06 57 SM 13 6S 1.08 1 1 1 61.7S 179.73 87.53 1.08 34 10.36 59 SM 13 65 1.08 1 1 1 63.92 18S.22 90.03 1.06 35 10.67 58 SM 13 65 1.08 1 1 1 62.83 190.70 92.53 1.05 36 10.97 53 SW 3 65 1.08 1 1 1 57.42 196.19 95.02 1.03 37 11.28 52 SM 13 65 1.08 1 1 1 56.33 201.68 97.52 1.02 38 11.58 43 SM 13 65 1.08 1 1 1 46.58 207.16 100.01 1.01 39 11.89 45 SM 13 65 1.08 1 1 1 48.75 212.65 102.51 0.99 40 12.19 51 SM 13 65 1.08 1 1 1 55.25 218.14 105.01 0.98 41 12.50 43 SM 13 65 1.08 1 1 1 46.58 223.62 107.50 0.97 42 12.80 38 SM 13 65 1.08 1 1 1 41.17 229.11 110.00 0.96 43 13.11 39 SM 13 65 1.08 1 1 1 42.25 234.60 112.50 0.95 44 13.41 43 SM 13 r;<; 1.08 1 1 1 46.58 240.08 114.99 0.94 45 13.72 51 SM 13 65 1.08 1 1 1 55.25 245.57 117.49 0.93 46 14.02 69 SM 13 65 1.08 1 1 1 74.75 251.05 119.98 0.92 47 14.33 74 SW 3 65 1.08 1 1 1 80.17 256.54 122.48 0.91 48 14.63 66 SW 3 65 1.08 1 1 1 71.50 262.03 124.98 0.90 49 14.94 64 SW 3 65 1.08 1 1 1 69.33 267.51 127.47 0.89 50 15.24 50 SM 13 65 1.08 1 1 1 54.17 273.00 129.97 0.88 Auger Diameter: 1.375 inches Hammer Weight: n.a. Drop: continuous push CPT-1 advanced to 50.81 ft by Kehoe Testing and Engineering on April 5, 2022 (CPT Data Logs attached herein) References: Idriss, l.M. and Boulanger, R.W. Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. 8 September 2008. Liu, C. and Evett. J.B. Soils and Foundations, 8th Edition. 4 August 2013. Martin, G.R. and Lew, M. Recommendations/or Implementation of DMG Special Publication I I 7, University of Southern California Earthquake Center. March 1999. California Department of Conservation, CGS. Special Publication I I 7A: Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California Rev 11 Sept. 2008. "CPT and SPT Based Liquefaction Triggering Procedures• by R.W. Boulanger and I.M. Idriss, dated April 2014. "'Evaluation of Settlements in Sand Deposits Following Liquefaction During Earthquakes." by Ishihara and Yoshi mine, dated 1992. consultants engineering geotechnical applications PLATE A CPT-1 advanced to 50.81 ft. on 4/5/2022 Page 2 PA2022-0281 (N1)60 LlN for (N1)60-CS Stress CSR MSF for sand Fines reduction Content coeff, rd 13.81 2.51 16.32 1.00 0.47 1.08 23.48 2.51 25.99 1.00 0.47 1.08 20.72 2.51 23.23 1.00 0.56 1.08 22.10 2.51 24.61 1.00 0.64 1.08 17.68 2.51 20.19 0.99 0.69 1.08 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0.99 0.73 1.08 17.68 2.51 20.19 0.99 0.76 1.08 30.94 2.51 33.45 0.98 0.79 1.08 31.31 2.51 33.82 0.98 0.80 1.08 32.87 2.51 35.38 0.98 0.82 1.08 39.14 2.51 41.64 0.97 0.83 1.08 64.14 2.51 66.64 0.97 0.84 1.08 68.02 2.51 70.52 0.97 0.85 1.08 67.33 2.51 69.84 0.96 0.85 1.08 69.84 2.51 72.35 0.96 0.86 1.08 75.59 2.51 78.10 0.95 0.86 1.08 79.59 2.51 82.10 0.95 0.87 1.08 73.19 2.51 75.70 0.95 0.87 1.08 78.57 2.51 81.08 0.94 0.87 1.08 73.98 2.51 76.49 0.94 0.87 1.08 76.46 0.00 76.46 0.93 0.87 1.08 72.18 0.00 72.18 0.93 0.87 1.08 70.72 0.00 70.72 0.92 0.87 1.08 70.64 0.00 70.64 0.92 0.87 1.08 75.62 0.00 75.62 0.91 0.87 1.08 engineering geotechnical applications consultants Ko for sand CRR for M=7.5 CRR &oVC'= 1 atm 1.10 0.17 1.10 0.32 1.10 0.25 1.10 0.28 1.10 0.21 1.10 n.a. 1.10 0.21 1.10 0.82 1.10 0.88 1.10 1.20 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 2508 Marino Drive, Newport Beach, CA E0372.l April 2022 Factor of Limiting shear Safety strain ylim 0.20 0.42 0.24 0.38 0.79 0.08 0.30 0.53 0.11 0.33 0.52 0.09 0.25 0.36 0.16 n.a. n.a. 0.00 0.25 0.32 0.16 0.98 1.24 0.03 1.05 1.30 0.03 1.43 1.75 0.02 2.00 2.00 0.01 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 PLATE A CPT-1 advanced to 50.81 ft. on 4/5/2022 Page 3 PA2022-0281 76.74 0.00 76.74 0.91 0.87 1.08 1.10 75.41 0.00 75.41 0.90 0.86 1.08 1.10 78.04 0.00 78.04 0.90 0.86 1.08 1.09 71.82 0.00 71.82 0.89 0.86 1.08 1.08 68.26 2.51 70.76 0.89 0.86 1.08 1.07 66.02 2.51 68.52 0.88 0.85 1.08 1.06 59.13 2.51 61.63 0.88 0.85 1.08 1.05 66.44 2.51 68.94 0.87 0.85 1.08 1.04 67.81 2.51 70.32 0.87 0.84 1.08 1.03 65.75 2.51 68.26 0.86 0.84 1.08 1.03 59.29 0.00 59.29 0.86 0.84 1.08 1.02 57.42 2.51 59.93 0.85 0.83 1.08 1.01 46.89 2.51 49.40 0.85 0.83 1.08 1.00 48.47 2.51 50.97 0.84 0.83 1.08 1.00 54.27 2.51 56.78 0.84 0.82 1.08 0.99 45.22 2.51 47.73 0.83 0.82 1.08 0.98 39.51 2.51 42.02 0.83 0.81 1.08 0.97 40.10 2.51 42.60 0.82 0.81 1.08 0.97 43.73 2.51 46.24 0.82 0.81 1.08 0.96 51.31 2.51 53.82 0.81 0.80 1.08 0.96 68.69 2.51 71.20 0.81 0.80 1.08 0.95 72.92 0.00 72.92 0.80 0.79 1.08 0.94 64.38 0.00 64.38 0.80 0.79 1.08 0.94 61.81 0.00 61.81 0.79 0.78 1.08 0.93 47.83 2.51 50.33 0.79 0.78 1.08 0.93 References: Idriss, J.M. and Boulanger, R.W. Soil liquefaction During Earthquakes. Eanhquake Engineering Research Institute. 8 September 2008. Liu, C. and Evett, J.B. Soils and Foundations, 8th Edition. 4 August 2013. 2508 Marino Drive, Newport Beach, CA EO372.1 April 2022 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.01 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 Martin, G.R. and Lew, M. Recommendations for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117. University of Southern California Earthquake Center. March 1999. California Depanment of Conservation, CGS. Special Publication 117 A: Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California . Rev 11 Sept 2008. "CPT and SPT Based Liquefaction Triggering Procedures" by R.W. Boulanger and J.M. Idriss, dated April 2014. "Evaluation of Settlements In Sand Deposits Following Liquefaction During Eanhquakes," by Ishihara and Yoshi mine, dated 1992. consultants engineering geotechnical applications PLATE A CPT-1 advanced to 50.81 ft. on 4/5/2022 Page 4 PA2022-0281 Parameter Fa Maximum C.Hi (m) ALDli (m) Vertical shear strain reconsol. ymax Strain €V 0.70 0.24 0.30 0.07 0.03 0.17 0.06 0.30 0.02 0.01 0.34 0.11 0.30 0.03 0.02 0.26 0.09 0.30 0.03 0.02 0.51 0.16 0.30 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.16 0.30 0.05 0.02 -0.33 0.02 0.30 0.01 0.00 -0.35 0.02 0.30 0.01 0.00 -0.46 0.01 0.30 0.00 0.00 -0.93 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 ·3.00 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 ·3.34 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 ·3.28 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 -3.50 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 -4.02 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 -4.39 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 -3.81 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 ·4.30 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 ·3.88 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 ·3.87 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 .3.49 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 -3.36 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 .3.35 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 ·3.80 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 engineering geotechnical applications consultants LiSi (m) C.Si (ft) 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2508 Marino Drive, Newport Beach, CA E0372.l April 2022 C.Si (inches) 0.32 0.15 0.24 0.23 0.27 0.00 0.27 0.05 0.04 I 0.01 = 1.60 -0.00 n=lO 0.00 Post Soil Cement (Remedial o.oo I Grading): 0.00 = 0.88 0.00 n=lO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PLATE A CPT-1 advanced to 50.81 ~-on 4/5/2022 Page 5 PA2022-0281 -3.90 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.78 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -4.02 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.46 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.36 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.16 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.56 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.20 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.32 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.14 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.36 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.42 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.54 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.67 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.15 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.41 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.96 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.00 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.29 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.90 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.40 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.56 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.80 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.58 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.62 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Settlement: I 0.041 References: Idriss, I.M. and Boulanger, R.W. Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes. Earthquake Engineering Research lnsti:ute. 8 September 2008. Liu, C. and Evett. J.B. Soils and Foundations, 8th Edition. 4 August 2013. 2508 Marino Drive, Newport Beach, CA E0372.1 April 2022 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.131 1.601 Martin, G.R. and Lew, M. Recommendations/or Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117. University of !outhern California Earthquake Center. March 1999. California Department of Conservation, CGS. Special Publication 117A: Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigatin9 Seismic Hazards in California. Rev 11 Sept. 2008. "CPT and SPT Based Liquefaction Triggering Procedures· by R.W. Boulanger and 1.M. Idriss, dated April 2014. "Evaluation of Settlements in Sand Deposits Following Liquefaction During Earthquakes," by Ishihara and Yoshimine, dated 1992. consultants engineering geotechnical applications PLATE A CPT-1 advanced to 50.81 ft. on 4/5/2022 Page 6 PA2022-0281