The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutX2021-2023 - SoilsWe,24 - 2023 I l µvs G October 20, 2021 Project 4953-20-0782 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian c/o Ms. Angel Liu Senior Project Manager Howe Bonney & Associates 4040 West Coast Highway, Trailer 57 Newport Beach, California 92663 wood. Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. 6001 Rickenbacker Road Los Angeles, CA 90040-3031 USA BUILDING DIVISION T: +1323.889.5300 www.woodplc.com Nfl'V % J •.Li BY: Subject: Supplemental Geotechnical Consultation — Response to Comments Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive Newport Beach. California Dear Ms. Liu: This letter presents our response to comments received from the Building Division of the Community Development Department of the City of Newport Beach, California based on their review of our report dated May 25, 2021. The comments were provided in a Geotechnical Report Review Checklist, dated August 25, 2021; the checklist is attached to this letter for ease of reference. 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, express or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this letter. Our itemized responses are given below. Comment No. 1: Please reviser seismic design porometers utilized Site Class "D" default. Or justify why Site Class "D" stiff is utilized. For structures on Site Class D with S1>0.2g, The Geotechnical Engineer must provide the value of coefficient Cs. Determine by Equation 12.8-2 for values T< 7.5Ts and take os equal to 1.5 times the value computed in accordance with either equation 12.8-3 or equation 12.8-4. Response to Comment No. 1: As stated in Sections 11.4.3 and 11.4.4 of ASCE 7-16, Site Class "D" default is only intended to be used when the soil properties of a site are not known in sufficient detail to determine the site class (i.e., when a geotechnical Wood' is a trading name for John Wood Group PLC and its subsidiaries Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Supplemental Geotechnical Consultation — Response to Comments Project 4953-20-0782 Page 2 October 20, 2021 investigation has not been performed). The results of our geotechnical investigation indicate subsurface conditions consistent with a Site Class D ("stiff soil") site as defined in Chapter 20 of ASCE 7-16. As noted in our report, we have assumed that Exception No. 2 under Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-16 will be utilized for this project. This exception requires that the Seismic Response Coefficient (Cs) be calculated using Equations 12.8-2, 12.8-3, or 12.8-4 depending on the fundamental period of the structure. Because the value of Cs is dependent on the fundamental period of the structure, the value of Cs should be determined by the structural engineer for the project using the values of Sos and Sol provided in Section 6.3 of our report; although it is not anticipated to be required, the value of TL for the site is 8 seconds. Comment No. 2: Pleose review the Grading, Foundation and Landscape Plans for compliance with geotechnicol recommendations of this report Response to Comment No. 2: We will review the Grading, Foundation, and Landscape Plans for conformance with our recommendations when they are provided to us. It has been a pleasure to be of professional service to you. We trust that the above satisfies your current needs. Please contact us if there are any questions or if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. Lan Anh Tran Senior Engineer Reviewed by: Mark A. Murphy Principal Geotechnical Engineer Project Manager Wox-fs tiprojects14953 Geofech12020-proji200782 One Hoag Leadership Center103 DocCtrf14953-20.078210l.doc\MMat (submitted electronically) Attachment: Geotechnical Report Review Checklist, dated August 25, 2021 November 10, 2021 Project 4953-20-0782 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian c/o Mr. Barry Paxson, CCM Construction Manager Howe Bonney & Associates 4040 West Coast Highway, Trailer 57 Newport Beach, California 92663 Subject: Supplemental Geotechnical Consultation Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive Newport Beach. California Dear Mr. Paxson: wood. Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. 6001 Rickenbacker Road Los Angeles, CA 90040-3031 USA T: +1 323.889.5300 www.woodplc.com BUILDING DIVISION f`R'.\ a 9 . BY: S.R.G. Li This letter presents the results of our supplemental geotechnical consultation in support of the proposed One Hoag Leadership Center at Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian in Newport Beach, California. We previously performed a geotechnical investigation for the subject project, the results of which were submitted in a report dated May 25, 2021 (Report). We understand that plan check comments have been received from the City of Newport Beach regarding protection of the adjacent existing structure during excavation and construction of the new foundations and floor slab; clarification of the recommendations in our Report and supplemental recommendations to address this comment are provided below. Our Report recommended that new foundations be underlain by at least 2 feet of properly compacted fill and that all existing fill soils be excavated and replaced as properly compacted fill for support of new foundations and floor slabs on grade (a maximum fill thickness of 31/2 feet was encountered during our 2021 investigation). Our report also stated that the recommended excavation should not extend below a 11/2:1 (horizontal:vertical) plane extending downward from adjacent existing footings. Therefore, the excavation for new footings immediately adjacent to existing footings may be limited so as to not extend below the bottoms of the existing footings, as planned, provided that the new foundation excavation is observed by a representative of our firm to confirm that suitable bearing materials are present at the design foundation depth. Vertical excavations up to 4 feet in height may be made adjacent to the existing floor slab (i.e. excavation for new foundations or for new floor slabs). However, as stated in our Report, excavations should be observed by personnel of our firm so that any necessary modifications based on variations in the soil conditions can be made and all applicable safety requirements and regulations, including OSHA regulations, should be met. In the event of minor caving or ravelling, such as within the sand/gravel layer that may be present immediately beneath the Wood' is a trading name for John Wood Group PLC and its subsidiaries Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Supplemental Geotechnical Consultation Project 4953-20-0782 Page 2 November 10, 2021 existing floor slab, any voids should be backfilled with sand -cement slurry containing at least 11 sacks of cement per cubic yard. 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, express 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. We trust that the above satisfies your current needs. Please contact us if there are any questions or if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. Larry Hong Senior Engineer Reviewed by: Pi1 7i Mark A. Murphy Principal Geotechnical Engineer Project Manager 11(ox-I 7lprojects14953 Geotech12020-pmj1200782 One Hoag leadership Center103 DocCM14953-20-0782102.doclMM:Ih (submitted electronically) OF November 10, 2021 Project 4953-20-0782 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian c/o Mr. Barry Paxson, CCM Construction Manager Howe Bonney & Associates 4040 West Coast Highway, Trailer 57 Newport Beach, California 92663 Subject: Supplemental Geotechnical Consultation Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive Newport Beach, California Dear Mr. Paxson: BUILDING DIVISION r. BY: S.A.G. wood. Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. 6001 Rickenbacker Road Los Angeles, CA 90040-3031 USA T: +1 323.889.5300 www.woodplc.com This letter presents the results of our supplemental geotechnical consultation in support of the proposed One Hoag Leadership Center at Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian in Newport Beach, California. We previously performed a geotechnical investigation for the subject project, the results of which were submitted in a report dated May 25, 2021 (Report). We understand that plan check comments have been received from the City of Newport Beach regarding protection of the adjacent existing structure during excavation and construction of the new foundations and floor slab; clarification of the recommendations in our Report and supplemental recommendations to address this comment are provided below. Our Report recommended that new foundations be underlain by at least 2 feet of properly compacted fill and that all existing fill soils be excavated and replaced as properly compacted fill for support of new foundations and floor slabs on grade (a maximum fill thickness of 31/2 feet was encountered during our 2021 investigation). Our report also stated that the recommended excavation should not extend below a 11/2:1 (horizontal:vertical) plane extending downward from adjacent existing footings. Therefore, the excavation for new footings immediately adjacent to existing footings may be limited so as to not extend below the bottoms of the existing footings, as planned, provided that the new foundation excavation is observed by a representative of our firm to confirm that suitable bearing materials are present at the design foundation depth. Vertical excavations up to 4 feet in height may be made adjacent to the existing floor slab (i.e. excavation for new foundations or for new floor slabs). However, as stated in our Report, excavations should be observed by personnel of our firm so that any necessary modifications based on variations in the soil conditions can be made and all applicable safety requirements and regulations, including OSHA regulations, should be met. In the event of minor caving or ravelling, such as within the sand/gravel layer that may be present immediately beneath the Wood' is a trading name for John Wood Group PI C and its subsidiaries 0 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Supplemental Geotechnical Consultation Project 4953-20-0782 Page 2 November 10, 2021 existing floor slab, any voids should be backfilled with sand -cement slurry containing at least 1'h sacks of cement per cubic yard. 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, express 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. We trust that the above satisfies your current needs. Please contact us if there are any questions or if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. Larry Hong Senior Engineer Reviewed by. ;4\ 4f Mark A. Murphy Principal Geotechnical Engineer Project Manager Wax fs 1 projectst4953 Geotech12020-prof1200782 One Hoog leadership Centert03 Docfm1t4953-20-0782102.doc1MM:lh (submitted electronically) 1 1 Prepared for: Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Newport Beach, California Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 May 25, 2021 Wood Project 4953-20-0782 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian c/o Ms. Angel Liu Senior Project Manager Howe Bonney & Associates 4040 West Coast Highway, Trailer 57 Newport Beach, California 92663 Subject Letter of Transmittal Report of Geotechnical Investigation Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive Newport Beach, California Dear Ms. Liu: wood. Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. 6001 Rickenbacker Road Los Angeles, CA 90040-3031 USA T: +1 323.889.5300 www.woodplc.com We (Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc., Wood) are pleased to submit the results of our geotechnical investigation for the proposed One Hoag Leadership Center at Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian in Newport Beach, Califomia. This investigation was conducted in general accordance with our proposal dated March 5, 2021 and Purchase Order Number 1726387, dated March 24, 2021. The scope of our services was planned based on the information provided by you, which included a description of the project and the conceptual design package, dated January 18, 2021. Structural loading information was not available at the time of this report. The results of our investigation and design recommendations are presented in this report. Please note that you or your representative should submit copies of this report to the appropriate governmental agencies for their review and approval prior to obtaining a building permit. 'Wood' is a trading name for John Wood Group PLC and its subsidiaries Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 It has been a pleasure to be of professional service to you. Please contact us if you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. Lan Anh Tran Senior Engineer Reviewed by: Mark A. Murphy Principal Geotechnical Engineer Project Manager Pierre E. Romo Senior Geologist Rosalind Munro Principal Engineering Geologist y4lax-fs1,projects44953 Geoteehy2020-pro11200782 One Hoag Leadership Center403 OoeCtrt 4953-20-0782R01 FinalRevised 052521.docx4LT:MM (Electronic copies submitted) 2 Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Report of Geotechnical Investigation Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive Newport Beach, California Prepared for: Hoag Memorial Hospital Presybterian Newport Beach, California Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. Los Angeles, California May 25, 2021 Project 4953-20-0782 Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 1 1 Table of Contents 1 Section Page No. UST OF FIGURES AND APPENDICES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iv 1.0 SCOPE 1 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SITE CONDITIONS 3 3.0 FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTS 4 4.0 SOIL CONDITIONS 5 1 1 5.0 LIMITED GEOLOGIC -SEISMIC HAZARDS EVALUATION 6 5.1 Geologic Setting 6 5.2 Geologic Materials 6 5.3 Groundwater 6 5.4 Geologic -Seismic Hazards 6 5.5 Geologic Conclusions 9 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 10 6.1 General 10 6.2 Foundations 10 6.3 Seismic Design Parameters 11 6.4 Floor Slab Support 11 6.5 Paving 12 6.6 Stormwater Infiltration 13 6.7 Grading 13 6.8 Geotechnical Observation 15 7.0 BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS 16 8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY 17 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 UST OF FIGURES AND APPENDICES Figures Figure 1: Figure 2: Appendix Appendix A: Appendix 8: Site Vicinity Map Plot Plan Current Field Explorations and Laboratory Test Results Prior Pertinent Field Explorations and Laboratory Test Results Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY We have completed our geotechnical investigation for the proposed One Hoag Leadership Center project on the campus of Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian in Newport Beach, California. Our current and prior pertinent subsurface explorations, engineering analyses, and foundation design recommendations are summarized below. The proposed One Hoag Leadership Center project will consist of the renovation of the existing single -story James Irvine Surgery Center and the construction of a new addition. The proposed new building addition is planned within the parking lot just east of the existing James Irvine Surgery Center. The proposed building addition will be one story in height. Subterranean construction is not planned. The proposed finished floor elevation will be established at about the existing grade; only minor grading and site work are planned to achieve the planned grades. To supplement our existing geotechnical data, two new borings were drilled at the site; fill soils, 31 feet thick, were encountered in our borings. The upper natural alluvial soils generally consist of medium dense silty sand and poorly graded sand down to approximately 13 to 17 feet below the existing grade. Below those depths, stiff silty claystone and clayey siltstone was encountered in our borings. The upper natural alluvial soils are medium dense at present moisture content and may become weaker and more compressible when wet. Groundwater was not encountered within the 25-foot maximum depth explored by our borings. The historic -high groundwater level has been mapped to a be at a depth greater than 30 feet below ground surface. The corrosion test results indicate that the on -site soils are moderately corrosive to ferrous metals and that the potential for sulfate attack on portland cement concrete is considered moderate. Based on the available geologic data, active or potentially active faults with the potential for surface fault rupture are not known to be located directly beneath or projecting toward the project site. Therefore, the potential for surface rupture due to fault plane displacement propagating to the surface at the project site during the design life of the building is considered low. Although the project site could be subjected to strong ground shaking in the event of an earthquake, this hazard is common in Southern California and the effects of ground shaking can be mitigated by proper engineering design and construction in conformance with current building codes and engineering practices. The project site is relatively level and the absence of nearby slopes precludes slope stability hazards. The project site is located within the Newport Oil Field; therefore, a remote possibility exists of encountering undocumented wells during excavations. Any well encountered would need to be appropriately abandoned in accordance with the current requirements of CaIGEM. The project site is the vicinity of a City of Newport Beach Methane Gas Mitigation District. Therefore, there is the potential for subsurface methane at the project site and a site -specific methane investigation may be required. The potential for other geologic hazards such as liquefaction, seismically -induced settlement, tsunamis, seiches, flooding, radon gas, and subsidence affecting the site is considered low. Records documenting the placement and compaction of the existing fill soils are not available. Therefore, the existing fill soils are not considered suitable for support of the shallow foundations, paving, or floor slabs on grade. The proposed addition may be supported on conventional spread/continuous footings if all existing fill soils (and the upper natural soils as necessary) are excavated to allow for the placement of at least 2 feet of property compacted fill beneath footings. The floor slab may be supported on grade if all existing fill soils are excavated and replaced as properly compacted fill; all existing fill should also be excavated and replaced as properly compacted fill for support of new pavement or other exterior concrete walks and slabs on grade. iv Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 1.0 SCOPE This report provides geotechnical recommendations for the proposed building upgrade and addition on the Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian campus located in Newport Beach, California. The location of the project site is illustrated on Figure 1, Site Vicinity Map. The locations of our current and prior pertienent explorations in relation to the locations of the existing site features and in relation to the proposed project features are shown on Figure 2, Plot Plan. Under our predecessor firm of MACTEC Engineering and Consulting of Georgia, Inc., we previously performed a geotechnical investigation for an addition at the west end of the existing James Irvine Surgery Center and presented the results in a report dated April 4, 2003 (our project no. 4953-03-0931). The recommendations presented in this report were developed in part using the geotechnical information from the above -referenced investigation. We acknowledge that we have reviewed the referenced report and we concur with the data and findings contained therein. This investigation was authorized to supplement the available geotechnical data to further evaluate the physical characteristics of the soils underlying the site, and to provide recommendations for analysis of existing foundations and design of new foundations, for floor slab and paving support, and for grading for the project. More specifically, the scope of this investigation included the following: • Review of prior data at and in the vicinity of the site; • Perform subsurface explorations and laboratory testing and provide a description of the soil and groundwater conditions encountered; • Perform a limited geologic -seismic hazards evaluation; • Provide recommendations for analysis of existing foundations and an appropriate foundation system for the proposed addition, together with the necessary design parameters, including frictional resistance, passive resistance, and anticipated total and differential settlements due to expected structural loadings; • Provide the applicable seismic design parameters based on the 2019 California Building Code (CBC); • Provide recommendations for subgrade preparation and floor slab support; • Provide recommendations for design of asphalt and portland cement concrete paving; • Provide recommendations for grading, including site preparation, excavation and slopes, the placing of compacted fill, and quality control measures relating to earthwork. The scope of this geotechnical investigation did not include the assessment of general site environmental conditions for the presence of contaminants in the soils and groundwater of the site. Our recommendations are based on the results of our current and the previous field explorations, laboratory tests, and appropriate engineering analyses. The results of the current field exploration and laboratory tests, 1 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 which, together with the relevant prior data obtained from the previous investigation, form the basis of our recommendations, are presented in Appendix A. The results of the previous field exploration and laboratory tests are presented in Appendix B. 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, express or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this report. This report has been prepared for Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian and their design consultants to be used solely in the design of the proposed One Hoag Leadership Center at Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian in Newport Beach, California. This report has not been prepared for use by other parties, and may not contain sufficient information for purpose of other parties or other uses. 2 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SITE CONDITIONS The proposed One Hoag Leadership Center project will consist of the renovation of the existing single -story James Irvine Surgery Center and the construction of a new addition. The existing building to be renovated has a footprint area of 6,600 square feet and is supported on shallow foundations. The proposed new building addition will be 4,400 square feet in plan area and is planned within the parking lot just east of the existing James Irvine Surgery Center. The proposed building addition will be one story in height. Subterranean construction is not planned. The proposed finished floor elvation will be established at about the existing grade; only minor grading and site work are planned to achieve the planned grades. Structural details are not available at this time; however, based on our prior experience with similar projects, the maximum dead -plus -live column loads of the proposed addition are not expected to exceed 100 kips. The existing ground surface at the site is relatively flat, with a difference in elevation across the site of the proposed addition of less than 2 feet. The proposed addition site is currently occupied primarly by an asphalt - paved surface parking lot and minor amounts of landscaping. Various underground utilities cross the site. 3 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25.2021 3.0 FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTS To supplement our existing geotechnical data, the soil conditions beneath the site were further explored by drilling two borings to depths of 25 feet below the existing grade. Data were also available from our previous investigation for an addition at the west end of the existing James Irvine Surgery Center. The locations of the current borings, along with the pertinent prior borings, are shown on Figure 2. Details of our current explorations and the logs of the borings are presented in Appendix A. The results of our pertinent prior explorations are presented in Appendix B. Laboratory tests were performed on selected samples obtained from our borings to aid in the classification of the soils and to evaluate the pertinent engineering properties of the foundation soils. The following tests were performed: • Moisture content and dry density determinations. • Fines content. • Direct shear. • Consolidation. • Compaction. • Stabilometer (R-value). • Corrosion. All testing was performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM specifications at the time of testing. Details of our current laboratory testing program and test results are presented in Appendix A. The results for our prior laboratory testing are presented in Appendix B. 4 Report of GeotechnicaI Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 4.0 SOIL CONDITIONS Fill soils, 31/2 feet thick, were encountered in our borings. The fill soils beneath the paving base course consist of silty sand. Deeper fill may be encountered at locations not explored, particularly near underground utilities. Records documenting the placement and compaction of the existing fill soils are not available. Underlying the fill soils, the upper natural alluvial soils generally consist of medium dense silty sand and poorly graded sand down to approximately 13 to 17 feet below the existing grade. Below those depths, stiff silty claystone and clayey siltstone was encountered in our borings. The upper natural alluvial soils are medium dense at present moisture content and may become weaker and more compressible when wet. Groundwater was not encountered within the 25-foot maximum depth explored by our borings. The historic - high groundwater level has been mapped to a be at a depth greater than 30 feet below ground surface (bgs). The corrosion test results indicate that the on -site soils are moderately corrosive to ferrous metals and that the potential for sulfate attack on portland cement concrete is considered moderate. 5 Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 5.0 LIMITED GEOLOGIC -SEISMIC HAZARDS EVALUATION 5.1 Geologic Setting Regionally, the site is in the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province. The Peninsular Ranges province is characterized by northwest/southeast trending alignments of mountains and hills and intervening basins, reflecting the influence of northwest trending major faults and folds controlling the general geologic structural fabric of the region. This province extends northwesterly from Baja California into the Los Angeles Basin and westerly into the offshore area, including Santa Catalina, Santa Barbara, San Clemente and San Nicolas islands (Yerkes et al., 1965). This province is bounded on the east by the San Jacinto fault zone. The proposed development is located in the coastal portion of California's Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province just northwest of the San Joaquin Hills in the southern portion of the Los Angeles Basin.. Locally, the site is located 0.6-mile northeast of the Pacific Ocean and 0.3-mile northwest of Newport Bay at an approximate elevation of 82 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) (NAVD88). The site in relation to local topographic features is shown in Figure 1, Site Vicinity Map. 5.2 Geologic Materials According to published geologic publications, the site is underlain by late to middle Pleistocene -age marine terrace deposits (Morton and Miller, 1981; Vedder, 1975). Based on the soils encountered in our current and prior geotechnical explorations, the site is locally mantled with artificial fill to a depth of approximately 31/2 feet bgs (MACTEC, 2003). The fill generally consists of fine- to medium -grained silty sand. Below the fill, marine terrace deposits were present in both current borings and consist predominantly of silty sand with a layer of poorly - graded sand and local clayey sand. Sedimentary bedrock of the Monterey Formation was encountered below the terrace deposits and consists of thickly bedded silty claystone and clayey siltstone to the maximum drilled depth of 25 feet bgs. A sandstone bed was encountered at the bottom of Boring 2. 5.3 Groundwater The site is located in the southern portion of the Coastal Plain of Orange County groundwater basin according to the California Department of Water Resources (DWR, 2003). Groundwater was not encountered in our current or prior exploratory borings to the maximum drilled depths of 25 feet bgs. In the vicinity of the site, the California Geological Survey [CGS, previously the California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG)] reports historic -high groundwater level for seismic hazard estimations to be deeper than 30 feet bgs (CDMG, 1997). 5.4 Geologic -Seismic Hazards Fault Rupture The project site is not within a currently established Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (A-P Zone) for surface fault rupture hazard (CGS, 2021a; 2017). An A-P Zone is an area which requires geologic investigation to evaluate whether the potential for surface fault rupture is present near an active fault (CGS, 2018). An active fault is a fault with surface displacement within the last 11,700 years (Holocene). The closest Earthquake Fault Zone, established for the Newport -Inglewood fault, is located approximately 3.7 miles northwest of the site (CGS, 2021a and 2017). The closest section of the Newport -Inglewood fault zone with the potential for surface rupture outside of an established A-P Zone is approximately 0.6-mile west of the site (USGS-CGS, 2020). 6 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 The project site is underlain at depth by the San Joaquin blind thrust fault [Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP), 2019]. Blind thrust faults are not exposed at the ground surface and are typically identified at depths greater than 3 kilometers. Therefore, these faults do not present a potential surface fault rupture hazard. Based on the available geologic data, other active or potentially active faults with the potential for surface fault rupture are not known to be located directly beneath or projecting toward the site. Therefore, the potential for surface rupture due to fault plane displacement propagating to the surface at the site during the design life of the proposed development is considered low. Seismicity and Ground Shaking The proximity of the site relative to known active faults indicates the site could be subjected to significant ground shaking caused by earthquakes. This hazard is common in Southern California and the effects of ground shaking can be mitigated by proper engineering design and construction in conformance with current building codes and engineering practices. Liquefaction and Seismically -Induced Settlement Liquefaction is the process in which loose granular soils below the ground -water table temporarily lose strength during strong ground shaking as a consequence of increased pore pressure and, thereby, reduced effective stress. Lateral spread can occur in liquefied soils with a nearby free -face, such as a river channel, or under sloping ground conditions. The vast majority of liquefaction hazards are associated with sandy soils and silty soils of low plasticity (CGS, 2008). Potentially liquefiable soils (based on composition) must be saturated or nearly saturated to be susceptible to liquefaction (CGS, 2008). Liquefaction potential is greatest where the ground -water level is shallow, and submerged loose, fine sands occur within a depth of about 50 feet or Tess. According to the City of Newport Beach (2006) and the CGS (2021a and 2017), the project site is not located within an area identified as having a potential for liquefaction. The project site is underlain by 13 to 17 feet of Pleistocene -age medium dense terrace deposits over sedimentary bedrock of the Monterey Formation. Groundwater was not encountered in our current exploratory borings to the maximum drilled depth of 25 feet bgs and the historic -high groundwater level is mapped at a depth deeper than 30 feet bgs. Therefore, the potential for liquefaction occurring beneath the project area is considered low. Seismically -induced settlement is often caused by loose to medium -dense granular soils becoming denser during ground shaking. We estimate that the seismically -induced settlement beneath the site will be less than ' inch in the event of the Maximum Considered Earthquake. Slope Stability The gently sloping topography at the site precludes both slope stability problems and the potential for lurching (earth movement at right angles to a cliff or steep slope during ground shaking). According to the City of Newport Beach (2006) and the CGS (2021b and 2017), the site is not in an Earthquake Induced Landslide Hazard Zone. There are no known landslides near the site, nor is the site in the path of any known or potential landslides. 7 Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Tsunamis, Inundation, Seiches, Flooding and Subsidence The site is located 0.6 and 0.3 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean and Upper Newport Bay, respectively, at an approximate elevation of 82 feet AMSL. According to tsunami inundation maps published by the California Emergency Management Agency, California Geological Survey, and University of Southern California, the site is not within a tsunami inundation area (CEMA, CGS, and USC, 2009). Therefore, tsunamis (seismic sea waves) are not considered a significant hazard at the site. According to the County of Orange Safety Element (2012) and the California Office of Emergency of Services (CaIOES, 2007), the site is not located within a potential inundation area for an earthquake -induced dam failure. Dams in California are continually monitored by various governmental agencies (such as the State of California Division of Safety of Dams and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) to guard against the threat of dam failure. Therefore, the potential for inundation at the site as a result of an earthquake -induced dam failure is considered low. The site is not located downslope of any large bodies of water that could adversely affect the site in the event of earthquake -induced seiches (wave oscillations in an enclosed or semi -enclosed body of water). The site is in Zone X, an area of minimal flooding potential [Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2008]. Zone X, as defined by FEMA, is an area outside of the 0.2% annual chance flood. Therefore, the potential for flooding at the site is considered low. The site is not within an area of known subsidence associated with fluid withdrawal (groundwater or petroleum), peat oxidation, or hydrocompaction. Therefore, the potential for subsidence is considered low. Oil Wells and Methane Gas The site is located within the limits of the active Newport Oil Field according to the California Geologic Energy Management Division's [CaIGEM, previously the California Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR)] Well Finder System (CaIGEM, 2021). The closest known oil exploration well is located approximately 900 feet west-northwest of the site. Per CaIGEM, the well is classified as "plugged." According to CaIGEM, the closest active well is located approximately 1,500 feet southwest of the site. Although considered a remote possibility, abandoned wells or other undocumented wells could be encountered during excavations. Any well encountered would need to be properly abandoned in accordance with the current requirements of CalGEM. Methane gas is a colorless, odorless, and highly flammable by-product of the decay of organic material. It is often associated with oil fields where subsurface volatile gases naturally permeate to the surface. In an urban environment, methane gas can be introduced though a building's foundation or basement where it can concentrate into a hazardous level. According to the City of Newport Beach (2021), the site is in the vicinity of a Methane Gas Mitigation District (MGMD) (City Code Chapter 15.55). Verification with City of Newport Beach maps will be necessary to define MGMD boundaries near the site. An MGMD is an area designated by the City of Newport Beach to have the potential for high concentrations of methane gas. Any new project or improvement that increases an impervious ground surface by 300 square feet or more within an MGMD is required to have site -specific testing and mitigation measures abiding by the City Code. 8 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Radon Gas According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and CGS, the site is not located in an area of radon gas potential for indoor levels above 4.0 picocuries per liter (EPA, 2021; CGS, 2021c). Therefore, the potential for high levels of radon gas intrusion is considered low. 5.5 Geologic Conclusions Based on the available geologic data, active or potentially active faults with the potential for surface fault rupture are not known to be located directly beneath or projecting toward the project site. Therefore, the potential for surface rupture due to fault plane displacement propagating to the surface at the project site during the design life of the building is considered low. Although the project site could be subjected to strong ground shaking in the event of an earthquake, this hazard is common in Southern California and the effects of ground shaking can be mitigated by proper engineering design and construction in conformance with current building codes and engineering practices. The project site is relatively level and the absence of nearby slopes precludes slope stability hazards. The project site is located within the Newport Oil Field; therefore, a remote possibility exists of encountering undocumented wells during excavations. Any well encountered would need to be appropriately abandoned in accordance with the current requirements of CalGEM. The project site is the vicinity of a City of Newport Beach Methane Gas Mitigation District. Therefore, there is the potential for subsurface methane at the project site and a site -specific methane investigation may be required. The potential for other geologic hazards such as liquefaction, seismically -induced settlement, tsunamis, seiches, flooding, radon gas, and subsidence affecting the site is considered low. 9 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 General Records documenting the placement and compaction of the existing fill soils are not available. Therefore, the existing fill soils are not considered suitable for support of the shallow foundations, paving, or floor slabs on grade:The proposed addition maybe supported on conventional spread/continuous footings if all existing fill soils (and the upper natural soils as necessary) are excavated to allow:for.the.placement of at least:2-feet-of rproperly compacted-fill.tieneath;footings?The floor slab maybe supported on grade if all existing fill soils are `excavated-and'replaced as properly compacted fill; all existing fill should also be excavated and replaced as properly compacted fill for support of new pavement or other exterior concrete walks and slabs on grade. Where adjacent footings are required at different elevations, the higher footing should be located below a 1:1 plane extending upward from the bottom of the lower footing to avoid imposing surcharge loads on the lower footing. New footing excavations should not extend below a 1 1/2:1(horizontal:vertical) plane extending downward from adjacent existing footings. 6.2 Foundations Bearing Value Spread/continuous footings that are a I ast 2 feet wide, underlain by at least 2-feet'of pi-bperly compacted fill' (with.no•existing fill remaining_ between undisturbed natural soils and new properly compacted fill)), and cextending.at.least 2�feet below_the_lowestadjacent,gradeyor floor level may be designed to imposernet:deady plus -live lioad pressure of 2y500 pounds per square foot..tl The above bearing value may also be used for analyses of existing spread/continuous footings supporting the existing building to be renovated. A o'ne=third-increase ma"y be used for.wind or seismic !olds. The recommended bearing value is a net value, and the weight"of concrete in the footings may be taken as 50 pounds per cubic foot; the weight of soil backfill may be neglected when determining the downward loads. Settlement Based on an assumed maximum dead -plus -live column load of 100 kips, we estimate that the settlement of the proposed building addition, supported on spread/continuous footings in the manner recommended above, will be on the order of 1 inch or less, with differential settlements of less than V2 inch between adjacent columns. If additional loads will be imposed on the existing foundations as a result of the proposed renovations, the additional settlement will depend on the additional Toads imposed. We can evaluate the additional settlement if we are provided with the existing and proposed loads on the existing foudnations. Lateral Resistance Lateral loads may be resisted by soil friction and by the passive resistance of the soils. A coefficient of friction of 0.4 may be used between the footings and the floor slab and the supporting soils. The passive resistance of the soils may be assumed to be equal to the pressure developed by a fluid with a density of 250 pounds per cubic 10 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 foot. A one-third increase in the passive value may be used for wind or seismic loads. The frictional resistance and the passive resistance of the soils may be combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance. Ultimate Design Factors When considering an ultimate design approach, the recommended allowable design values provided in the previous sections may be multiplied by the factors shown in the table below: Design Item Ultimate Design Factor Footing Bearing Value 3.0 Passive Resistance 1.2 Coefficient of Friction 1.0 In no event, however, shall foundation sizes be Tess than those required for dead -plus -live loads when using the working stress design values. 6.3 Seismic Design Parameters We have determined the mapped seismic design parameters in accordance with the 2019 CBC and ASCE 7-16 Standard (ASCE, 2017) using the SEAOC/OSHPD Seismic Design Map Tool. The CBC Site Class was determined to be Site Class "D" based on the results of our explorations and a review of the local soil and geologic conditions. The mapped seismic parameters may be taken as presented in the following table: Parameter • Mapped value l Ss:____________ -- — 1.38g------, 0.49* Project Site Class i Fa 10 i i F ___�__-_� _.. �.. __ _ 1.7* i I JAIS = F.Ss{0.2 second period) —L_. — 1.38g* — sMl = F Si(1.0 second period) ,I•_ 0.84g: ,• I Sos = 2/3 x SMs (0.2 second period) l _ f0.92g•* —I i Sol = 2/3 x SMi (10 second period)i O.S *See note in text below By: LT 4/7/2021 Checked: JF 4/20/2021 It should be noted that, based on the project Site Class and the St value, per Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-16, a site - specific ground motion hazard analysis would be required unless Exception No. 2 under Section 11.4,8 of ASCE 7-16 is utilized; we have assumed that this exception will be utilized for this project. 6.4 Floor Slab Support If the subgrade is prepared as recommended in the following section on grading, new building floor slabs may be supported on grade. 11 Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Construction activities and exposure to the environment can cause deterioration of the prepared subgrade. Therefore, we recommend that our field representative observe the condition of the final subgrade soils immediately prior to slab -on -grade construction, and, if necessary, perform further density and moisture content tests to determine the suitability of the final prepared subgrade. Where vinyl or other moisture -sensitive floor covering is planned, we recommend that the floor slab on grade in those areas be underlain by a capillary break consisting of a vapor -retarding membrane over,a'4inch-thick=layer Of gravvel. A 2:inch thick layer ofsand:sshould-be_placed;beiween.the.grav`el anddthe membrane.to'decreasethe 4possibility_of.damage_to..the.membrane. We suggest the following gradation for the gravel: Sieve Size Percent Passing No. 4 No. 100 90-100 0-10 0-3 A low -slump concrete should be used to minimize possible curling of the slab. A,2=inch-thick:layer of soars— <sand_should_be_placed over the_vaporretarding:memfarankto.rediice slab:curlin If this sand bedding is used, care should be taken during the placement of the concrete to prevent displacement of the sand. The concrete slab should be allowed to cure properly before placing vinyl or other moisture -sensitive floor covering. 6.5 Paving To provide support for paving, the subgrade soils should be prepared as recommended in the following section on grading. Compaction of the subgrade, including trench backfills, to at least 90%, and achieving a firm, hard, and unyielding surface will be important for paving support. The preparation of the paving area subgrade should be performed immediately prior to placement of the base course. Proper drainage of the paved areas should be provided since this will reduce moisture infiltration into the subgrade and increase the life of the paving. To provide data for design of paving sections, the R-value of a sample of the upper soils collected during our current investigation was determined. The test result, which indicated an R-value of 56, is presented in the Appendix. Asphalt Concrete Paving The required paving and base thicknesses will depend on the expected wheel loads and volume of traffic (Traffic Index or TI). Assuming that the paving subgrade will consist of on -site or comparable soils compacted to at least 95% as recommented, the minimum recommended paving thicknesses are presented in the following table. Assumed Traffic Index i Asphalt Concrete • 1 Base Course (Inches) , ` (Inches) j 4 and 5 (Automobile Parking and Driveways with Light Truck Traffic) 3 6 (Driveways with Heavy/fire Truck Traffic) 1 4 4 4' The asphalt paving sections were determined using the Caltrans design method. We can determine the recommended paving and base course thicknesses for other Traffic Indices if required. Careful inspection is 12 Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 recommended to verify that the recommended thicknesses or greater are achieved, and that proper construction procedures are followed. Portland Cement Concrete Paving Portland cement concrete paving sections were determined in accordance with procedures developed by the Portland Cement Association. Concrete paving sections for a range of Traffic Indices are presented in the following table. We have assumed that the paving subgrade will consist of on -site or comparable soils compacted to at least 90% as recommented and that the portland cement concrete will have a compressive strength of at least 3,000 pounds per square inch. Assumed Traffic Index Concrete Paving Base Course+ (Inches) 1 (Inches) j 4 (Automobile Parking) 6' I 4 5 and 6 (Driveways with Light or Heavy/Fire Truck Traffic) _ — — 7 4 The paving should be provided with joints at regular intervals no more than 15 feet in each direction. Load transfer devices, such as dowels or keys, are recommended at joints in the paving to reduce possible offsets. The paving sections in the above table have been developed based on the strength of unreinforced concrete. Steel reinforcing may be added to the paving to reduce cracking and to prolong the life of the paving. Base Course The base course should meet the specifications for Class 2 Aggregate Base as defined in Section 26 of the latest edition of the State of California, Department of Transportation, Standard Specifications. Alternatively, the base course could meet the specifications for untreated base as defined in Section 200-2 of the latest edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction. The base course should be compacted to at least 95%. 6.6 Stormwater Infiltration As previously stated, the upper natural alluvial soils are medium dense at present moisture content and may become weaker and more compressible when wet. In addition, the alluvial soils are underlain at relatively shallow depths (13 to 17 feet) by relatively impermeable sedimentary bedrock of the Monterey Formation consisting of silty claystone and clayey siltstone. Therefore, stormwater infiltration facilities could adversely impact the proposed addition and other settlement -sensitive project features through saturation of soils susceptible to hydroconsolidation. In addition, storwater infiltration could lead to a perched water condition at the relatively shallow bedrock contact and the overlying medium dense alluvial soils could become saturated and susceptible to liquefaction. Therefore, infiltration is not recommended as a means of disposal of on -site stormwater runoff. 6.7 Grading General Records documenting the placement and compaction of the existing fill soils are not available. Therefore, the existing fill soils are not considered suitable for support of the shallow foundations, paving, or floor slabs on grade. All existing fill soils (and the upper natural soils as necessary) should be excavated to allow for the placement of at least 2 feet of properly compacted fill beneath footings. The floor slab may be supported on 13 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 grade if all existing fill soils are excavated and replaced as properly compacted fill; all existing fill should also be excavated and replaced as properly compacted fill for support of new pavement or other exterior concrete walks and slabs on grade. The recommended excavation beneath foundations should extend laterally beyond foundations a distance equal to the depth of removal beneath the foundation; the excavation need not extend laterally beyond floor slabs, pavement, and other exterior concrete walks and slabs. The recommended excavation should not extend below a 11h:1 (horizontal:vertical) plane extending downward from the bottom edge of existing footings. All required fill should be uniformly well compacted and observed and tested during placement. The on -site soils may be used in any required fill. Site Preparation After the site is cleared and the existing fill soils (and the upper natural soils as necessary) are excavated 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 (by either adding water or by drying out the soils), and rolled with heavy compaction equipment. 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 method of compaction. Good drainage of surface water should be provided by adequately sloping all surfaces. Such drainage will be important to minimize infiltration of water beneath floor slabs and pavement. Furthermore, heavy landscaping immediately adjacent to the building should be avoided. Excavations and Slopes Where excavations are deeper than about 4 feet, the sides of the excavations should be sloped back at 1:1 (horizontal:vertical) or shored for safety. Unshored excavations should not extend below a plane drawn at 11/::1 (horizontal:vertical) extending downward from adjacent existing footings. We would be pleased to present data for design of shoring, if required. 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. Compaction All 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 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. 14 Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20.0782 May 25, 2021 Trench Backfill All required backfill should be mechanically compacted in layers; flooding should not be permitted. Proper compaction of backfill will be necessary to minimize 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 method of compaction. The on -site soils may be used in the compacted backfill. The exterior grades should be sloped to drain away from the foundations to prevent ponding of water. Some settlement of the backfill should be expected. Provisions should be made for some settlement of pavement and concrete walks supported on backfill; proper compaction of trench backfill will be important to minimize settlement of overlying pavement and concrete walks. Material of Fill The on -site soils, less any debris or organic matter, may 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 (at least 15% passing the No. 200 sieve) 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. 6.8 Geotechnical Observation The reworking of the upper soils and the compaction of all required fill should be observed and tested during placement by a representative of our firm. This representative should perform at least the following duties: • Observe the clearing and grubbing operations for proper removal of all unsuitable materials. • Observe the exposed subgrade in areas to receive fill and in areas where excavation has resulted in the desired finished subgrade. The representative should also observe proofrolling and delineation of areas requiring overexcavation. • Evaluate the suitability of on -site and import soils for fill placement; collect and submit soil samples for required or recommended laboratory testing where necessary. • Observe the fill and backfill for uniformity during placement. • Test backfill for field density and compaction to determine the percentage of compaction achieved during backfill placement. • Observe and probe foundation materials to confirm that suitable bearing materials are present at the design foundation depths. The governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the project should be notified prior to commencement of grading so that the necessary grading permits can be obtained and arrangements can be made for required inspection(s). The contractor should be familiar with the inspection requirements of the reviewing agencies. 15 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 7.0 BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS The recommendations provided in this report are based upon our understanding of the described project information and on our interpretation of the data collected during our subsurface explorations. We have made our recommendations based upon experience with similar subsurface conditions under similar loading conditions. The recommendations apply to the specific project discussed in this report; therefore, any change in the structure configuration, loads, location, or the site grades should be provided to us so that we can review our conclusions and recommendations and make any necessary modifications. The recommendations provided in this report are also based upon the assumption that the necessary geotechnical observations and testing during construction will be performed by representatives of our firm. The field observation services are considered a continuation of the geotechnical investigation and essential to verify that the actual soil conditions are as expected. This also provides for the procedure whereby the client can be advised of unexpected or changed conditions that would require modifications of our original recommendations. In addition, the presence of our representative at the site provides the client with an independent professional opinion regarding the geotechnically-related construction procedures. If another firm is retained for the geotechnical observation services, our professional responsibility and liability would be limited to the extent that we would not be the geotechnical engineer of record. Project labor agreements are often written in such a manner to preclude non -union firms from providing inspection and testing services during construction. If your project is considering being signatory to a project labor agreement or other union labor agreement, it would be beneficial for the labor agreement to include language that specifically excludes construction soils and materials inspection. Failure to exclude construction inspection from the project labor agreement would likely preclude the geotechnical engineer of record from continuing services during construction and limit construction inspection and testing to union firms. We would be pleased to meet with you to discuss the implications associated with project labor agreements. 16 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 8.0 BIBUOGRAPHY California Department of Conservation, Geologic Energy Management Division (CaIGEM), 2020, CaIGEM Well Finder, <https://www.conservation.ca.gov/calgem/Pages/WellFinder.aspx>, accessed April 20, 2021. California Department of Water Resources (DWR), 2003, "Califomia's Groundwater," Bulletin 118, Update 2003. California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1997, "Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Anaheim and Newport Beach 7.5-Minute Quadrangles, Orange County, California", Seismic Hazard Zone Report 03, updated 2006. California Emergency Management Agency, California Geological Survey, and University of Southern California CEMA, CGS, and USC,) 2009, "Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning," State of California -County of Orange, Newport Beach Quadrangle, March 15, 2009. California Geological Survey (CGS), 2021a, EQ Zapp: California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application, accessed April 15, 2021, <https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/geohazards/eq-zapp>. Califomia Geological Survey (CGS), 2021b, 'Landslide Inventory (Beta)," Online database, <http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Isi/>, Accessed April 3, 2021. California Geological Survey (CGS), 2021c, "Indoor Radon Potential," Online Map, <https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/radon/>, Accessed April 20, 2021. California Geological Survey (CGS), 2018, "Earthquake Fault Zones, A Guide for Government Agencies, Property Owners/Developers, and Geoscience Practitioners for Assessing Fault Rupture Hazards in California," Special Publication 42, Revised 2018. California Geological Survey (CGS), 2017, Seismic Hazard Zones Newport Beach 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation, Newport Beach Quadrangle, Revised Official Map, Includes Seismic Hazard Zones Official Map released April 17, 1997 and April 15, 1998; Earthquake Fault Zones Official Map released July 1,1986. California Geological Survey (CGS), 2008, "Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California," Special Publication 117A. California Office of Emergency Services (CaIOES), 2007, Dam Inundation Maps, vector spatial data. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2021, Maps of Radon Zones EPA website for California, <https://www.epa.g ov/radon/find-information-about-local-radon -zones-and-state-contact-information>, accessed April 20, 2021. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2008, Flood Insurance Rate Map, Map Number 06059CO286J, <http://msc.fema.g ov> . MACTEC, 2003. "Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Addition to James Irvine Surgery Center, Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian, Newport Beach, California;' Project No. 4953-03-0901, dated April 4, 2003. 17 Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Morton, D.M. and Miller, F.K., 2006, Geologic map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30' x 60' quadrangles, California: U.S. Geological Survey, Open -File Report OF-2006-1217, scale 1:100,000. Morton, P.K., and Miller, R.V., 1981, Geologic map of Orange County, California, showing mines and mineral deposits: California Division of Mines and Geology, Bulletin 204, scale 1:48,000. Newport Beach, City of, 2021, Charter and Municipal Code, <https://newportbeachca.gov/govemment/departments/city-clerk/city-charter-and-mu nicipal-code>, accessed April 20, 2021. Newport Beach, City of, 2006, 'City of Newport Beach General Plan," adopted July 26, 2006. Orange, County of, 2012, "County of Orange General Plan," updated 2012. U.S. Geological Survey and California Geological Survey (USGS-CGS), 2020, Quaternary Fault and Fold Database for the United States, accessed 01-01-21, data timestamp 10-19-2020, <https://www.usgs.gov/natural- hazards/ea rthquake-hazard s/faults>. Vedder, J.G., 1975, Revised geologic map of the San Joaquin Hills - San Juan Capistrano area, Orange County, California: U.S. Geological Survey, Open -File Report OF-75-552, scale 1:24,000. Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP), 2019, Fault Database Tools, <http://www.wgcep.org/tools-fault_db> Yerkes, R. F., McCulloch, T. H., Schoellhamer, J.E., and Vedder, J. G., 1965, "Geology of the Los Angeles Basin -An Introduction," U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper420-A. 18 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Figure 1 Site Vicinity Map 117.570'W 117'5340W 117^5520W 111•590W 117'5540W 117•5520119 117'550W 117'54'40W i r I I i 1 1 1 I Paso USGS topographic maps of mo Newport Beall, and NLwpon Beach OE Soum I.5m hole Dunarmolos. 2018. 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 Feet 0 0.2 0.4 1 wood. Wood EreekSolo In 4 Wkuo uknaa 6dkg4da.IM. 6001 RdsnOedw Road Los Avow.. Caabmis 90040 1. 3206696300 "00dp1/4.0o,n 0.8 Miles w SITE VICINITY MAP LAT: 33 62554 ION: .117.93004 SCALE: 1:24.000 ORAWN. PER CHECK: RU DATE: 412012021 Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive Newport Beach, California N s E FIGURE: PROJECT: '953.200762 1 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Figure 2 Plat Plan 111111 NIB MI 11M1 ME 1M NM MD 11111 MI Nil OM NMI In NIB 1E1 OM E ; • r . 111;i: . • HOSPITAL PO: . eiq't : ; • .1:- INR.5.1.F*3 ' : . . „ . • •. - g fi 1. . . . . . ..• •::••• , .. . . . ...51,. • . .. . • .. 7... . .. .. ,5:......2......55i24 • ,.:...,.....•.....:...,:,........:3—.4.,..,...,..,,.........:::::.1 e)...... 4-- .o.... , 4.::ekt. '.- I. • •••- ' ' ' G • ...04.4" .; • - • i•••••••••\ ••• • ......itiewe•—•—•- • • •.• ..-"4...- ••••'...":::••••....._...4,•• .: ',. ''.... . .• ".•lik11 . to. oi, 74: ..P"...f/t r• . ..... 1 . C Z. -.I .: 'a' agf " n G.'W../ . % -.S.'s:, - ' ':'.!:.' • • 4 . " • 43-.%)ietflfr. .. ./1...'"' -r• A i ' 7' n'-•, - "'s;-:.vi4 NEW ADDITION FOOTPRO2r 4 400 sr Reference: Conceptual Site Plan datedJanuary 18, 2021 prepared by ware Makomb LEGEND 2 • Current Boring Location 5 do Prior Boring Locations (4953-03-0931) 0 1530' 217 SCALE: 1- • 30' a 'AA ea • at wood. P oposed One Hoag leaden-0 Center oag Merro.i00iIIPresbyterian Ora •-laag C. Newport Beach. CM fo•-ia ••‘••••1:••• VAIN Wood 1•4111 Inik..•••••••••0•• Ilon••••••••,•••nxin 011311•0 10-1k2I n• GI 9 TV,' 34.42 1..30 r•-•ID •GIVI 131/29/2021 Plot Plan 2 4953 20 0/22 Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Appendix A CURRENT FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Appendix A Current Field Explorations and Laboratory Test Results Current Field Explorations The soil conditions beneath the site were explored by drilling two borings to depths of about 25 feet below the existing grade.The borings were drilled using 8-inch-diameter hollow stem auger -type drilling equipment. The locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2. The soils encountered were logged by our field technician, and undisturbed and bulk samples were obtained for laboratory inspection and testing. The logs of the borings are presented on Figures A-1.1 through 1.2; the depths at which undisturbed samples were obtained are indicated to the left of the boring logs. The number of blows required to drive the Crandall sampler 12 inches using a 140-pound automatic hammer falling 30 inches is indicated on the logs. The soils are classified in the accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System described on Figure A-2. Current Laboratory Test Results Laboratory tests were performed on selected samples obtained from the borings to aid in the classification of the soils and to evaluate their engineering properties. The field moisture content and dry density of the soils encountered were determined by performing tests on the undisturbed samples. The results of the tests are presented to the left of the boring Togs. Tests to determine the percentage of fines (material passing through a -200 sieve) in selected samples were performed. The results of these tests are presented on the boring logs. Direct shear tests were performed on selected undisturbed samples to determine the strength of the soils. The tests were performed after soaking to near -saturated moisture content and at various surcharge pressures. The testing procedure was in general accordance with ASTM Designation D3080. The results of the tests are presented on Figure A-3, Direct Shear Test Data. Confined consolidation testing was performed on two undisturbed samples to determine the compressibility of the soils. Water was added to the samples during the tests to illustrate the effect of moisture on the compressibility. The testing procedures were in general accordance with ASTM Designation D2435. The results of the tests are presented on Figure A-4, Consolidation Test Data. To provide information for paving design, a stabilometer test ("R" value test) was performed on two samples of the upper soils. The results of the test are presented on Figure A-5.1 and 5.2, R-Value Test Data. Soil corrosivity tests were performed on samples of the on -site soils. The results of the tests are presented on Figure A-6. ■w OM MI r SIM MI Ir NIP OM 111M1 S IMO r NMI r A r SI ISOIL CRANOALUELEVATION) C;IUSINSWMMY.VNANCISCOp1.SK'I'ONLIBNARY AMLCFIV P UQ., C.FOT4f'IRxOJO_VROIllflO]%�!1\I NOAC [ I+. IWRSIIIPfV\T4f11n5 Ff f;f'TRI MIRI')•GLU M, 0 = THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE EXPLORATION LOCATION. LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE OF BORING LOCATION SHOWN ON LOGS ARE APPROXIMATE: REFER TO PLOT PLAN FOR MORE ACCURATE LOCATION INFORMATION. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER IAf.:.ATIONS AND AT OT)II?R TIMES MAY DIFFER. INTERFACES BETWEEN STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE. TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL. O 'O �QQ Vim. O U in C n x I I I I I I I I E l` I ELEVATION (ft) it o c I I; ;: I! 1 f _ ;. I I '^ DEPTH (ft) 2IL= 1�xl W. N = oo 00 a � MOISTURE (%ofdry wt.) 4.E ..m m qp�a qg a _ — — — r DRY DENSITY (ikf) ship Centt rest yteriai ich, Califo c p .1,1 . s BLOW COUNT* (blows/ft) :•:+ al l f1 ; a ff:1 i?.1 SAMPLE LOC. .. <•� ..,. m.o' III•,Il�llt11l1l1 EI'III'I'I:IlI:III:��i I:I:I:(i a.yRfR .i.i1 I;I. 1 ,I I I:L:I:Ii I ,I I .I I 1 :ill .i .- .. trig mp S < m C m joriii n a z H 7 y O L to Ja�,� �` a N Z.qZ ..-I m 0 c F.t. . "' m 3 -< $ co °�` a� z H t > rri cd .ti no A 0OZ 18 sg :.� y z m 0,� -1 (o n (! eo 37 �' r� - . G .f > ''e Yamo ' '6. o , W r n y 7 - x n BORING 1 DRILLED: March 25, 2021 'MEAT USED: Hollow Stem Auger DIAMETER (in.): 8 ATION (ft.): 82** • g. 3a m� ? .a A o' A- y tri 5 v.• r _ _ CA m g '2 Q G tp 7 J• 0. G: S �, 3. e ° 5 IA H n - R o �. 07 O •. O 5. LOG OF BORING Project: 4953-20-0782 Figure: A-1.1 `.d rye S F.6 C , -V" n W O , 3.Z C J S F s 'o w w E. 3 g' 0 c G .0 = c ? 3 5 ?' = 'a "9 qq V) fY o 5 :cf'� =_C S s b fa c et r dG co.: r3• a 1 r g �y ��wr Q.S n' p1' d 7 _ /N Fm f''. ^v G E' a.c r > 5 E- nN �f. Y K W dO L �` 2. DI ISOIL CRANDALLIELEVATION) C:\USERSUIMMY.FRANCISCO\DESKTOPILIBRARY AMECPW 2013140LB P:M953 GEOTI CIIL020-PROD\2007I 2 ONE IIBAG LEADERSIIIP CENTER'AS ENGCTRLUII'LD NOTES14933-20-0752 LOGS.GPJ 5125121 THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OE SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE EXI'LORATION LOCATION. LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE OF BORING LOCATION SFIOWN ON LOGS ARE APPROXIMATE; REFER TU PLOT PLAN FOR WORE ACCURATE LOCATION INFORMATION. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER L(X:ATIUNS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER. INTE..RFACES BETWEEN STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE. TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL. N Ue w N 1 i l 1 1 1 I I' I 1 I I I I' 1 t 1 1 ELEVATION(R) t1: 5 1 I : N l 1 1 1 I 1 `o H 1 o s T 1 I S. '^ DEPTH (ft) o a 0 — '0 " :T �, s MOISTURE (% of dry wt.) c kb - o ND - - DRY DENSITY (Pei) N _V N U a Ai P BLOW COUNT' (blows/R) 2; '1 f-; 0 SAMPLE LOC. l: 9I�jjljl -1:1- I jI igi;.I ...• • .. r xT BO DATE DRILLED: March 25, 2 EQUIPMENT USED: Hollow Stcr HOLE DIAMETER (in.): 8 ELEVATION (IL.): 81" jll'jj• 1 EI:11611Ejij:l'1` • • i�1:1_I: ..1 CA CAM VJ v 3 2 Z r' CA nn 0 I� m o r- X O d ,, l5 '! 8 A f Z �m8 Q7 a RO C oo ' O 6 3. i N N m' c a 2' Tr. 1 T ti S =, f v N 1 'e N pn �''� 6-' N .r.] gam' -1, 'v� CA +r �rA 0� v �° g� m g Iwo E p A 3 a z a. r t/� N O 1n 5� ,,. S, n w 7I" "1 A 3 ' r 7Y r' 7 C :} �� -. �„-4 �Cl,n,'� w o S Q!i � lZ L. 2 7 N Q �. " 0 N r r Ir r r r■ r OM r INN e On r MI r N r Oat ■ O MI MIN NIB MB 1E1 INN MIN MI MIN IIIIII MI I Sill MIN r INN Ell r MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP SYMBOLS TYPICAL NAMES Undisturbed Sample Auger Cuttings Auger COARSE GRAINED SOILS (More than 50%of material is LARGER than No. 200 sieve size) CLEAN '� j 4 GW well graded gravels. gravel - sand mixtures, little or no Ilene,,. Split Spoon Sample S Sample GRAVELS (More than 50%of fraction is GRAVELS (Little or no lines) 6wt e 0 ) ° GP `( Poorly graded gravels or grave • sand mixtures, hale o r no lutes. Rock Core J Si : "' 'gyp Crandall Sampler r coarse LARGER than the No. 4 sieve size) GRAVELS WITH FINES ° e GM Silty gravels, gravel - sand - silt mixtures. r Dilatometer Modified Califomia Sampler (Appr iablc amount of fines) °o y GC Clayey gravels, gravel - sand - clay mixtures. ri Packer C) No Recovery CLEAN •• SW • Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. V Water Table at time of drilling - Water Table after drilling SANDS (More than 50% of coarse fraction is SANDS• (Little or no fins) SP Poor! graded sands or gravelly little or nonofines. y sands. SMALLER than the No. 4 Sieve size) SANDS WITH FINES :' SM Silty sands. sand - silt mixtures (Appreciable ou amount of tint,%) %f 7 SC Clayey sands, sand - clay mixtures. FINE GRAINED SOILS (More than 50"/I, of material is SMALLER than No. 200 sieve size) ML Inorganic silts and vary fine sands. rock flour, silty of clayey fine sands or clayey and w'th slielr� I sticitrr Correlation of Penetration Resistance with Relative Densityand Consistency SILTS AND CLAYS (Liquid limit LESS than 50) % CL � Inorganic Lays °fill000w to medium plasticity. levelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, can clays. SAND & GRAVEL SILT & CLAY No. of Blows Relative Density_ tt' No. of Blows Consisten cy - =,- = OL Organic silts and organic silty days of low plasticity, 0 - 4 Very Loose 0 - I Very Soft 5 - 10 Loose 2 - 4 Soft SILTS AND CLAYS M}I Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous line sandy or silty soils, el.., silo. 11 - 30 Medium Dense 5 - 8 Medium Stiff 31 - 50 Dense 9 - 15 Stiff (Liquid limit GREATER than 50) CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays Over 50 _ Very Dense 16 - 30 Very Stiff Over 30 Hard SANDSTONE Reference; The Unified Soil Classification System, Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army Technical Memorandum No. 3-357, Vol. I, March, 1953 (Revised April, 1960) BEDROCK &Hs SILTSTONE GRANITE BOUNDARY CLASSIFICATIONS: Soils possessing characteristics of two groups are designated by KEY TO SYMBOLS AND DESCRIPTIONS combinations ofgroup symbols. SAND GRAVEL d. SILT OR CLAY Fine Medium 'Coarse Fine Coarse Cobbles Boulders No.200 No.40 No.I0 No.4 3/4" 3" 12"WOU.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE Figure A-2 1 0 0 1000 G z rIa 2000 c rzi 3000 cC rwn OG 14 4000 od rn 5000 6000 0 SHEAR STRENGTH in Pounds per Square Foot 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 1€0V 0 2 S% 0 I c 2910'h Boring Designation Sample Depth (ft.) and 1a13%, 0 1u7%, 2d.5% 0 2 i0'/, 0 0 0 O o Samples soakcd to a moisture content near saturation L Natural Soil Bedrock Prepared/Date: JF 4/15/2021 Checked/Date: GA 4/19/2021 Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive, Newport Beach, California wood. DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA Project No. 4953-20-0782 Figure A-3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.00 0.02 U a 0.04 (n ta) z 0.06 0 0.08 to 0 0.10 0.12 LOAD IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 lu.0 — — L Boring 2 @ 51/2' SAND / SILTY No Boring SILTY 1 a 7%W' SAND I Note: Water added to samples after consolidation under a Toad of 1 8 kips per square foot. Prepared/Date: JF 4/16/2021 Checked/Date: GA 4/19/2021 Proposed One Iloag Leadership Center Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive. Newport Beach. Califomia wood. CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA Project No.: 4953-20-0782 Figure A-4 1 1 LM R - VALUE DATA SHEET 1 LaBe TTe Mary n PROJECT No. 47060 DATE: 4/12/2021 BORING NO. B -1 @ 3'-8' Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center P.N. 4953-20-0782.01.02 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION: Brown Fill / SM .,, _, R'VALUE rESTINGIDATA I CATEST 301 �' _ r SPECIMEN ID a b c Mold ID Number 1 2 3 Water added, grams 50 39 33 Initial Test Water, % 9.0 8.0 7.5 Compact Gage Pressure,psi 80 280 350 Exudation Pressure, psi 170 410 751 Height Sample, Inches 2.55 2.50 2.48 Gross Weight Mold, grams 3111 3099 3099 Tare Weight Mold, grams _ 1954 1946 1958 Sample Wet Weight, grams 1157 1153 1141 Expansion, Inches x 10exp-4 0 0 10 Stability 2,0001bs (160psi) 33 / 61 19 / 34 17 / 26 Turns Displacement 4.97 4.19 3.87 R-Value Uncorrected 45 69 77 R-Value Corrected 45 69 77 Dry Density, pcf 17.6.1 129.4 129.7 DESIGN CALCULATION DATA Traffic Index Assumed: 4.0 4.0 4.0 G.E. by Stability 0.56 0.32 0.24 G. E. by Expansion 0.00 0.00 0.33 Equilibrium R-Value REMARKS: 61 by EXUDATION Gf = 1.25 0.0% Retained on the 3/4" Sieve. Examined & Checked: 4 /12/ 21 The data above is based upon processing and testing samples as received from the field. Test procedures In accordance with latest revisions to Department of Transportation, State of California, Materials & Research Test Method No. 301. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 li LaBelle Marvin, Inc. 12700 South Grand Avenue I Santa Ana, CA 92705 1714-514.3565 Figure A-5.1 Mil i i i i i i R-VALUE GRAPHICAL PRESENTA"I"IOIV ' ':AT.5trCOMPicOrm PRESSt kt vsMOISTURE%`^ , L LaBelle Marvin PROJECT NO. DATE: 47060 4 /12/ 21 REMARKS: BORING NO. B-1@3'-8' Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center P.N. 4953-20-0782.01.02 • COVER:THICKNESS;13VEXUD'ATION vs'COVEKTHIGKNESFBY EXPANSION!; =EV SOO 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 ... t • ' 5.0 700 600 . ' t 500 400 awl 310 100 10C 100 llt �..I t is f^ ligtariSin NMN: MI .. ..-`.armr81 .I UIM l r. .111 G::CC�y:. .... • 20 1lIW �ti LO 0.c 0.0 1.0 H- 1.3 I' _ 3.0 8.0 5.0 E.0 I I•• 7.0 COV FA TI t0015$ 8V DNAN310N. FT. 0 EXUD. T 05. Expon. T ♦R-VALUE vs. EXUO. PRES. 8.0 90 80 70 50 40 30 l0 10 0 410 I I 350 900 zoo 100 i i i 7.5 8.5 MOISTUREIV AT FABRICA TON 9.5 F31 Sample ID Resistivity as -received saturated pH Table 1 - Laboratory Tests on Soil Samples WOOD, PLC Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Your #4953200782.01.02, HDR Lab #21-0288LA8 8-Apr-21 @ 3-8' Units ohm -cm 20,800 ohm -cm 2,920 8.7 Electrical Conductivity mS/cm 0.16 Chemical Analyses Cations calcium Cat* mg/kg 36 magnesium Mgt+ mg/kg 4.1 sodium Na" mg/kg 57 potassium K'+ mg/kg 6.9 ammonium NH4'+ mg/kg ND Anions carbonate CO3`" mg/kg 47 bicarbonate HC031' mg/kg 61 fluoride F'' mg/kg 3.8 chloride CI'. mg/kg 29 sulfate S042- mg/kg 1,152 nitrate N031" mg/kg 13 phosphate P043- mg/kg 7.6 Other Tests sulfide Redox S2" quad mV na na ANINEVIECEMSEMEWINE Resistivity per ASTM G187, pH per ASTM G51. Cations per ASTM D6919, Anions per ASTM 04327. and Alkalinity par APHA 2320-8. Electrical conductivity in millisiemensfcm and chemical analyses were made on a 1:5 soil -to -water extract. mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram (pans per million) of dry soil. Redox = oxidation-reduction potential in millivolts ND = not detected na = not analyzed '0 431 West Baseline Road • Claremont, CA 91711 Phone: 909.962.5485 • Fax: 909.626.3316 Figure A-6 Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Appendix B PRIOR PERTINENT FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TEST RESULTS 1 ' 1 r•LEVA I 95 — — IU 90— 7-44 8.7 117 U 3 if U ij rr lt1 Hoag \7emorial Medical Center Torrance, California BORING 1 DATE DRILLED: March 20. 2003 EQUIPMENT USED: Hand Augers HOLE DIAMETER tins 0 ELEVATION: 101.8 " SMI C FILL - SILTY SAND - luaae, moist. hrawn. with some Clay. some :r.n el :utd asphalt and concrete pieces CL - SANDI' CLAY • medium sari. midst. light brown. line sand END OF BORING AT 5.5' Notes: Water mu encountered. Boring hacktilted with soil cuttings and tamped. . Number or blows required to drive the Crandal sampler 12 inches using a 50 pound hammer falling 12 inches. Eieva:ions based nn benchmark shown on Figure 2. Site Plan, MACTEC Field Tech: GMC/AR Prepared By: JA Checked By: LOG OF BORING Pr)jecl: 4953-03-0)3l Figure: A- 1.1 311%11.61l I Aw_l RAN.UU7 •1/3A3 I.f1C.ATH INS 100- 95- 96- 8 5 11' } E— tf i5 35 BORING 2 DATE DRILLED: March 26. 2003 EQUIPMENT USED: Hand Augcr; HOLE DIAMETER tin.): 6 ELEVATION: 101.2 •' SM CL FILL - SILTY SAND - loose. moist. light hrown. with some asphalt and Krick CL - SANDY CLAY - medium stiff, moist, light brown. fine sand END OF BORING AT 5.0' Notes: Water not encountered. Boring backfilled With soil cuttings and tamped. Field Tech: GMC/AR Prepared By: IA Checked By: Hoag Memorial Medical Center Torrance. California MACTEC LOG OF BORING Project: 495?-01-O')3I Figure: A-1.2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 •�•••�.••�•�.v i �i••••••••��•�•�•�•�•�••• O•••••:00••O• •O•••00••Ap•Od•••• • •••p0•••• • ••• •••••••.••••••••• ••••• I c c ? F n :7-,rr rB • •• 7'*. '—*I a :n r. - O i W� z c r. 4 'L 3• to C ',.• n Q ri y �7 n c y c_ c 3 C rn V, c - c: ? o. O n _ a.^ 1= Cj L S 3^r •S 0 C c t 7 2 f, t Y. r 7 • G 2 rt rt 1 _ c n n 2 7 • F 7 C m` D K 2 B > 'c' s z r 3 Hoag Memorial Medical Center Torrance, California d giMACT EC LOG OF BORING pi.,je.). 1953M3.O')3i Figure: A-1.3 —1 a. BORING 4 DATE DRILLED: March 26. 2U0? EQUIPMENT USED: Hand Augers HOLE DIAMETER rin.f: ( ELEVATION: 99.1 '° -- In \NI IAI,L.REV I 7IYI11.04 I.P _CRAN I:11T UNILI J SM FILL - SILTY SAND - louse. moist. hrawn. some gravel and asphalt ENI) OF BORING AT 3. Notes: Unable to advance due to pnssihlc utilities in area. Boring hackfil led with coil cuttings and tamped. Field Tech: GMCIAR Prepared By: !A Checked By: Hoag Memorial Medical Center Torrance. California MACTEC LOG OF BORING Pmlccn l953-03-M31 Figure: A-1.4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 z 4 95 _ b5- 8U u 3 — 5 15 oq r z_ D` 'l.� ^� > 3= E .e f 95 BORING 5 L):1TE DRILLED: March 2h. 2003 EQUIPMENT USED: Hand Augers HOLE DIAMETER rim): p ELEVATION: 99.3 " FILL - SILTY SANI) - tooec. moist. Tight hrawn, with gravel A little Conchae and gravel found CL - SANDY CLAN' - Tight brown. medium stLFJ' END OF BORING AT 3.5' Notes: Water not encountered. Raring hacktilled with soil cuttings and tamped, Field Tech: GMC/AR Prepared By: JA Checked By: Hoag Memorial Medical Center Torrance. California MACTEC [Pr,iLOG II;OF BORING 5 MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP SYMBOLS fYPICAI, NAMES Undisturbed Sample Auger Cuttings COARSE. GRAINED SOILS GRAVELS s (More than . m. of coarse lracuion is 1.A14(ill4 limn the No. 4 Nies e site) CIJ AN `, ( Ci W Well graded gravels. gravel - sand mixtures. Iialeornolines. • X Split Spoon Sample `p P ( Bulk S lull IC p Rock Core Crandall Sampler turn,: turn,: or no rows) a t: ) ( Ili ro rly gladod gravels.or guise - sandI 111ixrlltes. wilco'. DOIirlcs. GRAVELS WfMII FINES) c GM Silty gravels. gravel - sand - sill ultim tes. I}ilattlmeter Pressure Meier (.nppreciahlc aMMIlli +ffims) (ic f.laycygr,vels,gravel-sand-clay mixtures. Packer 0 No Recovery i mow than $li% of material is 1 AR( ih:R than No 2rnsieve site) SANDS Intnrc than Sfl':: of coarse fraction is Sn1AI.I .P12 than the No 4 Sieve si/ct CLEAN •• •..•.• SW Well gt:uletl sands- gravelly sands, little or no noes Q Water Table at time of drilling V Water Table aller 24 hours SANDS lUIlIe of no liltesl SP Poorly.graded sands or gravelly sands, time of no lilts. SANDS WITI•I FINES j j SM Silty sands, sand - sill mixtures (Appreciahle amount of lines) A SC Clayey sands. sand - clay mixtures. MI., Inorganic silts and very line sma(s, rock floor. silly of clayey fine sank nr clayey ?au and .vnh slight nlasuc;(y`r• Correlation of Penetration Resistance with Relative Dens ty and Consistency FINE SII:IS AND CLAYS 11.iquwl limit Ll'SS than SO) / CL I'"'rgauiic lays"I k n Ir+1lle(liuln plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silly clays, Ican clays. SAND & GRAVEL SILT & CLAY No. of Blows Relative Density No. of Blows Consistency GRAINED—__ SOII.S — OI trrg;nticsilts and lxganicsilty days oflo.v plasiiciiy. 0-4 Very Loose 0- I Very Soft 5 - 10 Loose 2 - 4 Soft (Mine than 511%aI marginal is SMAI.I Pk !him MI I Inorganic silts. I111caccom or di:11rM1:11:MM line sandy or silty soils, elaslie silts. I I - 20 Finn 5 - 8 firm 21 30 Very Finn 9 - 15 Stiff No 2110 siefe sire' SILTS AND CI.AYS 1t 'quid !lulu (iRI:Ai FR than $111 CI I Inorganic clays of high plasticity-, fat days 31 - 50 Dense 16 - 30 Very Stiff .--...Over 50 Very Dense Over 31 !lard .. A A-A- Ati 01.1 t,rgaoic days of medium to high.r plasticity, organic sills. III{il l l.Y ORGANIC SOILS ., PT feat and othc highly organic soils BOUNDARY CLASSIFICATIONS: Soils possessing charac eristics of two groups are designated by combinations of group symbols. KEY TO SYMBOLS AND DESCRIPTIONS SAND GRAVEL Cobbles Boulders SILT OR CLAY fine Medium Coarse Fine Coarse No.2011 N( 41) No.10 No.4 344" 3" I2" U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE Reference: The Unified Soil Classification System, Corps of Engineers, U.S. Anny Technical �� /�lAL LAWGIBB Group Member Memorandum No.3-357, Vol. 1, March, 1953 (Revised April, 1960) 0 S 0 0 O re 0 DATE 4/3/03 SURCHARGE PRESSURE in Pounds per Square Foot 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 SHEAR STRENGTH in Pounds per Square Foot 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 • \ • • 62@4.5 • • \ • \ \‘i B2@4.5 BORING NUMBER & SAMPLE DEPTH (FT.) • VALUES USED IN ANALYSES • \ • • i/ \ • • • • \ • • • KEY: Samples tested after soaking to a moisture content near saturation Natural sods DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA (PEAK VALUES) W MACTEC f=�' FIGURE A - 3.1 0 1) w 0 0 w O BORING NUMBER AND SAMPLE DEPTH: SOIL TYPE: CONFINING PRESSURE: (Ibs.lsq.ft.) INITIAL MOISTURE CONTENT: (% Of dry wt.) 5at 2112' SILTY CLAY 144 8.0 FINAL MOISTURE CONTENT: 15.8 (% of dry wt.) DRY DENSITY: (Ibs./cu.ft.) EXPANSION INDEX 117.7 9 TEST METHOD: ASTM Designation D4829.88 EXPANSION INDEX TEST DATA MACTEC FIGURE A - 6 County of Orange/Santa Ana Region Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Project Name: One Hoag Leadership Center 1 Hoag Drive Newport Beach, CA 92663 APN: 423-011-30 Prepared for: Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian 1 Hoag Drive Newport Beach,CA 92663 (310) 614-1446, Prepared by: by: Ware Malcomb N,10-Edelman . � NN. Irvine, 2618 49 6 -92 O 918 (9 12/09/21 N\NN % \ BUILDING DJVJSJoN OEC i 4 2.02i RY. s.a.o. 44.zy � \' \• �\ Y4� •• . ```'` . `\ • • County of Orange/Santa Ana Region Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Project Name: One Hoag Leadership Center 1 Hoag Drive Newport Beach, CA 92663 APN: 423-011-30 Prepared for: Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian 1 Hoag Drive Newport Beach, CA 92663 (310) 614-1446 Prepared by: Ware Malcomb 10 Edelman Irvine, CA 92618 (949) 660-9128 12/09/21 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center `.4�a}yi'x1�1.4e%C .ectsOwnee's i�I^ Y'a�._T2�Gf.-IX�44iNSA'Nl�q�➢4Y. CertiAcatEo'� Planning�.�.r#L�(.fa Application No. (If applicable) Grading Permit No. GRAD r764-mzw Tract/Parcel Map and Lot(s) No. 1- Building Permit No. Address of Project Site and APN (if no address, specify Tract/Parcel Map and Lot Numbers) qz3-0on This Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) has been prepared for HOAG by Ware Malcomb. The WQMP is intended to comply with the requirements of the County of Orange NPDES Stormwater Program requiring the preparation of the plan. The undersigned, while it owns the subject property, is responsible for the implementation of the provisions of this plan , including the ongoing operation and maintenance of all best management practices (BMPs), and will ensure that this plan is amended as appropriate to reflect up-to-date conditions on the site consistent with the current Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and the intent of the non -point source NPDES Permit for Waste Discharge Requirements for the County of Orange, Orange County Flood Control District and the incorporated Cities of Orange County within the Santa Ana Region. Once the undersigned transfers its interest in the property, its successors -in -interest shall bear the aforementioned responsibility to implement and amend the WQMP. An appropriate number of approved and signed copies of this document shall be available on the subject site in perpetuity. Owner Bill Quiram Title 1 Senior Project Manager Company Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Address 1 Hoag Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92663 Email bill.quiram®hoag.org Telephone M 1 949-764-4464 I understand my responsibility to implement the provisions of this WQMP including the ongoing operation and maintenance of the best management practices (BMPs) described herein. Owner Signature8a aen-aH/ I?ate OCt 18, 2021 HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBY1 1AN Owner's Certification North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page i 126440_Lyon Center_Owner's Certification Final Audit Report r 2021-10-18 Created: 2021-10-18 By: Barry Paxson (98rty.PHXSOntroag•org) Status: steed Transedfan ID: C8JCHBCAA8AA-HnY)gabMivf9yzbwEmbFDtP- XTp3 "126440_Lyon Center_Owner's Certification" History t Document created by Barry Paxson (Barry.Paxson@hoag.org) 2021-10-18 - 7:00-.08 PM GMT- IP address: 23.240.83.169 F.: Document emailed to Bill Quiram (bill.quiramighoag.org) for signature 2021-10-18 - 7:00:24 PM GMT Emaa viewed by Bill Qulram (bill.quiram@hoag.org) 2021-10-18 - 7:29.31 PM GMT- IP address: 198.190.34.55 Oro Document a signed by Bill Quiram (bill.quiramr@hoag.org) Signature Date: 2021-10-18 - 7:41:50 PM GMT - Time source: server- IP address: 198.190.34.55 o Agreement completed. 2021-10-18 - 7:41:59 PM GMT hooaag Adobe Sign Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Preparer (Engineer): Lucas Corsbie Title Director, Civil Engineering PE Registration # 72588 Company Ware Malcomb Address 10 Edelman, Irvine, CA 92618 Email Icorsbie@waremalcomb.com Telephone # (949) 799-4049 [ hereby certify that this Water Quality Management Plan is in compliance with, and meets the requirements set forth in, Order No. R8-2009-0030/NPDES No. CAS618030, of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. SignatPreparure Signature 71 n % p pit. Date 12/0$/21 Place Stamp Here O,y9! �OQROFESS/ ,��`�gA CpFy� 5 Cr `c -r No. 72588 M * S' CIVIC O- 9lEOF CAk.\ ?, * HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Owner's Certification North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page ii Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Contents Page No. Section I Permit(s) and Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance 1 Section II Project Description 3 Section III Site Description 8 Section IV Best Management Practices (BMPs) 11 Section V Inspection/Maintenance Responsibility for BMPs 25 Section VI BMP Exhibit (Site Plan) 29 Section VII Educational Materials 30 Attachments Attachment A. Educational Materials Attachment B . Calculations, Worksheets, and Cross -Sections Attachment C . BMP Exhibit Attachment D. O&M Plan Attachment E . Soils Report Attachment F . Reference Maps HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Table of Contents North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page iii Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Section I Permit(s) and Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance Provide discretionary or grading/building permit information and water quality conditions of approval, or permit issuance, applied to the project. If conditions are unknown, please request applicable conditions from staff. Refer to Section 2.1 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD) available on the OC Planning website (ocplanning.net). :•.3.y i ."' nt+ ..rr (, a ¢u„ ':.Y>�; v �.Jl-:_., i f 7 'G� Y.. �}.� .i:f "i.' }y 4: # �}}"�� ►. , r� P .''ggInfomati0n ern van., >7ti r r.a4,:eta i:• rt ,Y' ,a Permit/Application No. (If applicable) Grading or Building Permit No. I (If applicable) 92663 GRAD 1764-2021 Address of Project Site (or Tract Map and Lot Number if no address) and APN 1 1 Hoag Drive Newport Beach, CA APN: 423-011-30 u .. _ W ', i i h s-' t°n °f /►PR aI o ssu l . �r s Water Quality Conditions of Approval The project is required to have a WQMP per the new Model WQMP as written by the County of Orange which states for a redevelopment or Issuance applied to j project creating or replacing 5,00o square feet or more of impervious this project. surface. (Please list verbatim.) / S, '4. ! ;fmt1 2�� h , r� \ ��tua��WQMP , u: «;, Was a Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan previously approved for this project? N/A • HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section I North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 1 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center bWat rshed-BaIa I Condit s Provide applicable conditions from watershed - based plans including WIHMPs and TMDLS. No applicable conditions from Watershed Infiltration and Hydromodification Management Plan. WIHMP for the Newport Bay - Newport Coast Watershed area has not been approved at this time. Lower Newport Bay has been identified as an Environmentally Sensitive Body of Water. Applicable TMDLs are Chlordane, DDT, indicator Bacteria, Nutrients, and PCBs. HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section I North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 2 • • Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Section II Project Description II.1 Project Description Provide a detailed project description including: • Project areas; • Land uses; • Land cover; • Design elements; • A general description not broken down by drainage management areas (DMAs). Include attributes relevant to determining applicable source controls. Refer to Section 2.2 in the Technical Guidance. Document (TGD) for information that must be included in the project description. Development Category (From Model WQMP, Table 7.11-2; or -3): Project Area (ft2): 14,763 Category 8: All significant redevelopment projects, where significant redevelopment is defined as the addition or replacement or 5,000 of more square feet of impervious surface on an already developed site. Redevelopment results in the addition or replacement of less than 50% of the impervious area on -site. Number of Dwelling Units: 0 Project Area Pervious Area (sq ft) Percentage SIC Code: 8062 Impervious Area (sq ft) Pre -Project Conditions 2,936 Post -Project Conditions 2,427 7 19.9 11,827 16.4 12,336 Percentage 80.t 83.6 Drainage Patterns/ Connections Stormwater sheet flows from the project site southwesterly and southeasterly into two catch basins located across the private street. The westerly catch basin eventually conveys the flow into a City -owned 36" RCP storm drain and the easterly catch basin eventually conveys the flow into a City -owned 18" RCP storm drain. Both flows are conveyed into Newport Bay, Lower via rectangular concrete boxes, before flowing into the Pacific Ocean. r HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section 11 North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 3 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Narrative Project Description: (Use as much space as necessary.) The project proposes to redevelop o.34 acre of an existing developed r7.64 acres site. The project will be demolishing the existing hardscape, landscape, and portion of parking lot. The proposed site improvements include building renovations and building addition the existing single -story James Irvine Surgery Center as well as construction of parking lot, hardscape, and landscape. The proposed new building addition is planned within the parking lot just east of the existing James Irvine Surgery Center. The proposed building addition will be one story in height. Subterranean construction is not planned. The proposed finished floor elevation will be established at about the existing grade; only minor grading and site work are planned to achieve the planned grades. A trash enclosure is proposed at the northeast corner of the parking lot. There are no proposed outdoor material storage areas. Activities that will be conducted outside are primarily for circulation and parking. The project will install a Lif) biotreatment BMP for pollution control. Refer to the BMP Exhibit in Attachment C for facility locations. HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section II North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 4 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag teadership Center II.2 Potential Stormwater Pollutants Determine and list expected stormwater pollutants based on land uses and site activities. Refer to Section 2.2.2 and Table 2.1 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for guidance. '•vi')cy l�ifyf:. h f s.1%:. f`. •f Y i•��"1�'e , �:/7., r a l • �yycj<.5�rfl''�' ,:.. Y' iAC. .., �>� Y 7.. ..�Y."�':'.P. v� S�aPOIIUt Z Concern tr��l �.LT. y�,y ll R i ..L.lO`Ylrlji�NIL�.�Y Pollutant Check One for each: E=Expected to be of concern N=Not Expected to be of concern Additional Information and Comments Suspended -Solid/ Sediment E ►.1 N ■ Nutrients IN ❑ E ►5 Heavy Metals ' N 0 . E ►Z+ Pathogens (Bacteria/Virus) E ® • N ■ Pesticides E ® N i Oil and Grease N 0 E ►.I Toxic Organic Compounds E ® N ■ Trash and Debris E 0 N ■ F HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section III North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 5 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center II.3 Hydrologic Conditions of Concern Determine if streams located downstream from the project area are potentially susceptible to hydromodification impacts. Refer to Section 2.2.3.1 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for North Orange County or Section 2.2.3.2 for South Orange County. ® No - Show map ❑ Yes - Describe applicable hydrologic conditions of concern below. Refer to Section 2.2.3 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD). I PARIn UV {SPAR Oil Jon ,r 6.1 i' tel .• t. /' .f ®''1„ 1 .ir 8 4 HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section III North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 6 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center II.4 Post Development Drainage Characteristics Describe post development drainage characteristics. Refer to Section 2.2.4 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD). The project site will not alter the overall existing drainage patterns within the site. Stormwater will sheet flow as in the existing condition. However, flows from the project site will be intercepted by a gutter system that will convey the flows into a biotreatment BMP via a curb inlet. The biotreatment BMP is located near the southeast of the project site. For the portion of the project site that flows southwesterly, the equivalent area will be treated. Treated flows will be conveyed via a proposed storm drain connection to the existing 15" storm drain located near the project site. II.5 Property Ownership/Management Describe property ownership/management. Refer to Section 2.2.5 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD). The property will be owned and managed by Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian. HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section III North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 7 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Section III Site Description III.1 Physical Setting Fill out table with relevant information. Refer to Section 2.3.1 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD). Name of Planned Community/Planning PC-38 Hoag Hospital Area (if applicable) I 1 Hoag Drive Location/Address Newport Beach, CA 92663 General Plan Land Use Special Purpose Zoning District - Planned Community Designation Zoning Special Purpose Zoning District - Planned Community Acreage of Project Site 0.34 acres Predominant Soil Type Hydrologic Soil Group D III.2 Site Characteristics Fill out table with relevant information and include information regarding BMP sizing, suitability, and feasibility, as applicable. Refer to Section 2.3.2 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD). Precipitation Zone twattgomir Design Capture Storm Depth: 0.7 inches Topography The existing ground surface is relatively flat, with a difference in elevation across the site of the proposed addition of less than 2 feet. Drainage Patterns/ Connections Stormwater sheet flows from the project site southwesterly and southeasterly into two catch basins located across the private street. The westerly catch basin eventually conveys the flow into a City- HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section III North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 8 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Soil Type, Geology, and Infiltration Properties owned 36" RCP storm drain and the easterly catch basin eventually conveys the flow into a City -owned 18" RCP storm drain. Both flows are conveyed into Newport Bay, Lower via rectangular concrete boxes, before flowing into the Pacific Ocean. Hydrologic Soil Type D. Infiltration testing was not performed as infiltration could adversely impact the existing site. Refer the project's geotechnical investigation report prepared by Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. on May 25, 2021 in Attachment E. Hydrogeologic (Groundwater) Conditions Geotechnical Conditions (relevant to infiltration) Groundwater was not encountered with 25' deep borings. Historic groundwater mapped to be greater than 30' below ground surface. Shallow impermeable sedimentary bedrock exists at the site. The project site is underlain by medium dense alluvial soils that may become weaker and more compressible when wet. Alluvial soils are underlain by shallow impermeable sedimentary bedrock of Monterey Formation consisting of silty claystone and clayey siltstone at depths (13 feet to 17 feet). Infiltration facilities are not recommended as infiltration could adversely impact the proposed addition and other settlement -sensitive project features through saturation of soils susceptible to hydroconsolidation. Infiltration could also lead to a perched water condition at the relatively low shallow bedrock contact and the overlying medium dense alluvial soils could become saturated and susceptible to liquefaction. Infiltration is not recommended as a means of disposal of on -site stormwater runoff. According to the States Waterboard GeoTracker website, there are no cleanup sites within 250 feet of the project site. Off -Site Drainage No offsite drainage is anticipated to enter the project area. Utility and Infrastructure Ti' • are existing gas, sewer, water, fire, and stonn drain utilities on Information tht eroject site. HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section III North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 9 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center 111.3 Watershed Description Fill out table with relevant information and include information regarding BMP sizing, suitability, and feasibility, as applicable. Refer to Section 2.3.3 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD). Receiving Waters 303(d) Listed Impairments Newport Bay, Lower Chlordane, Copper, DDT, indicator Bacteria, Nutrients, PCBs, Toxicity Applicable TMDLs Chlordane, DDT, indicator Bacteria, Nutrients, PCBs Pollutants of Concern for the Project Suspended Solids/Sediments, Nutrients, Pathogens, Pesticides, Oils and Grease, Toxic Organic Compounds, Trash and Debris Environmentally Sensitive and Special Biological Significant Areas Lower Newport Bay has been identified as an Environmentally Sensitive Body of Water by the State of California Water Board. BMPs must be capable of treating the pollutants of concern and TMDLs. HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section III North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 10 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Section IV Best Management Practices (BMPs) IV. 1 Project Performance Criteria Describe project performance criteria. Several steps must be followed in order to determine what performance criteria will apply to a project. These steps include: • If the project has an approved WIHMP or equivalent, then any watershed specific criteria must be used and the project can evaluate participation in the approved regional or sub - regional opportunities. (Please ask your assigned planner or plan checker regarding whether your project is part of an approved WIHMP or equivalent.) • Determine applicable hydromodification control performance criteria. Refer to Section 7.11- 2.4.2.2 of the Model WQMP. • Determine applicable LID performance criteria. Refer to Section 7.11-2.4.3 of the Model WQMP. • Determine applicable treatment control BMP performance criteria. Refer to Section 7.11-3.2.2 of the Model WQMP. • Calculate the LID design storm capture volume for the project. Refer to Section 7.11-2.4.3 of the Model WQMP. (NOC Permit Area only) Is there an approved WIHMP or equivalent for the project area that includes more stringent LID feasibility criteria or if there are opportunities identified for implementing LID on regional or sub -regional basis? YES ❑ NO If yes, describe WIHMP feasibility criteria or regional/sub-regional LID opportunities. N/A HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section IV North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 11 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center 9Ll If HCOC exists, list applicable hydromodification control performance criteria (Section 7.11-2.4.2.2 in MWQMP) }Pro�Perfofrmance Criteria f 5r . .HI.��. .. ite'iro�� JA +�k �R��.} J,�� HCOCs do not exist for this project site. List applicable LID performance criteria (Section 7.11-2.4.3 from MWQMP) Infiltrate, harvest and use, evapotranspire or biofilter, the 85th percentile. 24-hour storm event (Design Capture Volume or "DCV"). LID BMPs must be designed to retain, on -site, (infiltrate, harvest and use, or evapotranspire) storm water runoff up to 8o percent average annual capture efficiency. A properly designed biofiltration system may only be considered if infiltration, harvest and use, and evapotranspiration (ET) cannot be feasibly implemented for the full design capture volume. In this case, infiltration, harvest and use, and ET practices must be implemented to the greatest extent feasible and biofiltration may be provided for the remaining design capture volume. List applicable treatment control BMP performance criteria (Section 7.11-3.2.2 from MWQMP) The project DCV will be treated through LID BMPs. Calculate LID design storm capture volume for Project. Total Impervious Area Created and/or Replaced =12,336 sf The total impervious area created and replaced is less than 5o% of existing impervious area. Therefore, sizing only applies for areas created and replaced. DCV =CxdxAx43,56osf/acx1/t2in/ft Where DCV = design storm capture volume, cu-ft Imp = impervious fraction of drainage area = C = runoff coefficient = (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 = 0.75 X 1 + 0.15 = o.go d = storm depth (inches) = 0.7o inches per Technical Guidance Document A = Created and Replaced Impervious Areas = t2,336 sf = 0.283 acres HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section IV North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 12 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center DCV = o.go x o.7o x o.z83 ac X 4356o sf/ac x tin in/ft = 647 cu-ft Due to the potential of geotechnical hazards, infiltration is not feasible. A flow -based biotreatment BMP will be sized and the design flow rate will be calculated using the Capture Efficiency Method for Flow -Based BMPs Worksheet D. Sec Attachment B for the calculations. Q = (C X I X A) Q = Design Flow Rate A = Created and Replaced impervious Area (acres) = u,336 sf = o.z83 acres I = design intensity (in/hr) = o.z625 C = runoff coefficient (unitless) = (0.75 x imp)+ 0.15 = o.go Q = o.go x 0.2625 x o.283 Q = o.067 cfs A Modular Wetlands Linear MWS-L-4-6 unit is selected with a treatment capacity = o.o68 cfs, which exceeds the required treatment flow rate of o.067 cfs. HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section IV North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 13 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center IV.2. Site Design and Drainage Describe site design and drainage including • A narrative of site design practices utilized or rationale for not using practices; • A narrative of how site is designed to allow BMPs to be incorporated to the MEP • A table of DMA characteristics and list of LID BMPs proposed in each DMA. • Reference to the WQMP "BMP Exhibit." • Calculation of Design Capture Volume (DCV) for each drainage area. • A listing of GIS coordinates for LID and Treatment Control BMPs. Refer to Section 2.4.2 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD). Infiltration was deemed infeasible by the geotechnical engineer as infiltration will adversely impact the site's soils and stability. Refer to Section III.2 and the geotechnical investigation report in Attachment E. Harvest and Use BMPs were deemed infeasible due to low water demand. As a result, a biotreatment BMP, Modular Wetlands Linear System (MWS), will be proposed to mitigate the runoff. The project creates and replaces less than 5o% of the existing impervious area on -site. As a result, the biotreatment BMP only need to be sized to mitigate for the created and replaced impervious areas, which totals to 12,336 square feet. The project site will not alter the overall existing drainage patterns within the site. Stormwater will sheet flow as in the existing condition. However, flows from the project site will be intercepted by a gutter system that will convey the flows into a biotreatment BMP via a curb inlet. The biotreatment BMP is located near the southeast of the project site. For the portion of the project site that flows southwesterly, the equivalent area will be treated. Treated flows will be conveyed via a proposed storm drain connection to the existing 15" storm drain located near the project site. The MWS will be sized using a flow -based calculation rather than the standard design capture volume (DCV) sizing method. Q = Design Flow Rate = (C X I X A) A = Created and Replaced Impervious Area (acres) = 12,336 sf = 0.283 acres I = design intensity (in/hr) = 0.2625 C = runoff coefficient (unitless) = (0.75 x imp)+ 0.15 = o.90 Q = o.90 x o.2625 x o.283 = o.a67 cfs A Modular Wetlands Linear MWS-L-4-6 unit is selected with a treatment capacity = o.o68 cfs. BMP GIS Coordinates BIO-7 33°37`30"N 227°55.48"W HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section IV North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 14 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center IV.3 LID BMP Selection and Project Conformance Analysis Each sub -section below documents that the proposed design features conform to the applicable project performance criteria via check boxes, tables, calculations, narratives, and/or references to worksheets. Refer to Section 2.4.2.3 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for selecting LID BMPs and Section 2.4.3 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for conducting conformance analysis with project performance criteria, IV.3.1 Hydrologic Source Controls (HSCs) If required HSCs are included, fill out applicable check box forms. If the retention criteria are otherwise met with other LID BMPs, include a statement indicating HSCs not required. Name Included? Localized on -lot infiltration ❑ Impervious area dispersion (e.g. roof top disconnection) • Street trees (canopy interception) ❑ Residential rain barrels (not actively managed) ■ Green roofs/Brown roofs ❑ Blue roofs ■ Impervious area reduction (e.g. permeable pavers, site design) ❑ Other. ■ Other: ❑ Other: ❑ Other: ❑ Other. ■ Other. ❑ Other: ❑ Other: ❑ HSCs are not required. HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section IV North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 15 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center IV.3.2 Infiltration BMPs Identify infiltration BMPs to be used in project. If design volume cannot be met, state why. Name Induded? Bioretention without underdrains • ❑ I Rain gardens ❑ i Porous landscaping ❑ I Infiltration planters ❑ Retention swales ❑ Infiltration trenches ❑ Infiltration basins 0 Dryweils ❑ Subsurface infiltration galleries ■ French drains 0 ' Permeable asphalt 0 Permeable concrete ■ Permeable concrete pavers ■ Other. ■ Other: ❑ Show calculations below to demonstrate if the LID Design Strom Capture Volume can be met with infiltration BMPs. If not, document how much can be met with infiltration and document why it is not feasible to meet the full volume with infiltration BMPs. Infiltration BMPs are not recommended for the following reasons: "As previously stated, the upper natural alluvial soils are medium dense at present moisture content and may become weaker and more compressible when wet. In addition, the alluvial soils are underlain at relatively shallow depths (13 to 17 feet) by relatively impermeable sedimentary bedrock of the Monterey Formation consisting of silty claystone and clayey siltstone. Therefore, stormwater infiltration facilities could adversely impact the proposed addition and other settlement -sensitive project features through saturation of soils susceptible to hydroconsolidation. In addition, storwater infiltration could lead to a perched water condition at the relatively shallow bedrock contact and the overlying medium dense alluvial soils could become saturated and susceptible to liquefaction. Therefore, infiltration is not recommended as a means of disposal of on -site stormwater runoff." Refer to the project's geotechnical investigation in Attachment E. HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section IV North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 16 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center rBiotreatment BMP will be used to mitigate the full DCV. IV.3.3 Evapotranspiration, Rainwater Harvesting BM Ps If the full Design Storm Capture Volume cannot be met with infiltration BMPs, describe any evapotranspiration and/or rainwater harvesting BMPs included. • Name Included? I All HSCs; See Section 1 V.3.1 0 Surface -based infiltration BMPs 0 Biotreatment BMPs ■ Above -ground cisterns and basins ❑ Underground detention ■ `Other. ❑ Other. ■ Other: ❑ Show calculations below to demonstrate if the LID Design Storm Capture Volume can be met with evapotranspiration and/or rainwater harvesting BMPs in combination with infiltration BMPs. If not, document below how much can be met with either infiltration BMPs, evapotranspiration, rainwater harvesting BMPs, or a combination, and document why it is not feasible to meet the full volume with these BMP categories. i Not applicable. Biotreatment BMP will be used to mitigate the full DCV. HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section IV North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 17 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center IV.3.4 Biotreatment BMPs If the full Design Storm Capture Volume cannot be met with infiltration BMPs, and/or evapotranspiration and rainwater harvesting BMPs, describe biotreatment BMPs included. Include sections for selection, suitability, sizing, and infeasibility, as applicable. Name Included? Bioretention with underdrains ❑ Stormwater planter boxes with underdrains ❑ Rain gardens with underdrains 0 Constructed wetlands ❑ Vegetated swales 0 Vegetated filter strips ❑ Proprietary vegetated biotreatment systems ■ Wet extended detention basin ❑ Dry extended detention basins 0 Other. ❑ Other: 0 Show calculations below to demonstrate if the LID Design Storm Capture Volume can be met with infiltration, evapotranspiration, rainwater harvesting and/or biotreatment BMPs. If not, document how much can be met with either infiltration BMPs, evapotranspiration, rainwater harvesting BMPs, or a combination, and document why it is not feasible to meet the full volume with these BMP categories. Under the circumstances that the created and replaced impervious areas are less than 5o% of the existing impervious areas, the project only needs to mitigate the DCV produced from the addition of the created and replaced impervious areas. DMA A will be using a flow -based proprietary biotreatment BMP (810-7). The required design flow rate for flow -based proprietary devices was calculated using the Capture Efficiency Method for Flow -Based BMPs (Worksheet D). Q = (C X I X A) Q = Design Flow Rate A = Created and Replaced Impervious Area (acres) = tz,336 sf = 0.283 acres HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section IV North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 18 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Tc = 5 min from QC Nomograph I = Design Intensity = 0.2625 (From Annual Capture Efficiency graph) C = runoff coefficient (unitless) _ (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 = o.go Q = o.go x o.2625 x o.283= o.a67 cfs A Modular Wetlands Linear MWS-L-4-6 unit is selected with a treatment capacity = o.o68 cfs. IV.3.5 Hydromodification Control BMPs Hydromodification control BMPs are not required. Hy imodificatlon Control irt.el:rbr.afaLNVM+L�:V �m.A�ea.Y.orM+ BMP Name BMP Description IV.3.6 Regional/Sub-Regional LID BMPs vO.�S��R2£efrHf7}�MOS1 RegionalEgli- egionallLIO BMPs Not applicable. IV.3.7 Treatment Control BMPs Treatment control BMPs can only be considered if the project conformance analysis indicates that it is not feasible to retain the full design capture volume with LID BMPs. Describe treatment control BMPs including sections for selection, sizing, and infeasibility, as applicable. 1-44 reTa n nn Ps alal�n...ywnaasw�.wfittevsns..eYo�juuls+v BMP Name BMP Description t HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section IV North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 19 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section IV North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 20 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center IV.3.8 Non-structural Source Control BMPs Fill out non-structural source control check box forms or provide a brief narrative explaining if non- structural source controls were not used. Source Control BMPs Non -Structural Check One Identifier Name If not applicable, state brief Not Included reason Applicable NI Education (or Property Owners, Tenants and Occupants ❑ No No activity restrictions P,3 NI N2 El N3 Activity Restrictions Common Area Landscape Management 0 • N4 BMP Maintenance ig 0 N5 Title 22 CCR Compliance (How development will comply) No hazardous materials will be handled onsite. II 0 No industrial activities • ►�� N6 Local Industrial Permit Compliance proposed. No hazardous materials will be 0handled N7 Spill Contingency Plan onsite. N8 Underground Storage Tank Compliance ❑ ® No underground storage tanks proposed. N9 Hazardous Materials Disclosure hazardous materials will he handled onsite. •Compliance 0No N10 Uniform Fire Code Implementation 0 N11 Common Area Litter Control ,►:+� u N12 Employee Training ® 0 N13 Housekeeping of Loading Docks ■ Ib1 No loading clocks proposed. N14 Common Area Catch Basin Inspection in ►P N15 Street Sweeping Private Streets and Parking Lots El 0 NI6 Retail Gasoline Outlets ■ ® No gasoline facilities proposed. HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section IV North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 21 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center IV.3.9 Structural Source Control BMPs Fill out structural source control check box forms or provide a brief narrative explaining if structural source controls were not used. Structural Source Control BMPs Identifier Name Check One If not applicable, state brief 1 reason Included Not Applicable Sl Provide storm drain system stenciling and signagc @ • S2 Design and construct outdoor material storage areas to reduce pollution introduction ■ ►�1 No outdoor material storage areas proposed. S3 Design and construct trash and waste storage areas to reduce pollution introduction ►Zi 0 54 Use efficient irrigation systems & landscape design, water conservation, smart controllers, and source control ►K1 ■ Protect slopes and channels and provide energy dissipation ►�� No onsite open channels proposed. Incorporate requirements applicable to individual priority project categories (from SDRWQC13 NPDES Permit) 0 ■ S6 Dock areas 0 ® Not proposed within project. 57 Maintenance hays ❑ ® Not proposed within project. S8 Vehicle wash areas 0 ► i Not proposed within project. S9 Outdoor processing areas ■ ►i4 Not proposed within project. S10 Equipment wash areas ■ ►i4 Not proposed within project. Sil Fueling areas ■ ►�I Not proposed within project. 512 Hillside landscaping ® ■ 5'13 Wash water control for food preparation areas 0 ►mil Not proposed within project. S'I4 Community car wash racks ■ ►0 Not proposed within project. HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section IV North QC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 22 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center N.4 Alternative Compliance Plan (If Applicable) Not Applicable. IV,4.1 Water Quality Credits Description of Proposed Project Project Types that Qualify for Water Quality Credits (Select all that apply): ['Redevelopment 1 ['Brownfield redevelopment, meaning i ❑ Higher density development projects which projects that reduce the I include two distinct categories (credits can only overall impervious footprint of the project site. redevelopment, expansion, or reuse of real property which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants, and which have the potential to contribute to he taken for one category): those with more than seven units per acre of development (lower credit allowance); vertical density developments, for example, those with a Floor adverse ground or surface WQ if not to Area Ratio (FAR) of 2 or those having more redeveloped. than 18 units per acre (greater credit allowance). .Mixed use development, such as a Transit -oriented developments, such as a El Redevelopment projects combination of residential, commercial, mixed use residential or commercial area in an established historic industrial, office, institutional, or other land : designed to maximize access to public district, historic uses which incorporate design principles that can demonstrate environmental benefits that would not be realized through single use transportation; similar to above criterion, but where the development center is within one half mile of a mass transit center (e.g. bus, rail, projects (e.g. reduced vehicle trip traffic with i light rail or commuter train station). Such the potential to reduce sources of water or air projects would not he able to take credit for pollution). both categories, but may have greater credit assigned ['Developments with dedication of undeveloped portions to parks, preservation areas and other pervious Uses. Calculation of Water Quality Credits (if applicable) ❑ Developments in a city center area. .a.Y Not Applicable. Developments in historic districts or historic preservation areas. d Live -work - 1 developments, a variety of developments designed to i support residential and vocational needs together - similar to criteria to mixed use development; would not be able to take credit for 1 both categories. preservation area, or similar significant city area including core City Center areas (to be defined through mapping). ❑In -Fill projects, the conversion of empty Tots and other underused spaces into more beneficially used spaces, such as residential or commercial areas. 1 HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section IV North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 23 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag leadership Center IV.4.2 Alternative Compliance Plan Information Describe an alternative compliance plan (if applicable). Include alternative compliance obligations (i.e., gallons, pounds) and describe proposed alternative compliance measures. Refer to Section 7.11 3.0 in the Model WQMP. Not Applicable. HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section IV North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 24 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Section V Inspection/Maintenance Responsibility for BMPs The owner will be responsible for the Tong -term operation and maintenance of BMPs, including funding. See the project's Operation and Maintenance Plan in Attachment D. BMP Inspection%Maintenance Reponsible Inspection/ Maintenance Minimum BMP ,..• Frequency of Party(s): Activities Required Activities Inspection Activities 1) Check for excess erosion or scour 2) Identify sediment accumulation that requires maintenance 3) Evaluate plant health and need for corrective action 4) Identify any needed corrective maintenance that will require site Inspect prior to and at least four times per year during the rainy season (October t" BioClean Modular specific planning or design to April 30") and Wetlands Linear Owner Maintenance Activities within 24 hours after at least two storm events greater than or equal to 0.5 inches. Maintain as needed. 1) Remove trash from screening device, 2) Remove sediment from separation chamber 3) Replace cartridge filter media 4) Replace drain drown filter media 5) Trim vegetation Refer to the manufacturer's HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section VI North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag leadership Center operations and maintenance manual included in Attachment i. Education for Property Owners, Tenants, and Occupants (Ni) Owner Distribute appropriate materials to owner via contract language, mailings, website, or meetings. Refer to Section VII for Educational Materials specific for this site. Information provided to owners upon sale or lease. Reminders sent or posted annually. Common Area Landscape Management (N3) Owner Owner to provide maintenance of landscaping to meet current water efficiency. Monitor for runoff and efficiency. Mitigation of potential dangers of fertilizer and pesticide usage through the incorporation of an Integrated Pest Management Program (IPM). Inspect weekly. Maintain monthly or as needed. BMP Maintenance (N4) Owner Owner to provide maintenance of BMPs per requirements of the WQMP and O&M Manual in Attachment D. Inspect weekly and after rain events. Maintain monthly or as needed. Uniform Fire Code Implementation (Nio) Owner/Tenant Comply with Article 8o of the Uniform Fire Code and the City of Anaheim Fire Department. Ongoing Common Area Litter Control (MI)Owner Litter patrol may be included with landscaping maintenance or with waste disposal services. Inspect daily. Maintain weekly or as needed. Employee Training/Education Program (Nit) Owner Conduct training sessions on stormwater quality should include, but not limited to: i) Good housekeeping practices 2) Maintenance requirements 3) Material Management Practices 4) Visual observations for evidence of stormwater Annually and/or within 3o days of employee start date HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section VI North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 26 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center impacts (illicit discharges) and BM P function 5) Spill Prevention and Response 6) Location of the facility's BMPs, catch basins, spill kits, and drains Common Area Catch Basin Inspection (Ni4) Owner Owner to provide for inspection of common area catch basins. Clear inlets of trash, debris, and silt. Inspect weekly and after rain events. Regular maintenance as needed Street Sweeping Private Streets & Parking Lots (Ntg) Owner Vacuum sweeping of private streets and parking Tots. Regular street sweeping weekly. Storm Drain Stenciling and Signage (Si) Owner Inspect and maintain legibility of storm drain stencils and signage. Check that all catch basins in paved areas marked or stenciled with "No Dumping -Drains to Ocean; No Descargue Basura" language. Replace/repaint markings if faded, damaged, removed, or otherwise illegible. Inspect quarterly and maintain as necessary rash and Waste Storage (S3) Owner Owner to provide for regular maintenance and cleaning of trash and waste storage areas. Check that outdoor waste storage structure is consistently covered, structural stability is sound, and that no -run- on or contact of the trash with runoff is occurring. Repair leaks or damage and mitigate if trash is coming into contact with stormwater, as needed, Check that trash is removed by local waste management contractor. Regular cleaning and maintenance once a week. HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section VI North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 27 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Efficient Irrigation (S4) Owner Owner to provide for inspection of Inspect weekly irrigation systems and and maintain as connections for deficiencies. Correct deficiencies as needed. necessary Hillside Landscaping (Siz) Owner Hillside areas will he landscaped with deep-rooted, drought tolerant plant species selected for erosion control. Maintain as necessary. HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section VI North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 28 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center • Section VI • S BMP Exhibit (Site Plan) VI.1 BMP Exhibit (Site Plan) Include a site plan and drainage plan sheet set containing the following minimum information: • Project location • Site boundary • Land uses and land covers, as applicable • Suitability/feasibility constraints • Structural BMP locations • Drainage delineations and flow information • Drainage connections • BMP details VI.2 Submittal and Recordation of Water Quality Management Plan The minimum requirement is to provide submittal of PDF exhibits in addition to hard copies. Format must not require specialized software to open. If the local jurisdiction requires specialized electronic document formats (CAD, GIS) to be submitted, this section will be used to describe the contents (e.g., layering, nomenclature, georeferencing, etc.) of these documents so that they may be interpreted efficiently and accurately. HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section VI North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 29 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Section ViI Educational Materials Refer to the Orange County Stormwater Program (ocwatersheds.com) for a library of materials available. Please only attach the educational materials specifically applicable to this project. Other materials specific to the project may be included as well and must be attached. Education Materials. Residential Material (http://www.ocwatersheds.com) Check If Applicable Business Material (http://www.ocwatersheds.com) Check If Applicable The Ocean Begins at Your Front Door ■ Tips for the Automotive Industry ❑ 'lips for Car Wash Fund-raisers ■ Tips for Using Concrete and Mortar ■ Tips for the Home Mechanic I ❑ Tips for the Food Service Industry ■ Homeowners Guide for Sustainable• Water Use Proper Maintenance Practices for Your Business ❑ Household Tips 0 Other Material Check If Attached Proper Disposal of Household Hazardous Waste III Recycle at Your Local Used Oil Collection Center (North County) El Solution to Runoff Pollution IZ Recycle at Your Local Used Oil Collection Center (Central Count) Tips for Protecting Your Watershed • ►; Recycle at Your Local Used Oil• Collection Center (South County) ❑ Tips for Maintaining a Septic Tank i• System ❑ Responsible Pest Control ►Zi 0 Sewer Spill ■ ❑ Tips for the Horne Improvement Projects ❑ ❑ Tips for Horse Care ❑ ❑ 'Tips for Landscaping and Gardening ® ■ Tips for Pet Care ❑ ■ Tips for Pool Maintenance ❑ ■ Tips for Residential Pool, Landscape• and Hardscape Drains 0 Tips for Projects Using Paint ❑ ■ HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Section VII North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 30 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Attachment A — Educational Materials HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Attachment A North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 31 :.:.:''.. :'• Vt.-.'" • 7:.-4'::.•-.1-.,,..-6•,,-r--._,•7-.-...,,•-•.,-..•."..,..n.;.-..7.....,.l•'• .;.31•.4..se4•:w'-t'4y.:."e. r.ers(.'•f'sm2.t',•A::!jAo..ri....t..p.-......i:.:..: •'......t.- !4; ....^-•an ,t; 1-.! l.,;.4.;„• ,n.:; l: .';.;.4'....:4Z,.*.z'.' ..,•,.:..:P,.:..:.,".,!1:-iileti),=4ter.0t9T1. i s.. ....1''.:iN,.1z.;-4- nbt-treateibt5fe.enteour ,,,--t-J ....F.7.1: W.aerWay4s4..:.:.; t: , m-..• . m • m... .. t...-..: .. . .-.-• .. ., -y,n-im-- .,!•,,:......,...v.i.. If,:m.F. z.....i...... .,. ......... ...- : :1?, • '.::-... 7,.." ..i: f :I? l'11"!.:%?)=' ... %......14; 2 2:f.; ' I::: •-••••:- • ..• - :,,;:-.--:''''..:.: -.e- ' '1. 'A '• ' kliiinp:pesticides •-.: ;•youtwou10.T.,1Ye.1:,,..-.-,.• ' -- 'i----j•'.:.s'.-..-:-',..zi:. ..,4:.:;.;.!:•••iti...14:i''.:-..'th'.e.."9.--,e70'...;:.'.p-9.‘•':4.1.•_°.P:..!4..44-.--;:-- !......-:.:;':. ..,:ti..z.-:•!-,..:•-i,i7 ..:': ,.- - c"1--Araiiis;,- .esticideg....-.:••• etliter:.tri F--.st?.7...!?...: ., • ...,• .: 1:,::•.,. • -- f.,..,, -„,.....,....7.-....-: .•.!...... 7 !...1.-:- -..,.„;ficmant..... , . • ..p-7 .!. Can c4.1.,W qls..•...7,,i,,,,.- ••••••:! •::--•:•••:.ii;o "ur*. lelimixo..)• environment ... - • ...z. • ".-1.. • .1f-yotfAre ,.. :..-• , -• used -1,..:-. impr.oppr y.4.. :• ,.. • r. • : • .,. „ . - -.1... • , .......3 • .:':5•::..''' i.ii.. ' in ...i6.:::p.'".e0.tic-file 49c9Lnli"...,0_,.,1..L..,;:..'- 'fie -it 'there settle inapor ., '-'• things..to. consider.;.: ;.. ....,.:; • ,.. ,....:-. : . • For more intbrmation, please call University of California Cooperative Extension Master Gardeners at (714) 708-1646 or visit these Web sites: WWW.uccemg.org www.ipm.ucdavis.edu For instructions on collecting a specimen sample visit the Orange County Agriculture Commissioner's websiie at: littp://worw.ocagcomm.com/ser_lab.asp To report a spill, call iIit Orange County 24-Hour Water Pollution Problem Reporting Hotline at 1-877-89-SPILL (I-877-897-7455). Infinination From; Cheryl Wiien, Area IPM Advisor; Darren Haver, Watershed Management Advisor; Nlary Louise Flint, IPM Education and Publication Director; Pamela M. Ceisel, Environmental Horticulture Advisor; Carolyn I.. Unruh, University of California Cooperative Extrusion staff writer. Photos courtesy oi the LiC Statewide IPM Pro and Darren Haver. Funding for this brochure has been provided in IiII Or Ili part through att agreninciii with the SI:11C IVIller Re$01111:CS C0111 rill Board (SWRCB) L hc Coma-NI:Li-ha& Waft:I-Act of' 20iNi {Prtp. 1:41. 011 Rete4Cied PZIPCI" Help Prevent Ocead,Aution: --Responsible Pest Control' Tips 1r Pest Control Key Steps to Follow: St 1: Correctly identify the pest (insect, weed, rodent, or disease) and verify that it is actually causing the problem. Thrcc life stages of the common lade beetle. a benefircel insect. This is important because beneficial insects are often mistaken hor pests and sprayed with pesticides needlessly. Consult will! a Certified Nursery Professional at a local nursery or garden center or send a sample of the pest to the Orange County Agricultural Commissioner's Office,. Determine if the pest is still present.— even though you sec damage.. the pest may have left. Step 2: Determine how many pests are present and causing damage. Shall pest populations may he controlled more safely using not - pcsticide techniques. These include removing food sources, wasltiig off leaves with a strong stream of water, blocking entry into the home using caulking and replacing problem plains with ones less susceptible to pests. use Me Integrated Pest Management (IPM) usually combines several least toxic pest control methods for Tong -term prevention and management of pest problems without harming you, your family, or the e nvironment. S 3: If a pesticide must be used, choose the feast toxic chemical. Obtain information o11 the least toxic pesticides that are effective at. controlling the target. pest from the UC State wide Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Progranl's Web site al. ww►c.ipit.ucda+is.edu. Seek out the assistance of a Certified Nursery Professional at a local nursery or garden center when selecting a pesticide. Purchase the smallest. amount of pesticide available. Apply the pesticide to the pest. during its most %Adnerable life stage. This information can be found on the pesticide label. Step 4: Wear appropriate protective clothing. Follow pesticide labels regarding specific types of protective equipment you should wear. Protective clothing should always be wasl:ed separately from other clothing. St 5: Continuously monitor external conditions when applying pesticides such as weather, irrigation, and the presence of children and animals. Never apply pesticides whet' rain is predicted wiliuin the next 48 hours. Also, do not. water afier applying pesticides unless the directions say it. IS necessary. Apply pesticides when the air is still; breezy conditions may cause l.he spray or dust to clrift. away from your targeted area. In case of an emergency call 911 and/or the regional poison control number at (714) 634-5988 or (800) 541-4404 (CA only). For general questions you :nay also visit www.calpoison.org. Step 6: In the event of accidental spills, sweep up or use an absorbent agent to remove any excess pesticides. Avoid the use of water. Be prepared. [lave a broom, dust pan, or dry absorbent Material, such as cat. litter, newspapers or paper towels, ready to assist in cleaning up spills. Contain and clean up the spill right away. Place contaminated materials in a doubled plastic bag. All materials used to clean up the spill should be properly disposed of according to your local I lousehold I-lazardous Waste Disposal site. Step 7: Properly store and dispose of unused pesticides. Purchase heady-To- Usc. (RI'U) products to avoid storing large cot cenu'stted quautitics of pesticides. Store utilised chemicals in a locked cabinet. Unused pesticide chemicals may be disposed of at a I louschold I-Iazardouts Waste Collection C :ntcr. Empty pesticide containers shot&& be triple rinsed prior to disposing of them in i Inc gash. Household Hazardous Waste Collection Center (714) 834.6752 www.oclandfills.com ■ 1 0 ic s Fb}3l41°P1 t0N eant eac e For more information, please call the Orange County Stormwater Program at 1-877-89-SPILL (1-877-897-7455) or visit www.ocwatersheds.com To report a spill, call the Orange County 24-Hour Water Pollution Problem Reporting Hotline 1-877-89-SPILL (1-877-897-7455). The tips contained in this brochure provide meritl information to help prevent water pollution while landscaping or gardening. 11 you have other suggestions, please contact your city's stornmuer representatives or call the Orange County Storanwater Prognint. QII Recycled Paper Tips tor Landscape & Gardening Never allow gardening products or polluted water to enter the street, gutter or storm drain. General Landscaping Tips • Protect stockpiles and materials from wind and rain by storing them under tarps or secured plastic sheeting. • Prevent erosion of slopes by planting fast-growing, dense ground covering plants. These will shield and bind the soil. ■ Plant native vegetation to reduce the amount of water, fertilizers, and pesticide applied to the landscape. ■ Never apply pesticides or fertilizers when rain is predicted within the next 48 hours. Garden &' Lawn Maintenance • Do not overwater. Use irrigation practices such as drip irrigation, soaker hoses or micro spray systems. Periodically inspect and fix leaks and misdirected sprinklers. • Do not rake or blow leaves, clippings or pruning waste into the street, gutter or storm drain. Instead, dispose of green waste by composting, hauling it to a permitted landfill, or recycling it through your city's program. IN Use slow -release fertilizers to minimize leaching, and use organic fertilizers. • Read labels and use only as directed. Do not. over -apply pesticides or fertilizers. Apply to spots as needed, rather than blanketing an entire area. • Store pesticides, fertilizers and other chemicals in a dry covered area to prevent. exposure that may result in the deterioration of containers and packaging. �.. •-• • • Rinse empty pesticide containers and re -use rinse water as you would use the product. Do not dump rinse water down storm drains. Dispose of empty containers in the trash. ■ When available, use non -toxic alternatives to traditional pesticides, and use pesticides specifically designed to control the pest you are targeting. For more information, visit www.ipm.ucdavis.edu. ■ if fertilizer is spilled, sweep up the spill before irrigating. If the spill is liquid, apply an absorbent material such as cat litter; and then sweep it up and dispose of it in the trash. • Take unwanted pesticides to a Household Hazardous Waste Collection Center to be recycled. Locations are provided below. Household' Hazaidous; Waste? •=';.' 5•'..••....1•.:.:.')6•'...s,• ....r..:;s•:....; . Colllection Centers''%;-.:: ••+ 4' ;• ..4.•r.•I.-.:...-.......•`.:.•.."...!" `.• t..+. :t•!'.a:. •.yr...•4. .Ise •'.ts.'•S ,: .,.i- ,o =Anaheim~':' `;::'. I_O7'{� Na•131iie (iim',St'.; `.2. iiuntington-BcachiiC%..i • ••.I 71 `21 'Nic}i<ils•S't'.>: ' r ••, .; ..r .•. ,. e Irvine: 1i411 Oil .Canyon :R..ii;Capistianoe •?t'2at) I:ai; Pato .A t;0-,. .••.;fib .. ;L '.•'.'.•. . ,`:.:.... ;:: ter ;- - ! . •.., •'� p':. .•� '� . ':. Fo'r•'more•inforriiation, call'(714j 8346752 r, -t:: oisvisit www ociandf,lls.coni.k? • • 4 1 1141.0,4 81- 6turm drain UNTREATED Unlike water in sanitary sewers (from sinks and toilets), water in storm drains is not treated or cleaned before entering our waterways and should never contain any pollutants. Waste & .............. Storage Area Management .•"i . it � •m • - This brochure wilthclpyaiprofcctourwotci ... . rjlidlitytiyusingBMPappropriotetoyaufacility. , Leannmoreinside: : ;• s • ' crams untreated II to ocean H:OC 1s YOU! HOC is also a cooperative stormwater program which includes all 34 cities in Orange County. the County of Orange. and Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD). Clean and healthy beaches. creeks. rivers. bays, wetlands. and ocean arc important to Orange County. HOC provides resources to residents and businesses to encourage personal action and prevent polluted runoff from entering our waterways. :a,i•w%i..:: ....t.::.:�AiF.:,r�':.3.$f•,••rc.%te( 010 .N LIPwx:. r. Join Us Visit h2oc.org to learn more about runotf. water pollution. and how you can be the solution to runoff pollution and protect our water resources! Contact 0 24-hour Pollution Reporting Hotline: 1-877-89-SPILL (1-877-897.7455) 24-hour Reporting Website: myOCeSe rvi ces.ocgov.com For emergencies. dial 911 ' Some industrial facilities are also required to obtain coverage under the Slates Industrial General Permit (IGP). To determine it your facilityrequires a permit. contact the Slate Water Resources Control Board at waterboards.ca.gov " for more information shout recycling and collection centers. visit oclandhlls.com. r. "BEST HARAG.EMENEPRACTICES.,, FOR BOSNESSES•:' WATER POLLUTION AND COMMERCIAL Et INDUSTRIAL NIMES YOU ARE THE SOLUTION TO RUNOFF POLLUTION stag AI IR PA3G4AM How is Water Quality Affected By Your Business? Commercial and industrial facilities can generate a variety of waste products which can become pollutants. These can include metals. plastics. toxic chemicals. oil. grease. and bacteria. If not properly managed. these pollutants can be transported to Orange County's creeks. rivers. and ocean through our storm drain system. Aso business owner en manager.)on ore responsible for overseeing rite work of employees dud erdside A'vrhvrlors to wavvnt nurotfpcllution. Building . Landscape Maintenance Maintenance •By law. commercial and industrial facilities are required to Implement• -1. best management practices (BMP1) ..: _.+ - ',;,to.preVentrunoff pollution: , ••• • ' • RI Inspect ✓ Periodically inspectirrigation systems for leaks, overspray. and runoff. Repair and maintain as needed. Locate ✓ Locate and protect all area drains. yard drains. and catch basins where washwater could potentially enter the storm drain system. Contain ✓ \lever allow washwater. sweepings, or sediment to enter storm drains. ✓ Store materials indoors or under cover and away from storm drains. Collect .•s • ✓ Periodically check parking lots for disclrarges {ruin leaking vehicles. ✓ Ensure lids on dumpsters arc properly closed when not in use and sweep and pick up all debris daily. ✓ When working outdoors. conduct operatics away'rorn storm drains and waterbodics. ✓ Mix paint and clean tools ina contained area. ✓ Control. contain, and clean up all spills immediately with absorbents. rags, or mops. Never hose a spill. ✓ Follow the manufacturer's directions when applying fertilizers and pesticides. • Never apply 48 hours before a torerasted rain event. ✓ Properly collect all washwater generated during business maintenance activities for ✓ disposal. ✓ Collect grass clippings. leaves. and other debris and dispose in covered containers. Dispose ✓ Contact your waste hauler for proper waste. hazardous waste. and green waste disposal options. Use drop cloths underneath outdoor painting, scraping. and sandblasting work. Regulary sweep areas like corners and along curbs. where debris tends to accumulate. and dispose in covered containers. Contact your waste and recycling service to repair or replace leaking or damaged dumpsters. Recycle and dispose of materials as outlined by your local jurisdiction." What Pollutants Are Generated By Commercial & Industrial Sites? Landscape Maintenance When periorninrg landscape maintenance. pollutants generated can include organic debris. trash. dirt, fertilizers. and pesticides. Building Maintenance When performing building maintenance, various types of poIILtants can be generated including washwater. paint or paint chips. bacteria. and other toxic materials. Parking Lots & Outdoor Areas Pollutants in parking lots. patios. and outdoor areas can include trash. oil. grease. landscape debris, and bacteria. Waste & Storage Area Management Pollutants in waste and storage areas can include trash. oil. grease. bacteria. dirt. and other toxic materials. ,,. . -.. .0!r' rr.s., ••`.� .-.;rs�.-•H. +re "ti+fr e .. tik". >. 4E F�?.A�' , v.•e �w`4'i• FS x a.:E :3� �k G .i 1L "tRFFfS�' � Scenfor meretntoormallon abouPCommeretal 6lndu- dal eite•e• eltle 1MPeor vteh haprUocerws.ocdub,cwo:ks.com/service=areasloc-environmental-eesourcesloc Ovate shedsldocumen[s/best-manaaernent-oreeiIsa-hmp-T':. <irdt!e§1Cfb:'+s°`°++Fitt'.."G: S° .�i:> s*, °.��I'x•'i 'a'.i�iTr^.5.iilx' t'lrtr±►lr7ali'ac`"3'...,.-_ ^�.:i. -' .. �•.,..,+a,' '+'�..,..• 's, no,<,..e y. _�.s ..;''r''•': a�:r' ., What Amon Pollutants are Found in Runoff? Common runoff pollutants include trash. pet waste, yard debris, fertilizer, pesticides, engine oil, paint, home solvents, and detergents. Continue reading to learn how these pollutants affect our water resources and what you can do to help. POLLUTANTS FROM RUNOFF paint pet waste fertilizers curbs/gutters engine oil home solvents 0 pesticides rain. hoses & sprinklers ....,.. drain inlet Oo la detergents yard debris trash v v yard drain v stormn channel v OC@8111 • Who is H2!C I-IZOC is YOU! H2OC is also a cooperative stormwater program which includes all 34 cities in Orange County, the County of Orange, and Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD). Clean and healthy beaches, creeks, rivers, bays, wetlands, and ocean are important to Orange County. HZOC provides resources to residents and businesses to encourage personal action and prevent polluted runoff from entering our waterways. JoinUs Visit h2oc.org to learn more about runoff. water pollution, and how you can be the solution to runoff pollution and protect our water resources! Contact 24-hour Pollution Reporting Hotline: 1-877-89-SPILL (1-877-897-7455; 0 24-hour Reporting Website: myOCeServices.ocgov.corn For emergencies. dial 911 'For more information on household hazardous waste centers go to www.oclandfills.com/hazardous or cal( (714) 83 t-4000 "UCCE Master Gardeners: ucceocmghotliner@ucanredu m gora nge. ucanr. ed u/G a r de n i ng_ I -to t l i ne/ YOUARE?HE SOLUTION TO RUNOFF POLLUTION P y. i z. �L"." a iftl;;;!;:i• STORMWATER PROGRAM What is Runoff? Runoff is water from rain and outdoor water use that drains from roofs. driveways, sidewalks, and other surfaces, which does not soak into the ground. As runoff flows over surfaces it will pick up and carry pollutants it encounters, many of which come from waste we produce or mishandle. In Orange County, runoff is captured by storm drains where it flows untreated to the ocean. Water that flows into storm drains is NOT TREATED Runoff from homes and businesses may contain pollutants that have harmful effects on downstream creeks, rivers, bays, and ocean. Unlike household sewage, this water is not treated and can negatively impact recreational use, wildlife habitat, and even human health. %. if tras as cigarette butts, straws,'' cups;a he"rdebnsenterourg°�rrr watemewabir rway`a ass it cancreate water flow? problems and contamrnate'aquatic;, habitats. Alwaysproperly de st �, waste andrreccy a`abblet arkti s p o s of ssecu e your -I-e ra.~...1.:Nw.:p. trash can did to prevent•trash•from;,, try ' a�opwrdeu•%a x....Y e,A.ia .., : '.�• ¢ .:. being,released into:theenvironmennt. yy Yw•iNY"i. .(y y.• �1w.6f.f.•r".:-` o'Ca.%ia.::tis?..t,?:.m'.,.x:: •.:)�,LSs;w:, svd. .,.... fx .: 'i!. U.■rn.�1I Waste is a threat'. +' '. to human and, • `environrrieiitalhealth because itcontains:'.. harm fui.bacteria:••••• • • • Being a responsible• pet owner means... • i..' • picking up after yours'-.; pet on walk's and your yard; especially" ' '••beforeitrains.r.:'. ,'••� is nPaints,""and reiatec • i°<materrals contain :.:�'a wide iange of.-: ��=�ctiemicals�These� ;products 5,t ouI ,> iinever.be star_m'drains?sewers ; nor septic •systems' r : Instead; dispose of!' 'unused. paint at•'our e.oil enters oui• ays, plants can egatively important,to repair leaking oon Clean' as possible. areas utilizing:absorbents available at auto and home supply Be sure to follow.manufacturerisdirections absorbent. Used engine oil can Household Hazardous (HHWC') orwhere oil • Ifimproperlyappicd; •',�. : _fertilizers°can enter our ,: waterways and cause '• ecological problems': ;; For. proper.application,;`..;, :follow';theinariufacturer:'s\ ;' instructions and stop' ;• ,''.applgirig.ferti lizers 48'' .hours before aforecasted �:4 • If phosphorus from detergents enters'our can cause ecological problems. kills. Additionally, detergents When'using•detergents for cleaningprojects, to reach* he storm drain system. allow wash water .'h !ESTICIDES If pesticides;',whith+; include herbicides; ;; insecticides;.fungicides,,. and rodenticides; enter': ouri.waterways;tiieycan :in � dangerousto humanx� eaIth'andaquatic; life.•Be`sure tolirnit4`��""a pesticideuse by:usrng k ' ; norichemical; methods'x "t_; r or.lea's4;toxfc pesticides?`:yr ienever.possibleand .: a9 ,e contact, he University ofsnN' :•Cahforinia;n(UCCE}•HCooperativet;; A Ftensoasert�R iGar'deners f* with ank"... "• As"questions:yTo pro,folloperly:1,? i apply pesticidesw . A 5aa?'themanufacfurer'si; •rinstructions and stop:;; • supplying 48 hours before,...!, • u'ta f_ orei;asted-rain event;:" AF )H74 eC-r."1 ' • .-f • • • ..6;wis • )1' For more information, please call the Orange County Stormwater Program at 1.877.89.SPILL or visit www.ocwatersheds.com To report a spill, call tlic Orange County 24-Hour Water Pollution Problem Reporting Hotline at 1.877.89.SPrLL. The tips contained in this brochure provide useful information to help protect your watershed. If you Iiavc other suggestions. please contact your city's stormwater representatives or call the Orange OmitlyStormwater Program. nitICI ,,, RA:LT:1(41 • Help Prevent Ocean allution: • Tips For Protecting . C `trips Jr Protecting Your Watershed My Watershed. Our Ocean. Water + shed, noun: A ngion of land within uihich water flows down into a specified writer body, such as a river, lake, sea, or ocean; a drainage basin or catchment basin. Orange County is comprised of I I major watersheds itdo which most of our water flows, connecting all of Orange County to the Pacific Ocean. As water from rani (stormwater) or sprinklers and u hoses (urban runoff) runs clown your driveway aucf into your neighborhood stye:ens, sidewalks and gutters, it flows into storm drains t.hat. lead 10 w'aterwayS ►within your ►vatershcd. The waterways front other cities merge as they make their way through our watersheds until all the runoff water in Orange County meets al. the Pacific Ocean. The water that reaches our ocean is not pure. As it flows through the watershed, it picks up pollutants such as litter, cigarette butts, fertilizer; pesticides, pet waste, motor oil and lawn clippings. Unlike water that eaters the sewer (from sinks and toilets), water that enters the storm drain is not treated Ixaure it flows, ultimately, to the occau. Water quality can be improved by -Adopting Your Watershed." Through this effort, we are challenging citizens and organizations to join the Orange County Stout nvatcr Program and others who are working I.o protect and restore our creeks, rivers, bays and ocean. There are many opportunities to get involved: • Appreciate your watershed - explore the creeks, trails and ocean and make observations alxlut its conditions. If you see anything abnormal (scich as dead fish, oil spills, leaking barrels, and other pollution) contact. the Orange County 24hour water pollution problem reporting hotline al 1.877.89.SPILL to report the problem. • Research your watershed. Learn about what, watershed you live in by visiting ►v►vw.ocwatersheds.com. • Find a watershed organization in your community and volunteer to help. If there are 110 active groups, consider starting your O►►'11. • Visit I PA'sAdoptYoiir Waticrslicd's Catalog of Watershed Groups at. www.epa.gov/adoptio locate groups ill your community. • Organize or join in a creek, river, bay or ocean cleanup event Snell as Coastal & Inner Coastal Cleanup Day that takes place the 3rcl Santrday of evert' September. For more: information visit www.coast4u.org. Follow these simple tips to protlie water quality of your watershed: • Sweep up debris and dispose of it in the trash. Do not hose down driveways or sidewalks into the street or gutter. • Use dry cleanup methods such as cat litter to absorb spills and sweep up residue. • Set your irrigation systems to reflect seasonal water needs or use weather -based controllers. Inspect for runoff regularly. • Cover trashcans securely. • Take hazardous waste to a household hazardous waste collection center. (For example. paint, batteries and petroleum products) • Pick up after your pet. • Follow application and disposal directions for pesticides and fertilizers. • If you wash your car at home, wash it on your lawn or divert the runoff onto a landscaped area. Consider taking your car to a commercial car wash, where the water is reclaimed or recycled. • Keep your car well maintained. • Never pour oil or antifreeze in the u"' street, gutter or storm drain. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Attachment B — Calculations, Worksheets, and Cross -Sections HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Attachment B North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 32 • Table 2.7: Infiltration BMP Feasibility Worksheet • • Infeasibility Criteria: Yes No 1 Would Infiltration BMPs pose significant risk for groundwater related concerns? Refer to Appendix VII (Worksheet I) for guidance on groundwater -related infiltration feasibility criteria. X Provide basis: Historic groundwater is mapped to be greater than 30 feet below the ground surface. Refer to the project's geotechnical investigation report in Attachment E. 2 Would Infiltration BMPs pose significant risk of increasing risk of geotechnical hazards that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? (Yes if the answer to any of the following questions is yes, as established by a geotechnical expert): • The BMP can only be located less than 50 feet away from slopes steeper than 15 percent • The BMP can only be located less than eight feet from building foundations or an alternative setback. • A study prepared by a geotechnical professional or an available watershed study substantiates that stormwater infiltration would potentially result in significantly increased risks of geotechnical hazards that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level. X Provide basis: The project site is underlain by medium dense alluvial soils that may become weaker and more compressible when wet. Alluvial soils are underlain by shallow impermeable sedimentary bedrock of Monterey Formation consisting of silty claystone and clayey siltstone at depths (13 feet to 17 feet). Infiltration facilities are not recommended as infiltration could adversely impact the proposed addition and other settlement -sensitive project features through saturation of soils susceptible to hydroconsolidation. Infiltration could also lead to a perched water condition at the relatively low shallow bedrock contact and the overlying medium dense alluvial soils could become saturated and susceptible to liquefaction. Infiltration is not recommended as a means of disposal of on -site stormwater runoff. Refer to the project's geotechnical investigation report in Attachment E. 3 Would infiltration of the DCV from drainage area violate downstream water rights? X Provide basis: There are no known findings that infiltration of the DCV from the drainage area would violate downstream water rights. • • Table 2.7: Infiltration BMP Feasibility Worksheet (continued) Partial Infeasibility Criteria Yes No 4 Is proposed infiltration facility located on HSG D soils or the site geotechnical investigation identifies presence of soil characteristics which support categorization as D soils? X Provide basis: The project site's soils underlying soils are Hydrologic Soil Group D soils. 5 Is measured infiltration rate below proposed facility less than 0.3 inches per hour? This calculation shall be based on the methods described in Appendix VII. X Provide basis: Infiltration testing was not performed by geotechnical engineer. Infiltration is not recommended as a means of disposal of on -site stormwater runoff. Refer to the project's geotechnical investigation report in Attachment E. 6 Would reduction of over predeveloped conditions cause impairments to downstream beneficial uses, such as change of seasonality of ephemeral washes or increased discharge of contaminated groundwater to surface waters? X Provide citation to applicable study and summarize findings relative to the amount of infiltration that is permissible: There are no known findings indicating that a reduction of over predeveloped conditions would cause impairments to downstream beneficial uses. 7 Would an increase in infiltration over predeveloped conditions cause impairments to downstream beneficial uses, such as change of seasonality of ephemeral washes or increased discharge of contaminated groundwater to surface waters? X Provide citation to applicable study and summarize findings relative to the amount of infiltration that is permissible: There are no known findings indicating that an increase in infiltration would cause impairments to downstream beneficial uses. Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See f'GD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.cont/WQMP.aspx • • • Table 2.7: Infiltration BMP Feasibility Worksheet (continued) Infiltration Screening Results (check box corresponding to result): 8 Is there substantial evidence that infiltration from the project would result in a significant increase in I&I to the sanitary sewer that cannot be sufficiently mitigated? (See Appendix XVII) Provide narrative discussion and supporting evidence: There are no known findings indicating that infiltration would result in a significant increase in I&I to the sanitary sewer that cannot by sufficiently mitigated. If any answer from row 1-3 is yes: infiltration of any volume is not feasible within the DMA or equivalent. Provide basis: g Infiltration is not recommended by the geotechnical engineer as infiltration will adversely impact the stability of proposed and existing structures. Refer to the project's geotechnical investigation report in Attachment E. 10 11 Summarize findings of infeasibility screening If any answer from row 4-7 is yes, infiltration is permissible but is not presumed to be feasible for the entire DCV. Criteria for designing biotreatment BMPs to achieve the maximum feasible infiltration and ET shall apply. Provide basis: Summarize findings of infeasibility screening No X If all answers to rows 1 through 11 are no, infiltration of the full DCV is potentially feasible, BMPs must be designed to infiltrate the full DCV to the maximum extent practicable. Infiltration is not feasible. Worksheets from Orange Couuhj Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets wuno.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Worksheet B: Simple Design Capture Volume Sizing Method filtep 1 "Determinetthe designiceptueetorm,use sdepth used for-cal•culating,volume 1 Enter design capture storm depth from Figure 111.1, d (inches) d= inches 2 Enter the effect of provided HSCs, dHsc (inches) (Worksheet A) dHsc 0 inches 3 Calculate the remainder of the design capture storm depth, dromeinder (inches) (Line 1 — Line 2) _, e:ea= 0.7 inches Ter /� MP .ITI..' , J•"flui.`J.�', r i 2 Calculate•the'DCV Yr�n7 i < ,dlvY. .„n . foi. ,- i i• 3' ,i` �. :$' -17}U!, ? 4'•:., - c: {'�,'3r •a •i:•: '.re;'��yF,,sepi -.1.i% i;'4i rpoin. ' •-y�`lPs :9��$�ti/' 1 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= 0.283 acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 1 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C= 0.90 4 Calculate runoff volume, Vde. _ (C x drern/rr x A x 43560 x (1/12)) Vdesgn= 647 cu ft Stye lgn, enfiszto sureAel t viwn'o edatI . ira,nnlne:deslgn inflttfatlon.rnte. 9=aGS¢ei�Yte�YS�T�c�13YY'±�tG ar .; ;z.. 1 Enter measured infiltration rate, K,,,m,S,,,Bd (inlhr)Krnessured= (Appendix VII) Inlhr 2 Enter combined safety factor from Worksheet H, Sf,,e, (unitless) Ss ai= 3 Calculate design infiltrvaation, rat+le, Kde,.ig„ = K,, 8„,,,,sd/ Serer Kdes:gn= Inthr Step'3b:Metermine,minlmumtBMP.Tootprint z.ei r '15k3 lgreflItAikkrAV L 11s'hCA #F .,.:.. r +, . .,:. r ,} ' r . $s , . 4 Enter drawdown time, T (max 48 hours) T= Hours 5 Calculate max retention depth that can be drawn down within the drawdown time (feet), Dmex = Kdesrae x TX (1/12) Drnax= feet 6 Calculate minimum area required for BMP (sq-ft), Am,,, = Vdesyg„ / dmax Amin= sq-ft Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www. ocwa tershed s. com/WQMP. aspx 0 • • Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow -Based BMPs Step`t: Detemt ne the design captametone depth tusedforCalculating volume ` 1 Enter the time of concentration, T° (min) (See Appendix IV.2) T,= 5 2 Using Figure 111.4, determine the design intensity at which the estimated time of concentration (Tc) achieves 80% capture efficiency, 11 11= 0.2625 in/hr 3 Enter the effect depth of provided HSCs upstream, dHsc (inches) (Worksheet A) drtsc= 0 inches 4 Enter capture efficiency corresponding to drisc, Y2 (Worksheet A) Y2= 0 5 Using Figure 111.4, determine the design intensity at which the time of concentration (Tc) achieves the upstream capture efficiency(Y2), /2 12= 0 6 Determine the design intensity that must be provided by BMP, 'design= 11-12 Idasign= 0.2625 L ac'.'J q r � <t: 7.i("� �i 1 Y�4Z.rtYf. ��. � F .. Step 2•.Calculi/to the doslgn Aowrate 4, ` `�'e[ i R�.arf� v,., arpxJ - .:cl•- �. ;,.<.li a f`l 1-S'�-O .- . '4 ,!�ryF .Hy-4 ,0 ��..r"{''''-i `/r g �'. 14'-��'j.p7 *, . 1 , r -0,r4 rY P. M-44• ; _ „ ice+ 3�� 6•� , -. , '��E21"xlw4 ;� rY,y, .. - .L 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A. 0.283 acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 1 g Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C= 0.9 4 Calculate design flowrate, Qdesign= (C x idosign x A) Qdawon= 0.067 cfs 9�• �. �. C k-y �'. .\i. � I H 1 Lt�v't / 1 J�1 1r,� %F, I'1 1-\ tJ.%ppo►ting•Calculations` Yc�( tV�yt��Y'ifl r��'.. .. ,..'PAW ;tY ♦,�k-L� .:'i'- :aY:+ 9'..�1• ) �S. '. . {3''i .. i.cf.�' r -f l'a•l ,f�, f�'��fff y`�7 1 �fi., r. -'+.r /pt•,� r � +�lyD: ZYt'•h' 'ot 1 �"IJa / �� -, ��K:f` b� ° _ ' • t(, Describe system: A Modular Wetlands Linear MWS-L-4-6 is selected with a treatment capacity of 0.068 cfs, which exceeds the design flow rate of 0.067 cfs. Provide time of concentration assumptions: The time of concentration was calculated using the OC Nomograph Method per the Orange County Hydrology Manual. Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.corn/WQMP.aspx • • • Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow -Based BMPs AverageAnnual Capture Efficiency 100% 90% 80% 70% 6 0% C 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0 .00 l ; •'� i ; —To >= 60 minutes = 30 minutes = 20 mmutes = 10 minutes <= 5 minutes 1 _ Data l -rt-Tc ' ' r� '� . .. a.'.' f --6--Tc --,— Tc sir 1 —.--Tc ---- Extrapolated i•t • . j 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 Design Intensity. inlhr Provide supporting graphical operations. See Example 111.7. Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx L — 1000 0 0 0 c O 0 350 — 300 250 — 200 149 150 — 100 — 900 Tc' — 100 — 90 — 800 — 700 -- 600 a _ o o m — 500 o — 80 - 70 _60 — 50 m F 35 Q. 400 `o 30 ti 25 c E 0 0 Tc=5min Use Tc = 5 min for Capture Efficiency Method Calulation — 20 - 19 l8 —17 16 ^-15 —14 —12 — I 1 -9 -- 8 — 7 — 5 — 4 ORANGE COUNTY HYDROLOGY MANUAL il) LIMITATIONS, i. Maximum length = 1000 Feet 2. Maximum area = 10 Acres Development or Zoning(K) K Undeveloped —0 Good Cover Undeveloped Fair Cover Undeve • ped Poo COVer to o zo ngle Family 4230 (5-7 DU/AC) Commercial (Paved) Pi Development Elo- Apartment 5- Mobile Home 65- Condominium 60- Single Family-5,000 ft2 Lot 40- Single Family-I/4 Acre Lot 20 Single Family - I Acre Lot 15 - Developed Open Space 10 - Single Family-2 1/2 Acre Lot EXAMPLE (1) L= 550', H=5.0', K= Sing le Family (5-7 Dt/Ac) Development, Tc=12.6 min. (2) L= 530', H: 5.0 , K= Commercial Development, Tc=9.7 min. 500 400 300 200 100 90 60 40 30 20 H = 1.83' — 10 = a =6 90 co �C Commercial J KEY ro L-H-Tc-K-Tc' w Tc 5— (min) 6 a o 7 10 0 1l 12 13 15-- - 5 16 — c 17 -- E 19 — 20 - Y - c 0 0 6- 25 — o _ u - o 30 — ., 35 40 TIME OF CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA 1)- 4 Figure D-I • • Worksheet P. Summary of Harvested Water Demand and Feasibility 1 What demands for harvested water exist in the tributary area (check ail that apply): 2 Toilet and urinal flushing z 3 Landscape irrigation 4 Other: 5 What is the design capture storm depth? (Figure 111.1) d 0.70 inches 6 What is the project size? A 0.34 ac 7 What is the acreage of impervious area? IA 0.283 ac 8 For projects with both toilet flushing and indoor demand 570 gp d What is the minimum use required for partial capture? (Table X.6) 9 What is the project estimated minimum wet season total daily use? 280 g� 10 Is partial capture potentially feasible? (Line 9 > Line 8?) No :I For projects with only toilet flushing demand 11 What is the minimum TUTIA for partial capture? (Table X.7) 114 12 What is the project estimated TUTIA? 142 13 14 Is partial capture potentially feasible? (Line 12 > Line 11?) For projects with only irrigation demand Yes 4.77 • . • ac What is the minimum irrigation area required based on conservation landscape design'? (Table X.8) 15 What is the proposed project irrigated area? (multiply conservation landscaping by 1; multiply active turf by 2) 0.057 ac 16 Is partial capture potentially feasible? (Line 15 > Line 14?) No Provide supporting assumptions and citations for controlling demand calculation: Assumed the Land Use type is Office with a total of 40 employees for Toilet and Urinal Usage. Assumed that Newport Beach has similar irrigation demands as Irvine. The project site will have both toilet flushing and indoor demand. The minimum use required for partial capture is 570 gpd, which exceeds the project estimated minimum wet season total daily average of 280 gpd. See Harvest and Use Demand calculations. Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.corn/WQMP.aspx • Harvest and Use Demand Calculations Toilet & Urinal Flushing Demand Table X.1: Toilet and Urinal Water Usage per Resident or Employee ♦ 41 ! - L J� \ Land Lip Type ``t((t� v, .t 1 bt� :� « , .n : . ! -, T'• Tolkt User a` • t ,1 UnR et .'4- $Normdhatfon fret Captte tine tine6 e� . r M y Y / a(•i4 _i '° Sd r �/ 41Osttor: :F tea`: - uY �, � ° Watsr R` 1 "., y l�Rdency{4.: s `<. Factor A�`'a' .i i . Y-•. ff:'Use •. TtrlktiK �1wr.1``sM�x"'�� 'Filla�hS1rit10 ed6 N ,L : r (..:� yf 4) i. Unnalsa.: Residential ResWent 11).5 NA NA 0.5 9.3 Moe Employee (visitor) 9.0 2.27 1.1 0.5 7 Owe) Retail ( Employee) 9.0 2.11 1.4 0.5non-vlitt Schools Employee (non -student) 6.7 3.5 6.4 0.5 33 Venous Industrial Uses (excludes process water) Employee () 9.0 2 1 0.5 5.5 1- Bawd on American Waterworks Aveucia ion Rcsowt. Fountation.1999. Risidentid End Uses of Water Denver. co: AWWARF 2. Based on use of 3.45 gallons per flush and avenge number d per employee Ouches per whets -tor. Table 0.1 for MIND (Pacific Institute, 2003) 3 • Based on use of l.6 gallons per flush, Table 13-1 and average number of per employe, flushes per subseetur, Appertain 0 (Pacific Institute 20(3) 4 • Multiplied by the demand for toilet and urinal flushing for the project to account for visitors. Based on proportion of annual use allocated to visitor and others (lnelodes students fur schools; about 5 students per oo.pkwe) for each wbeectur in Table D-1 and 04 (Pacific Institute, 2003) 5 - Accounts for ryuifernenni to use ultra low flush toilets in new development projects; a. noted that requirements will reduce toilet and urinal flushing demand by half on avenge compared to literature estimate►. Ultra low flush IULF) WHEYS are resulted In all new constriction in California ae of tanuary 1, 199'L ULF toikts must use no more than 1.6gallore per flush (gpf) aid ULF urinals must use no mom than 1 gpf. ttp://www.fypower.trrg/com/tools/pndueb resutts.html?id.100139) Note. If zero flush urinals am being used, adjust accordingly. Assume Land use Type is Office. Assume 40 employees for project site. Total Toilet & Urinal Usage = 280 gpd Modified EAWU for Irrigation Demand The following equation is used to calculate the Modified EAWU: Modified EAWU = (E owae x KLx LAx 0.015) / IE Where: Modified EAWU = estimated daily average water usage during wet season ETowae to Average Reference ET from November through April (inches per month.. See Section F.2.5.1) Kt. = Landscape Coefficient, KL Kr x Kd x Kent(SeeSection F.25.2) K. = species factor Kd = density factor KM = microclimate factor LA = Landscape Area (sq-ft) lE = irrigation Efficiency (assume 90 percent for demand calculations) In this equation, the coefficient (0.015) accounts for unit conversions and shut down of irrigation during and for the three days following a significant precipitation event: 0.015 = (1 mn/30 days) x(1 ft/12 in)x(7.48 gal/cu-ft)x(approximately 7 out of 10 days with irrigation demand from November through April) Assume that Newport Beach has similar irrigation demands as Irvine (most conservative option) ETowet 3 Landscaped area in sf = 2,427 sf Ki = 0.7 IE = 0.9 Modified EAWU Demand = 84.95 gpd Harvest and Use Feasibility Screening Project's DCV = Is it feasible for the DCV to be used within 48 hours? Toilet/Urinal Demand + Irrigation Demand (48 hours) = No, Harvest and Use is not mandatory. • • 652.00 cu-ft 4,877.61 gallons 729.89 gallons TAPE PERFORMANCE SUMMARY MWS-LINEAR 2.0 Application: Stand Alone Stormwater Treatment Best Management Practice Type of Treatment: High Flow Rate Media Filtration and Biofiltration (dual -stage) DESCRIPTION Modular Wetland System Linear 2.0 (MWS-L 2.0) is an advanced dual -stage high flow rate media and biofiltration system for the treatment of urban stormwater runoff. Superior pollutant removal efficiencies are achieved by treating runoff through a pre-treatment chamber containing a screening device for trash and larger debris, a separation chamber for larger TSS and a series of media filter cartridges for removal of fine TSS and other particulate pollutants. Pre-treated runoff is transferred to the biofiltration chamber which contains an engineered ion exchange media designed to support an abundant plant and microbe community that captures, absorbs. transforms and uptakes pollutants through an array of physical, chemical, and biological mechanisms. MWS-L 2.0 is a self-contained treatment train that is supplied to the job site completely assembled and ready for use. Once installed, stormwater runoff drains directly from impervious surfaces through an built-in curb inlet, drop in, or via pipe from upstream inlets or downspouts. Treated runoff is discharged from the system through an orifice control riser to assure the proper amount of flow is treated. The treated water leaving the system is connected to the storm drain system. infiltration basins, or to be re -used on site for irrigation or other uses. TAPE PERFORMANCE Modular Wetland System Linear 2.0 (MWS-L 2.0) completed its TAPE field testing in the spring of 2013. The Washington DOE has approved the system under the TAPE protocol. The MWS- Linear has met the performance benchmarks for the three major pollutant categories as defined by TAPE: Basic Treatment (TSS), Phosphorus and Enhanced (dissolved zinc and copper). It is the first system tested under the protocol to meet the benchmarks for all three categories. alspf.a0Lo4Arew Pollutant Avg. Influent (mg/L) Avg. Effluent (mg/L) Removal Efficiency Notes Total Suspended Solids 75.0 15.7 85% SUMMON o101100'CfeeexyTAPE p0'olm,Iletpen lwnnylCIPhpolu•c.d Mean 0•8111Y'IOns. . Toto' Phosphorus 0.227 0.074 64% Summoly of a0 dp:c meolinS TAPP pa analog c'mllaiing la lhic pa8rinn•. Ortho Phosphorus 0.093 0.031 67% SummoyooT cloln mooting I4PFpe/o'-ole't1a1J'CIphowh.o,. Nitrogen 1.40 0.77 45% ..,•lung ma Cpklonlmer-ao nerd Al'IeYJulu nib wen: Sore—oy 01 e1 cola c-ling lmr no. Dissolved Zinc 0.062 0.024 66% S-mmc,yoroldalomoo0,gMY; pmemolanpC"ninngl0Int;po/..tan1. Dissolved Copper 0.0086 0.0059 38% S.-rarefy of of do la mooting TAPS paemello pp"c.nilg to l,ll p."8:lonl TofolZinc 0.120 0.038 69% samnlefyeleldkl0ca441ter'vvd. Total Copper 0.017 0.009 50% swArrKKyorofcal°Ndnglec54d. Motor Oil 24.157 1.133 95% sunvnpry of W ypin crying lasli-g NOTES: 1. The MWS•Linear was proven effective al infiltration rates of up to 121 in/hr. 2. A minimum of 10 aliquots were collected for each oven. 3. Sampling was targeted to capture at least 75 percent of the hydrograph. • Modular Wetland System. Inc. 2972 San Luis Rey Rd Oceanside, CA 92058 WETLANDS• Nature &Technology Working Together In Perfect Harmony" www.modularwetlands.com P 760-433-7640 F 760-433-3179 • • • FIM F RS616'610A S1R1E REPRRIYFR1 -0E ECOLOGY December 2015 GENERAL USE LEVEL DESIGNATION FOR BASIC, ENHANCED, AND PHOSPHORUS TREATMENT For the MWS-Linear Modular Welland Ecology's Decision: . Based on Moctulif Wetland.Systems, Inc. application submissions, including the Technical • Evaluation -Report, dated April 1, 2014,• Ecology hereby issues the following use level :' "' designation 1. General use level designation,(GULD) for the MWS-Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System for Basic treatment • • Sized•at:a hydraulic loading rate.of 1 gallon' per minute (gpm) per square foot (sq ft) of . •• wetland cell surface area. For moderate- pollutant loading rates (low to.mcdium.dcnsity residential basins), size'the Pre •filters at 3.0 gpm/sq ft of cartridge surface area. -For high loading'rates (commercial:and industrial basins), size the Prefilters at 2.1 gpm/sq ft:of cartridge- surface. area. • • -'•.- 2. General use•level designation (GULD) for the MWS-Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System for Phosphorus treatment : . • • Sized at a hydraulic loading rate of 1: gallon per minute (gpm) per square foot (sq 'ft) of - wetland cell surface area. For moderate pollutant loading rates (low to medium density residential basins), size the:Prefilters at 3.0 gpm/sq ft of cartridge, surface area. For high . loading rates (conunercial and industrial basins), size the Prefilters at 2.1 gpm/sq ft-of cartridge surface area.... 3. General use level.designation (GULD) for the MWS-Linear Modular 'Wetland Stormwater Treatment System for Enhanced treatment • Sized at a hydraulic loading rate of 1 gallon per minute (gpm) per square foot (sq ft) of wetland cell surface area. For Moderate pollutant loading rates (low.to medium density' residential basins), sizethe Prefilters at 310 gpm/sq ft of cartridge surface area. For high . loading rates (commercial and industrial basins), size the Prefilters at 2.1 gpm/sq ft of • cartridge surface area. . • • • 4:.Ecology approves the MWS,- L- inearModular W.etland'Stormwater Treatment.System Units for Basic,.Phosphoius, and Enhanced treatment at the hydraulic_ loading rate listed above. Designers shall calculate the, water•. quality design Clow rates using the following procedures: • : Western Washington: For treatment'installed 'upstieam of detention or retention;:the :.. water quality design flow rate is the peak 15-minute flow rate as calculated 'Using the - latest 'version'of the Western Washington Hydrology Model or other Ecology -approved _ continuous ninoff model: -.::._ • • •` . I, • • Eastern Washington: Fortreatment installed upstream ofdetention or retention; the water quality: design flow.rate is the peak 15-minute•flow rate as calculated using one of • the three methods.descri ied`in Chapter2:2�.5 of:the Stormwater Management Manual'" for Eastern Washington ... SWMMEW)'orlocal manual:.:, ' _ • Entire State:'For treatment installed downstream of detention, the •water:quality design:': flow rate is the full•2-year release rate ofthedetention facility. ' : 5. These use level designations have no expiration date but may.be revoked or amended by. Ecology, and are subject to the conditions specified below. EcoloEv's Conditions of:Use: Applicants•shall:comply with the following conditions: 1: Design;:assemble, install, operate, and maintaiin the MWS.—.Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System units, in accordance with Modular_ Wetland Systems,:Inc. applicable manuals and documents and the Ecology Decision. 2.- Each site plan must undergo Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. review and approval before site installation. This ensures that site gradingiand slope are appropriate for userof a MWS — Linear Modular Wetland Stonnwater Treatment System unit. • • . • 3. MWS. = Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System media shall conform to the specifications:subniitted to, and approved by, Ecology. 4. The applicant tested the MWS Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System • with -an external bypass weir. This weir.limited the depth of water flowing through the media, and. therefore the active treatment area; to below the root.zone of the plants: This GULD applies to'MWS — Linear Modular Wetland.Stonnwater Treatment Systems whether plants are included in•the final product or not.'• 5. Maintenance: The required maintenance interval for stonnwater treatment devices is:often dependent upon the degree of pollutant loading from a, particular drainage basin. Therefore, Ecology does not endorse or recommend a "one size fits all" maintenance cycle fora particular model/size of manufactured filter treatment device. • Typically, Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. designs MWS - Linear Modular Wetland systems for a target prefilter media life of 6 to 12 months. • Indications of the need for maintenance include effluent flow decreasing to below the design flow rate or decrease in treatment below required levels. • Owners/operators must inspect MWS - Linear Modular' Wetland systems for a minimum of twelve months fr m the start of post -construction operation to determine site -specific • • niaintenaiice schedules:and requirements: You must conduct inspections monthly:during the:wet season;:and every` other month during the dryyseason: (According.to the:*: . SWMMWW;:the wet•season;it westem Washington is October.l+:to April 30:*-According to,SWIvIMEW, the wet•season•in eastern.Washingtonris October l•to June 30): After the • first year of operation; :owners/operators.must conduct- inspections based on the findings_ during the first year of inspections.;= " ' - - • _ - - . • .-: Conduct inspections by qualified` personnel, follow manufacturer's -guidelines, and use • • :methods capable of'determining either•:a decrease in treated effluent flowrate. a•nd/or a'. • decrease in'pollutant removal ability: ' , • Wheninspections are performed, the following-fmdings•typically serve:as maintenance' :triggers: ••- • Standing.water remains -in the vault between rain events, or• :. • . • ..Bypass occurs 'during storms smaller than the design storm. • • • If'excessive floatables (trash.and debris). are present (bufno-standing water or -:.excessive'sedimentation)•, perform a minor maintenance consisting•of gross solids: ' • ••removal, not: prefilter media replacement. •• ... • • Additional data collection will be used to create a correlation between pretreatment ' -.chainber�sediment depth and pre -filter clogging (see Issues to be Addressed .by the • Company section below) .. . . .• 6. Discharges' from the MWS - Linear.Modular Wetland StormwatcrTreatment System units ' shall not cause or contribute to water quality standards violations in receiving waters.: Applicant: Applicant's Address: Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. PO. Box 869 Oceanside, CA 92054 Application Documents: • Original Application for Conditional Use Level Designation, Modular Wetland System, Linear Stormwater Filtration System Modular Wetland Systems, Inc., January 2011 • Quality Assurance Project Plan: Modular Wetland system — Linear Treatment System performance Monitoring Project, draft, January 2011. • Revised Application for Conditional Use Level Designation, Modular Wetland System, Linear Stormwater Filtration System Modular Wetland Systems, Inc., May 2011 • Memorandum: Modular Weiland System -Linear GULD Application Supplementary Data, April 2014 • Technical Evaluation Report: Modular Wetland System Storm►vater Treatment System Performance Monitoring, April 2014. • s • Applicant's Use Level Request: General use level designation as a Basic, Enhanced, and Phosphorus treatment device in accordance with Ecology's Guidance for Evaluating Emerging Stormwater Treatment Technologies Technology Assessment Protocol — Ecology (TAPE) January 2011 Revision. Applicant's Performance Claims: • The MWS - Linear Modular wetland is capable of removing a minimum of 80-percent of TSS from stormwater with influent concentrations between 100 and 200 mg/I. • The MWS — Linear Modular wetland is capable of removing a minimum of 50-percent of Total Phosphorus from stormwater with influent concentrations between 0.1 and 0.5 mg/I . • The MWS — Linear Modular wetland is capable of removing a minimum of 30-percent of dissolved Copper from stormwater with influent concentrations between 0.005 and 0.020 mg/I. • The MWS — Linear Modular wetland is capable of removing a minimum of 60-percent of dissolved Zinc from stormwater with influent concentrations between 0.02 and 0.30 mg/I. Ecology Recommendations: • Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. has shown Ecology, through laboratory and field- testing, that the MWS - Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System filter system is capable of attaining Ecology's Basic, Total phosphorus, and Enhanced treatment goals. Findings of Fact: Laboratory Testing The MWS-Linear Modular wetland has the: • Capability to remove 99 percent of total suspended solids (using Sil-Co-Si1 106) in a quarter -scale model with influent concentrations of 270 mg/L. • Capability to remove 91 percent of total suspended solids (using Sil-Co-Si1 106) in laboratory conditions with influent concentrations of 84.6 mg L at a flow rate of 3.0 gpm per square foot of media. • Capability to remove 93 percent of dissolved Copper in a quarter -scale model with influent concentrations of 0.757 mg/L. • Capability to remove 79 percent of dissolved Copper in laboratory conditions with influent concentrations of 0.567 mg/L at a flow rate of 3.0 gpm per square foot of media. • Capability to remove 80.5-percent of dissolved Zinc in a quarter -scale model with influent concentrations of 0.95 mg/L at a flow rate of 3.0 gpm per square foot of media. • Capability to remove 78-percent of dissolved Zinc in laboratory conditions with influent concentrations of 0.75 mg/L at a flow rate of 3.0 gpm per square foot of media. • • • Field Testing • Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. conducted monitoring of an MWS-Linear (Model MWS-L-4-13) from April 2012 through May 2013, at a transportation maintenance facility in Portland, Oregon. The manufacturer collected flow -weighted composite samples of the system's influent and effluent during 28 separate storm events. The system treated approximately 75 percent of the runoff from 53.5 inches of rainfall durinn the monitoring period. The applicant sized the system at 1 gpm/sq ft. (wetland media) and 3gpm/sq ft. (prefilter). • Influent TSS concentrations for qualifying sampled storm events ranged from 20 to 339 mg/L. Average TSS removal for influent concentrations greater than 100 mg/L (n=7) averaged 85 percent. For influent concentrations in the range of 20-100 mg/L (n=18), the upper 95 percent confidence interval about the mean effluent concentration was 12.8 mg/L. • Total phosphorus removal for 17 events with influent TP concentrations in the range of 0.1 to 0.5 mg/L averaged 65 percent. A bootstrap estimate of the lower 95 percent confidence limit (LCL95) of the mean total phosphorus reduction was 58 percent. • The lower 95 percent confidence limit of the mean percent removal was 60.5 percent for dissolved zinc for influent concentrations in the range of 0.02 to 0.3 mg/L (n=11). The lower 95 percent confidence limit of the mean percent removal was 32.5 percent for dissolved copper for influent concentrations in the range ot'0.005 to 0.02 mg/L (n=14) at flow rates up to 28 gpm (design flow rate 41 gpm). Laboratory test data augmented the data set. showing dissolved copper removal at the design flow rate of 41 gpm (93 percent reduction in influent dissolved copper of 0.757 mg/L). Issues to be addressed by the Company: 1. Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. should collect maintenance and inspection data for the first year on all installations in the Northwest in order to assess standard maintenance requirements for various land uses in the region. Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. should use these data to establish required maintenance cycles. 2. Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. should collect pre-treatment chamber sediment depth data for the first year of operation for all installations in the Northwest. Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. will use these data to create a correlation between sediment depth and pre -filter clogging. Technology Description: Download at http://www.modularwetlands.com/ Contact Information: Applicant: Greg Kent Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. P.O. Box 869 Oceanside, CA 92054 L'kenl(ir?hiocleanenvironnrcntal. nei 0 • O Applicant website: hup://www.modularwetlands.com/ Ecology web link: http://+vww.ecv.wa.eovinrouramslweistorm++pater/newrtech/index.html Ecology: Revision Histo Douglas C. Howie, P.E. Department of Ecology Water Quality Program (360) 407-6444 doualas.howie(thecv. wa.eov Date Revision June 2011 Original use -level -designation document September 2012 Revised dates for TER and expiration January 2013 Modified Design Storm Description, added Revision Table, added maintenance discussion, modified format in accordance with Ecology standard December 2013 Updated name of Applicant April 2014 Approved GULD designation for Basic, Phosphorus, and Enhanced treatment December 2015 Updated GULD to document the acceptance of MWS-Linear Modular Wetland installations with or without the inclusion of plants. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Attachment C — BMP Exhibit HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Attachment C North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 33 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Attachment D — O&M Plan HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Attachment D North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 34 • • • Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Plan for WQMP Project Name: One Hoag Leadership Center Prepared for: Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian 1 Hoag Drive Newport Beach, CA 92663 Contact Person: Karen Costello Phone: (310) 614-1446 Email: karen.costello@hoag.org Prepared on: 07/29/21 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Contents Page No. Section 1 BMP Inspection and Maintenance Responsibility Matrix 3 Section 2 Permit(s) Information 7 Section 3 Recordkeeping 7 Section 4 Waste Management 7 Section 5 Forms to Record BMP Implementation 7 Attachment 1: Vendor O&M Information 10 • • Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Section 1 BMP Inspection and Maintenance Responsibility Matrix The owner will be responsible for the long-term operation and maintenance of BMPs, including funding. BMP Inspection Maintenance Minimum Reponsible Inspection/ Maintenance BMP Frequency of. Party(s) Activities Required Activities Inspection Activities 1) Check for excess erosion or scour 2) Identify sediment accumulation that requires maintenance 3) Evaluate plant health and need for corrective action 4) Identify any needed corrective maintenance Inspect prior to and at least four times per year during the rainy season (October 151 to April 30th) BioCIean Modular that will require site and within 24 Wetlands Linear Owner specific planning or design Maintenance Activities hours after at least two storm events greater than or equal to 1) Remove trash from screening device, 0.5 inches. Maintain as needed. 2) Remove sediment from separation chamber 3) Replace cartridge filter media 4) RepIace drain drown filter media Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Page 3 Page 3 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center 5) Trim vegetation Refer to the manufacturer's operations and maintenance manual induded in Attachment T. Education for Property Owners, Tenants, and Occupants (NI) Owner Distribute appropriate materials to owner via contract language, mailings, website, or meetings. Refer to Section VII for Educational Materials specific for this site. Information provided to owners upon sale or lease. Reminders sent or posted annually. C:omnnon Area Landscape Management (N3) Owner Owner to provide maintenance of landscaping to meet current water efficiency. Monitor for runoff and efficiency. Mitigation of potential dangers of fertilizer and pesticide usage through the incorporation of an Integrated Pest Management Program (IPM). Inspect weekly. Maintain monthly or as needed. BMP Maintenance (N4) Owner Owner to provide maintenance of BMPs per requirements of the WQMP and O&M Manual in Attachment D. Inspect weekly and after rain events. Maintain monthly or as needed. Uniform Fire Code Implementation (N10) Owner/Tenant Comply with Article 80 of the Uniform Fire Code and the City of Anaheim Fire Department. Ongoing Common Area Litter Control (Nil) Owner Litter patrol may be included with landscaping maintenance or with waste disposal services. Inspect daily. Maintain weekly or as needed. Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Page 4 Page4 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Employee Training/Education Program (N12) Owner Conduct training sessions on stormwater quality should include, but not limited to: 1) Good housekeeping practices 2) Maintenance requirements 3) Material Management Practices 4) Visual observations for evidence of stormwater impacts (illicit discharges) and BMP function 5) Spill Prevention and Response 6) Location of the facility's BMI's, catch basins, spill kits, and drains Annually and/or within 30 days of employee start date Common Area Catch Basin Inspection (N14) Owner Owner to provide for inspection of common area catch basins. Clear inlets of trash, debris, and silt. Inspect weekly and after rain events. Regular maintenance as needed Street Sweeping Private Streets & Parking Lots (N15) Owner Vacuum sweeping of private streets and parking lots. Regular street sweeping weekly. Storm Drain Stenciling and Signage (S1) Owner Inspect and maintain legibility of storm drain stencils and signage. Check that all catch basins in paved areas marked or stenciled with "No Dumping -Drains to Ocean; No Descargue Basura" language. Replace/repaint markings if faded, damaged, removed, or otherwise illegible. Inspect quarterly and maintain as necessary Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Page 5 Page 5 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Trash and Waste Storage (S3) Owner Owner to provide for regular maintenance and cleaning of trash and waste storage areas. Check that outdoor waste storage structure is consistently covered, structural stability is sound, and that no -run-on or contact of the trash with runoff is occurring. Repair leaks or damage and mitigate if trash is coming into contact with stormwater, as needed. Check that trash is removed by local waste management contractor. Regular cleaning and maintenance once a week. Efficient Irrigation (Si) Owner Owner to provide for inspection of irrigation systems and connections for deficiencies. Correct deficiencies as needed. Inspect weekly and maintain as necessary Hillside Landscaping I (S12) Owner Hillside areas will be landscaped with deep-rooted, drought tolerant plant species selected for erosion control. Maintain as necessary. Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Page 6 Page 6 • • Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Section 2 Permit(s) Information Permits are not required for this project as there are no direct connections being made to the Citv s MS4 system. Section 3 Recordkeeping Documentation of site conditions, maintenance activities performed, and any other remaining maintenance required is necessary during each inspection/maintenance visit. All records must be maintained for at least five (5) years and must be made available for review upon request. Section 4 Waste Management Onsite waste will be properly disposed of offsite and BMPs will be maintained to prevent illicit discharges from entering the storm drain system. Section 5 Forms to Record BMP Implementation See attached form for recording BMP implementation, maintenance, and inspection. Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Page 7 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center RECORD OF BMP IMPLEMENTATION, MAINTENACE, AND INSPECTION ONE HOAG LEADERSHIP CENTER Today's Date: Name of Person Performing Activity {Printed): Signature: BMP Name or Type (As Shown in O&M Plan) Brief Description of Operation, Maintenance, or Inspection Activity Performed Hoag Memorial Ilospital Presbyterian Page 8 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center RECORD OF BMP IMPLEMENTATION, MAINTENACE, AND INSPECTION ONE HOAG LEADERSHIP CENTER Today's Date: Name of Person Performing Activity (Printed): Signature: BMP Name or Type (As Shown in O&M Plan) Brief Description of Operation, Maintenance, or Inspection Activity Performed Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Page 9 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center • Attachment 1: Vendor O&M Information • • Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Page 1D e Cle A Fcrterra Company OPERATION & MA • Maintenance Guidelines for Modular Wetlands Linear Maintenance Summary o Remove Trash from Screening Device — average maintenance interval is 6 to 12 months. • (5 minute average service time). o Remove Sediment from Separation Chamber — average maintenance interval is 12 to 24 months. • (10 minute average service time). o Replace Cartridge Filter Media — average maintenance interval 12 to 24 months. • (10-15 minute per cartridge average service time). o Replace Drain Down Filter Media — average maintenance interval is 12 to 24 months. • (5 minute average service time). o Trim Vegetation — average maintenance interval is 6 to 12 months. • (Service time varies). System Diactram Inflow Pipe (optional) Pre -Treatment Chamber Access to screening device, separation chamber and cartridge filter Biofiltration Chamber Discharge Chamber Access to drain down filter Outflow Pipe 5796 Armada Drive #250, Carlsbad, CA 1855.566.3938 i stormwater@forterrabp.com I www.biocleanenvironmental.com • e • Maintenance Procedures Screening Device 1. Remove grate or manhole cover to gain access to the screening device in the Pre - Treatment Chamber. Vault type units do not have screening device. Maintenance can be performed without entry. 2. Remove all pollutants collected by the screening device. Removal can be done manually or with the use of a vacuum truck. The hose of the vacuum truck will not damage the screening device. 3. Screening device can easily be removed from the Pre -Treatment Chamber to gain access to separation chamber and media filters below. Replace grate or manhole cover when completed. Separation Chamber 1. Perform maintenance procedures of screening device listed above before maintaining the separation chamber. 2. With a pressure washer spray down pollutants accumulated on walls and cartridge filters. 3. Vacuum out Separation Chamber and remove all accumulated pollutants. Replace screening device, grate or manhole cover when completed. Cartridge Filters 1. Perform maintenance procedures on screening device and separation chamber before maintaining cartridge filters. 2. Enter separation chamber. 3. Unscrew the two bolts holding the lid on each cartridge filter and remove lid. 4. Remove each of 4 to 8 media cages holding the media in place. 5. Spray down the cartridge filter to remove any accumulated pollutants. 6. Vacuum out old media and accumulated pollutants. 7. Reinstall media cages and fill with new media from manufacturer or outside supplier. Manufacturer will provide specification of media and sources to purchase. 8. Replace the lid and tighten down bolts. Replace screening device, grate or manhole cover when completed. Drain Down Filter 1. Remove hatch or manhole cover over discharge chamber and enter chamber. 2. Unlock and lift drain down filter housing and remove old media block. Replace with new media block. Lower drain down filter housing and lock into place. 3. Exit chamber and replace hatch or manhole cover. • e O Maintenance Notes 1. Following maintenance and/or inspection, it is recommended the maintenance operator prepare a maintenance/inspection record. The record should include any maintenance activities performed, amount and description of debris collected, and condition of the system and its various filter mechanisms. 2. The owner should keep maintenance/inspection record(s) for a minimum of five years from the date of maintenance. These records should be made available to the governing municipality for inspection upon request at any time. 3. Transport all debris, trash, organics and sediments to approved facility for disposal in accordance with local and state requirements. 4. Entry into chambers may require confined space training based on state and local regulations. 5. No fertilizer shall be used in the Biofiltration Chamber. 6. Irrigation should be provided as recommended by manufacturer and/or landscape architect. Amount of irrigation required is dependent on plant species. Some plants may require irrigation. 5796 Armada Drive #250, Carlsbad, CA 1855.566.3938 I stormwater@forterrabp.com I www.biocleanenvironmental.com • • Maintenance Procedure Illustration Screening Device The screening device is located directly under the manhole or grate over the Pre -Treatment Chamber. It's mounted directly underneath for easy access and cleaning. Device can be cleaned by hand or with a vacuum truck. Separation Chamber The separation chamber is located directly beneath the screening device. It can be quickly cleaned using a vacuum truck or by hand. A pressure washer is useful to assist in the cleaning process. • • Cartridge Filters The cartridge filters are located in the Pre -Treatment chamber connected to the wall adjacent to the biofiltration chamber. The cartridges have removable tops to access the individual media filters. Once the cartridge is open media can be easily removed and replaced by hand or a vacuum truck. Drain Down Filter The drain down filter is located in the Discharge Chamber. The drain filter unlocks from the wall mount and hinges up. Remove filter block and replace with new block. • Trim Vegetation Vegetation should be maintained in the same manner as surrounding vegetation and trimmed as needed. No fertilizer shall be used on the plants. Irrigation per the recommendation of the manufacturer and or landscape architect. Different types of vegetation requires different amounts of irrigation. • 5796 Armada Drive #250, Carlsbad, CAI 855.566.3938 I stormwater@forterrabp.com I www.biocleanenvironmental.com Bio6CIean A Forterra Coleman' •ect Name Inspection Report Modular Wetlands Linear Project Address Owner / Management Company Contact Inspector Name UM) ILm Cool Type of Inspection ❑ Routine ❑ Follow Up ❑ Complaint Weather Condition Phone ( ) - Date / / ❑ Storm Additional Notes Time or � 7 For Irfice Use Only, wK ;OIfKe personnel to complete section w '.Lnc?Omalac# ?a AM/PM Storm Event in Last72-hours? 0 No ❑ Yes Inspection Checklist Modular Wetland System Type (Curb, Grate or VG Vault): Size (22', 14' or etc.): Structural Integrity: Yes No Comments Damage to pre-treatment access cover (manhole cover/grate) or cannot be opened using normal lining pressure? Damage to discharge chamber access cover (manhole cover/grate) or cannot be opened using normal lifting pressure? Does the MWS unit show signs of structural deterioration (cracks in the wall, damage to frame)? Is the inlet/outlet prpe or drain down pipe damaged or otherwise not functioning properly? Ilkking Condition: evidence of illicit discharge or excessive oil, grease, or other automobile fluids entering and clogging thr unit? Is there standing water in inappropriate areas after a dry period? Is the filter insert (if applicable) at capacity and/or is there an accumulation of debris/trash on the shelf system? Does the depth of sediment/trash/debns suggest a blockage of the inflow pipe. bypass or cartridge filter? If yes specify which one in the comments section. Note depth of accumulation in in pre-treatment chamber. NAM Does the cartridge filter media need replacement in pre-treatment chamber and/or discharge chamber? Chamber: Any signs of improper functioning in the discharge chamber? Note issues in comments section. Other Inspection Items: Is there an accumulation of sediment/trash/debris in the wetland media (if applicable)? Is it evident that the plants are alive and healthy (if applicable)? Please note Plant Information below. Is there a septic or foul odor coming from inside the system? Waste: Yes No Recommended Maintenance Plant Information Sediment / Silt/ Clay No Cleaning Needed Damage to Plants Trash / Bags 1 Bottles Schedule Maintenance as Planned Plant Replacement Green Waste / Leaves 1 Foliage Needs Immediate Maintenance Plant Trimming Ilkonal Notes: 5796 Armada Drive #250, Carlsbad, CA 1855.566.3938 I stormwater@forterrabp.com I www.biocleanenvironmental.com Weather Condition Bic)Clean A rortma Company • Cleaning and Maintenance Report Modular Wetlands Linear Project Name Project Address Owner r Management Company Contact tmyi iLp --de, Inspector Name Phone( ) — Date / / Type of Inspection ❑ Routine ❑ Follow Up ❑ Complaint ❑ Storm Additional Notes Time luete)aMaettgaMS,tMtVa; 'Office pommel to complete sectIon to, AM / PM Storm Event in Last72-hours? ❑ No ❑ Yes Sae Map # GPS Coordinates of Insert Manufacturer / Description / Sizing Trash Accumulation Foliage Accumulation Sediment Accumulation Total Debris Accumulation Condition of Media 25/50/75/100 (will be changed 75%) Operational Per Manufactures' Specifications (If not, why?) Lat: MWS Catch Basins Long: • MWS Sedimentation Basin Media Filter Condition Plant Condition Drain Down Media Condition Discharge Chamber Condition Drain Down Pipe Condition _ Inlet and Outlet Pipe Condition Comments: • 5796 Armada Drive #250, Carlsbad: CA 1855.566.3938 I stormwater@forterrabp.com I www.biocleanenvironmental.com Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Attachment E — Soils Report HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Attachment E North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 35 -•••.,!' • .4.1••••'1,1-••••;0A-.2z:0,- -.h.,. • .; • • A; • i•••••• ri 1". ',V s.,,,:4.7:4,1S:;1 10.4 • !vi.e. 4, wi.r4 . .LNC.../. , ".4,01...: r : t • Or • P:••••i .1 • As • . •• • 1.11 at j‘i1 .• a- • t.r# 41'411.41.i.,11 .C*/ 1.1' • a- ..t1.7••••• ' •gir • •is • .4.- ,..1-1!„ %t • • • le • 11 r slis t.! :2.1 , A • .* ti: • ''.. t 4," 'In; .1 '1 • . ' ‘ • R t( .1' lir m" .* •.'Itt '')f ..:'';'.4:61:14:•t•P •'''T• i I Pi;* •••• li*Pk. 1,,,Kitepciitto , eeteclinicar-Investigatioli ..:.‘....y6,..x ..-...t.c.!....,••fe ..if..... Vey-'610;'..•!;;•e"?:.;•„.`4,4,;:m.'••••%;.•tt.'!" ei ..,.. ••••11; ....4,4,1.1,M.., . ;:,. 4,4sii,;.:4,, 7 „.14. ;1..V•Tr,,ray.4 fi.Nre..!...bet:..A; .t.,..,./.1,7k 4, ...;•.A.: ^ .0, ., 1. 7..$1141,6.1.4 e ''...'7„14.444:•,iP' 1S4 3:4. ilektnii,,q;:.•Vt.,,i. . ''' 9C.NAKiii* , i::4••••44';,i.i.el, , 1.;':".t. l.r...t:jige; VI )11'.'":, i :......,....,:cik. . • rk., , c...t, ., . ;'.1•4$ . . '1 4.4.$1...fr-T. iltre.f.'04- 7 11 •r, ' 9 'illcrt.....4..':•-•' 7.-41 . ' '1'''''''..Alks,;:r ..:;;,,,,, ., •1!....lifi.'•::y1-si.:.44.i. :-.v.• • • t: , . :al% it...1,:.4... L., •;.1 . t m. ,.•... ,I.I. .... ,ir. •.. ..yopose ' ,.6..,,F0,;-.4ti.i;,,,to;'!•44;:r . -6'....,• • . . ,,,..4,..,..) i're:otP•1,` ...p.: 2,, •*••.L:2:••:%4 ?At'. iV• TIliFt: V•69•?...i.-' t''.:tt ...41-11,. .3. ',14;:. ..hi'.• HoawMemotia 4rospitaliRresb ' 'urs40•14t2,Pi de Hoag..Dtive4',',..-4,- iv: '..,IV:1•,,l1:174-',•'' v., 2,2.a•r• .....-.,•.•tA. 4.32( yterL ,.,...F.,...04.2 , . . .41;• .....1. '-'tv.-,a . • 4 - 14-.:4`54%;•"1 • ew ort..BeachiL 4 tui7„,, jot:A:vet zstt'/' .. • .. • •A s. -.• , ..... 4.• . ,.. . .„,, ..,„ ..... ... : • :. • .,.. .,., ...., v,,..41,0/ • -....7; .1 .q.11.• ;. .1.? • • 14 . • Prepared for: Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Newport Beach, California Project 4953-20-0782 May 25,2021 May 25, 2021 Wood Project 4953-20-0782 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian c/o Ms. Angel Liu Senior Project Manager Howe Bonney & Associates 4040 West Coast Highway, Trailer 57 Newport Beach, California 92663 Subject: Letter of Transmittal Report of Geotechnical Investigation Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive Newport Beach, California Dear Ms. Liu: wood. Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. 6001 Rickenbacker Road Los Angeles, CA 90040-3031 USA T: +1 323.889.5300 www.woodplc.com We (Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc., Wood) are pleased to submit the results of our geotechnical investigation for the proposed One Hoag Leadership Center at Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian in Newport Beach, California. This investigation was conducted in general accordance with our proposal dated March 5, 2021 and Purchase Order Number 1726387, dated March 24, 2021. The scope of our services was planned based on the information provided by you, which included a description of the project and the conceptual design package, dated January 18, 2021. Structural loading information was not available at the time of this report. The results of our investigation and design recommendations are presented in this report. Please note that you or your representative should submit copies of this report to the appropriate governmental agencies for their review and approval prior to obtaining a building permit. 'Wood' is a trading name for John Wood Group PLC and its subsidiaries e Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 It has been a pleasure to be of professional service to you. Please contact us if you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. Lan Anh Tran Senior Engineer Reviewed by: Mark A. Murphy Principal Geotechnical Engineer Project Manager Pierre E. Romo Senior Geologist Rosalind Munro Principal Engineering Geologist Iliac-fsl4projecws14953 Geotech\2020-pro11200782 One Hoag Leadership Center103 DocCtr144953-20-0782R01 Fino!_Revised 032521.dorx LI:MM (Electronic copies submitted) 2 • Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Report of Geotechnical Investigation Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive Newport Beach, California Prepared for: Hoag Memorial Hospital Presybterian Newport Beach, California Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. Los Angeles, California May 25, 2021 Project 4953-20-0782 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Table of Contents Section Page No. LIST OF FIGURES AND APPENDICES iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iv 1.0 SCOPE 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SITE CONDITIONS 3 3.0 FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTS 4 4.0 SOIL CONDITIONS 5 5.0 LIMITED GEOLOGIC -SEISMIC HAZARDS EVALUATION 6 5.1 Geologic Setting 6 5.2 Geologic Materials 6 5.3 Groundwater 6 5.4 Geologic -Seismic Hazards 6 5.5 Geologic Conclusions 9 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 10 6.1 General 10 6.2 Foundations 10 6.3 Seismic Design Parameters 11 6.4 Floor Slab Support 11 6.5 Paving 12 6.6 Stormwater Infiltration 13 6.7 Grading 13 6.8 Geotechnical Observation 15 7.0 BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS 16 8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY 17 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 UST OF FIGURES AND APPENDICES Figures Figure 1: Figure 2: Appendix Appendix A: Appendix B: • Site Vicinity Map Plot Plan Current Field Explorations and Laboratory Test Results Prior Pertinent Field Explorations and Laboratory Test Results Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY We have completed our geotechnical investigation for the proposed One Hoag Leadership Center project on the campus of Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian in Newport Beach, California. Our current and prior pertinent subsurface explorations, engineering analyses, and foundation design recommendations are summarized below. The proposed One Hoag Leadership Center project will consist of the renovation of the existing single -story James Irvine Surgery Center and the construction of a new addition. The proposed new building addition is planned within the parking lot just east of the existing James Irvine Surgery Center. The proposed building addition will be one story in height. Subterranean construction is not planned. The proposed finished floor elevation will be established at about the existing grade; only minor grading and site work are planned to achieve the planned grades. To supplement our existing geotechnical data, two new borings were drilled at the site; fill soils, 31 feet thick, were encountered in our borings. The upper natural alluvial soils generally consist of medium dense silty sand and poorly graded sand down to approximately 13 to 17 feet below the existing grade. Below those depths, stiff silty claystone and clayey siltstone was encountered in our borings. The upper natural alluvial soils are medium dense at present moisture content and may become weaker and more compressible when wet. Groundwater was not encountered within the 25-foot maximum depth explored by our borings. The historic -high groundwater level has been mapped to a be at a depth greater than 30 feet below ground surface. The corrosion test results indicate that the on -site soils are moderately corrosive to ferrous metals and that the potential for sulfate attack on portland cement concrete is considered moderate. Based on the available geologic data, active or potentially active faults with the potential for surface fault rupture are not known to be located directly beneath or projecting toward the project site. Therefore, the potential for surface rupture due to fault plane displacement propagating to the surface at the project site during the design life of the building is considered low. Although the project site could be subjected to strong ground shaking in the event of an earthquake, this hazard is common in Southern California and the effects of ground shaking can be mitigated by proper engineering design and construction in conformance with current building codes and engineering practices. The project site is relatively level and the absence of nearby slopes precludes slope stability hazards. The project site is located within the Newport Oil Field; therefore, a remote possibility exists of encountering undocumented wells during excavations. Any well encountered would need to be appropriately abandoned in accordance with the current requirements of CaIGEM. The project site is the vicinity of a City of Newport Beach Methane Gas Mitigation District. Therefore, there is the potential for subsurface methane at the project site and a site -specific methane investigation may be required. The potential for other geologic hazards such as liquefaction, seismically -induced settlement, tsunamis, seiches, flooding, radon gas, and subsidence affecting the site is considered low. Records documenting the placement and compaction of the existing fill soils are not available. Therefore, the existing fill soils are not considered suitable for support of the shallow foundations, paving, or floor slabs on grade. The proposed addition may be supported on conventional spread/continuous footings if all existing fill soils (and the upper natural soils as necessary) are excavated to allow for the placement of at least 2 feet of properly compacted fill beneath footings. The floor slab may be supported on grade if all existing fill soils are excavated and replaced as properly compacted fill; all existing fill should also be excavated and replaced as properly compacted fill for support of new pavement or other exterior concrete walks and slabs on grade. iv • Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 1.0 SCOPE This report provides geotechnical recommendations for the proposed building upgrade and addition on the Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian campus located in Newport Beach, California. The location of the project site is illustrated on Figure 1, Site Vicinity Map. The locations of our current and prior pertienent explorations in relation to the locations of the existing site features and in relation to the proposed project features are shown on Figure 2, Plot Plan. Under our predecessor firm of MACTEC Engineering and Consulting of Georgia, Inc., we previously performed a geotechnical investigation for an addition at the west end of the existing James Irvine Surgery Center and presented the results in a report dated April 4, 2003 (our project no. 4953-03-0931). The recommendations presented in this report were developed in part using the geotechnical information from the above -referenced investigation. We acknowledge that we have reviewed the referenced report and we concur with the data and findings contained therein. This investigation was authorized to supplement the available geotechnical data to further evaluate the physical characteristics of the soils underlying the site, and to provide recommendations for analysis of existing foundations and design of new foundations, for floor slab and paving support, and for grading for the project. More specifically, the scope of this investigation included the following: • Review of prior data at and in the vicinity of the site; • Perform subsurface explorations and laboratory testing and provide a description of the soil and groundwater conditions encountered; • Perform a limited geologic -seismic hazards evaluation; • Provide recommendations for analysis of existing foundations and an appropriate foundation system for the proposed addition, together with the necessary design parameters, including frictional resistance, passive resistance, and anticipated total and differential settlements due to expected structural loadings; • Provide the applicable seismic design parameters based on the 2019 California Building Code (CBC); • Provide recommendations for subgrade preparation and floor slab support; • Provide recommendations for design of asphalt and portland cement concrete paving; • Provide recommendations for grading, including site preparation, excavation and slopes, the placing of compacted fill, and quality control measures relating to earthwork. The scope of this geotechnical investigation did not include the assessment of general site environmental conditions for the presence of contaminants in the soils and groundwater of the site. Our recommendations are based on the results of our current and the previous field explorations, laboratory tests, and appropriate engineering analyses. The results of the current field exploration and laboratory tests, 1 • • Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 which, together with the relevant prior data obtained from the previous investigation, form the basis of our recommendations, are presented in Appendix A. The results of the previous field exploration and laboratory tests are presented in Appendix B. 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, express or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this report. This report has been prepared for Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian and their design consultants to be used solely in the design of the proposed One Hoag Leadership Center at Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian in Newport Beach, California. This report has not been prepared for use by other parties, and may not contain sufficient information for purpose of other parties or other uses. 2 • • Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SITE CONDITIONS The proposed One Hoag Leadership Center project will consist of the renovation of the existing single -story James Irvine Surgery Center and the construction of a new addition. The existing building to be renovated has a footprint area of 6,600 square feet and is supported on shallow foundations. The proposed new building addition will be 4,400 square feet in plan area and is planned within the parking lot just east of the existing James Irvine Surgery Center. The proposed building addition will be one story in height. Subterranean construction is not planned. The proposed finished floor elvation will be established at about the existing grade; only minor grading and site work are planned to achieve the planned grades. Structural details are not available at this time; however, based on our prior experience with similar projects, the maximum dead -plus -live column loads of the proposed addition are not expected to exceed 100 kips. The existing ground surface at the site is relatively flat, with a difference in elevation across the site of the proposed addition of less than 2 feet. The proposed addition site is currently occupied primarly by an asphalt - paved surface parking lot and minor amounts of landscaping. Various underground utilities cross the site. 3 • • Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 3.0 FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTS To supplement our existing geotechnical data, the soil conditions beneath the site were further explored by drilling two borings to depths of 25 feet below the existing grade. Data were also available from our previous investigation for an addition at the west end of the existing James Irvine Surgery Center. The locations of the current borings, along with the pertinent prior borings, are shown on Figure 2. Details of our current explorations and the logs of the borings are presented in Appendix A. The results of our pertinent prior explorations are presented in Appendix B. Laboratory tests were performed on selected samples obtained from our borings to aid in the classification of the soils and to evaluate the pertinent engineering properties of the foundation soils. The following tests were performed: • Moisture content and dry density determinations. • Fines content. • Direct shear. • Consolidation. • Compaction. • Stabilometer (R-value). • Corrosion. All testing was performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM specifications at the time of testing. Details of our current laboratory testing program and test results are presented in Appendix A. The results for our prior laboratory testing are presented in Appendix B. 4 • • Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 4.0 SOIL CONDITIONS Fill soils, 31 feet thick, were encountered in our borings. The fill soils beneath the paving base course consist of silty sand. Deeper fill may be encountered at locations not explored, particularly near underground utilities. Records documenting the placement and compaction of the existing fill soils are not available. Underlying the fill soils, the upper natural alluvial soils generally consist of medium dense silty sand and poorly graded sand down to approximately 13 to 17 feet below the existing grade. Below those depths, stiff silty claystone and clayey siltstone was encountered in our borings. The upper natural alluvial soils are medium dense at present moisture content and may become weaker and more compressible when wet. Groundwater was not encountered within the 25-foot maximum depth explored by our borings. The historic - high groundwater level has been mapped to a be at a depth greater than 30 feet below ground surface (bgs). The corrosion test results indicate that the on -site soils are moderately corrosive to ferrous metals and that the potential for sulfate attack on portland cement concrete is considered moderate. 5 0 Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 5.0 LIMITED GEOLOGIC -SEISMIC HAZARDS EVALUATION 5.1 Geologic Setting Regionally, the site is in the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province. The Peninsular Ranges province is characterized by northwest/southeast trending alignments of mountains and hills and intervening basins, reflecting the influence of northwest trending major faults and folds controlling the general geologic structural fabric of the region. This province extends northwesterly from Baja California into the Los Angeles Basin and westerly into the offshore area, including Santa Catalina, Santa Barbara, San Clemente and San Nicolas islands (Yerkes et al, 1965). This province is bounded on the east by the San Jacinto fault zone. The proposed development is located in the coastal portion of California's Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province just northwest of the San Joaquin Hills in the southern portion of the Los Angeles Basin.. Locally, the site is located 0.6-mile northeast of the Pacific Ocean and 0.3-mile northwest of Newport Bay at an approximate elevation of 82 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) (NAVD88). The site in relation to local topographic features is shown in Figure 1, Site Vicinity Map. 5.2 Geologic Materials According to published geologic publications, the site is underlain by late to middle Pleistocene -age marine terrace deposits (Morton and Miller, 1981; Vedder, 1975). Based on the soils encountered in our current and prior geotechnical explorations, the site is locally mantled with artificial fill to a depth of approximately 31/2 feet bgs (MACTEC, 2003). The fill generally consists of fine- to medium -grained silty sand. Below the fill, marine terrace deposits were present in both current borings and consist predominantly of silty sand with a layer of poorly - graded sand and local clayey sand. Sedimentary bedrock of the Monterey Formation was encountered below the terrace deposits and consists of thickly bedded silty claystone and clayey siltstone to the maximum drilled depth of 25 feet bgs. A sandstone bed was encountered at the bottom of Boring 2. 5.3 Groundwater The site is located in the southern portion of the Coastal Plain of Orange County groundwater basin according to the California Department of Water Resources (DWR, 2003). Groundwater was not encountered in our current or prior exploratory borings to the maximum drilled depths of 25 feet bgs. In the vicinity of the site, the California Geological Survey [CGS, previously the California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG)] reports historic -high groundwater level for seismic hazard estimations to be deeper than 30 feet bgs (CDMG, 1997). 5.4 Geologic -Seismic Hazards Fault Rupture The project site is not within a currently established Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (A-P Zone) for surface fault rupture hazard (CGS, 2021a; 2017). An A-P Zone is an area which requires geologic investigation to evaluate whether the potential for surface fault rupture is present near an active fault (CGS, 2018). An active fault is a fault with surface displacement within the last 11,700 years (Holocene). The closest Earthquake Fault Zone, established for the Newport -Inglewood fault, is located approximately 3.7 miles northwest of the site (CGS, 2021a and 2017). The closest section of the Newport -Inglewood fault zone with the potential for surface rupture outside of an established A-P Zone is approximately 0.6-mile west of the site (USGS-CGS, 2020). 6 • Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 The project site is underlain at depth by the San Joaquin blind thrust fault [Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP), 2019]. Blind thrust faults are not exposed at the ground surface and are typically identified at depths greater than 3 kilometers. Therefore, these faults do not present a potential surface fault rupture hazard. Based on the available geologic data, other active or potentially active faults with the potential for surface fault rupture are not known to be located directly beneath or projecting toward the site. Therefore, the potential for surface rupture due to fault plane displacement propagating to the surface at the site during the design life of the proposed development is considered low. Seismicity and Ground Shaking The proximity of the site relative to known active faults indicates the site could be subjected to significant ground shaking caused by earthquakes. This hazard is common in Southern California and the effects of ground shaking can be mitigated by proper engineering design and construction in conformance with current building codes and engineering practices. Liquefaction and Seismically -Induced Settlement Liquefaction is the process in which loose granular soils below the ground -water table temporarily lose strength during strong ground shaking as a consequence of increased pore pressure and, thereby, reduced effective stress. Lateral spread can occur in liquefied soils with a nearby free -face, such as a river channel, or under sloping ground conditions. The vast majority of liquefaction hazards are associated with sandy soils and silty soils of low plasticity (CGS, 2008). Potentially liquefiable soils (based on composition) must be saturated or nearly saturated to be susceptible to liquefaction (CGS, 2008). Liquefaction potential is greatest where the ground -water level is shallow, and submerged loose, fine sands occur within a depth of about 50 feet or less. According to the City of Newport Beach (2006) and the CGS (2021a and 2017), the project site is not located within an area identified as having a potential for liquefaction. The project site is underlain by 13 to 17 feet of Pleistocene -age medium dense terrace deposits over sedimentary bedrock of the Monterey Formation. Groundwater was not encountered in our current exploratory borings to the maximum drilled depth of 25 feet bgs and the historic -high groundwater level is mapped at a depth deeper than 30 feet bgs. Therefore, the potential for liquefaction occurring beneath the project area is considered low. Seismically -induced settlement is often caused by loose to medium -dense granular soils becoming denser during ground shaking. We estimate that the seismically -induced settlement beneath the site will be less than Va inch in the event of the Maximum Considered Earthquake. Slope Stability The gently sloping topography at the site precludes both slope stability problems and the potential for lurching (earth movement at right angles to a cliff or steep slope during ground shaking). According to the City of Newport Beach (2006) and the CGS (2021b and 2017), the site is not in an Earthquake Induced Landslide Hazard Zone. There are no known landslides near the site, nor is the site in the path of any known or potential landslides. 7 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Tsunamis, Inundation, Seiches, Flooding and Subsidence The site is located 0.6 and 0.3 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean and Upper Newport Bay, respectively, at an approximate elevation of 82 feet AMSL. According to tsunami inundation maps published by the California Emergency Management Agency, California Geological Survey, and University of Southern California, the site is not within a tsunami inundation area (CEMA, CGS, and USC, 2009). Therefore, tsunamis (seismic sea waves) are not considered a significant hazard at the site. According to the County of Orange Safety Element (2012) and the California Office of Emergency of Services (CalOES, 2007), the site is not located within a potential inundation area for an earthquake -induced dam failure. Dams in California are continually monitored by various governmental agencies (such as the State of California Division of Safety of Darns and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) to guard against the threat of dam failure. Therefore, the potential for inundation at the site as a result of an earthquake -induced dam failure is considered low. The site is not located downslope of any large bodies of water that could adversely affect the site in the event of earthquake -induced seiches (wave oscillations in an enclosed or semi -enclosed body of water). The site is in Zone X, an area of minimal flooding potential [Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2008]. Zone X, as defined by FEMA, is an area outside of the 0.2% annual chance flood. Therefore, the potential for flooding at the site is considered low. el The site is not within an area of known subsidence associated with fluid withdrawal (groundwater or petroleum), peat oxidation, or hydrocompaction. Therefore, the potential for subsidence is considered low. • Oil Wells and Methane Gas The site is located within the limits of the active Newport Oil Field according to the California Geologic Energy Management Division's [CaIGEM, previously the California Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR)] Well Finder System (CaIGEM, 2021). The closest known oil exploration well is located approximately 900 feet west-northwest of the site. Per CaIGEM, the well is classified as "plugged." According to CaIGEM, the closest active well is located approximately 1,500 feet southwest of the site. Although considered a remote possibility, abandoned wells or other undocumented wells could be encountered during excavations. Any well encountered would need to be properly abandoned in accordance with the current requirements of CaIGEM. Methane gas is a colorless, odorless, and highly flammable by-product of the decay of organic material. It is often associated with oil fields where subsurface volatile gases naturally permeate to the surface. In an urban environment, methane gas can be introduced though a building's foundation or basement where it can concentrate into a hazardous level. According to the City of Newport Beach (2021), the site is in the vicinity of a Methane Gas Mitigation District (MGMD) (City Code Chapter 15.55). Verification with City of Newport Beach maps will be necessary to define MGMD boundaries near the site. An MGMD is an area designated by the City of Newport Beach to have the potential for high concentrations of methane gas. Any new project or improvement that increases an impervious ground surface by 300 square feet or more within an MGMD is required to have site -specific testing and mitigation measures abiding by the City Code. 8 • Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Radon Gas According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and CGS, the site is not located in an area of radon gas potential for indoor levels above 4.0 picocuries per liter (EPA, 2021; CGS, 2021c). Therefore, the potential for high levels of radon gas intrusion is considered low. 5.5 Geologic Conclusions Based on the available geologic data, active or potentially active faults with the potential for surface fault rupture are not known to be located directly beneath or projecting toward the project site. Therefore, the potential for surface rupture due to fault plane displacement propagating to the surface at the project site during the design life of the building is considered low. Although the project site could be subjected to strong ground shaking in the event of an earthquake, this hazard is common in Southern California and the effects of ground shaking can be mitigated by proper engineering design and construction in conformance with current building codes and engineering practices. The project site is relatively level and the absence of nearby slopes precludes slope stability hazards. The project site is located within the Newport Oil Field; therefore, a remote possibility exists of encountering undocumented wells during excavations. Any well encountered would need to be appropriately abandoned in accordance with the current requirements of CaIGEM. The project site is the vicinity of a City of Newport Beach Methane Gas Mitigation District. Therefore, there is the potential for subsurface methane at the project site and a site -specific methane investigation may be required. The potential for other geologic hazards such as liquefaction, seismically -induced settlement, tsunamis, seiches, flooding, radon gas, and subsidence affecting the site is considered low. 9 Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 General Records documenting the placement and compaction of the existing fill soils are not available. Therefore, the existing fill soils are not considered suitable for support of the shallow foundations, paving, or floor slabs on grade. The proposed addition may be supported on conventional spread/continuous footings if all existing fill soils (and the upper natural soils as necessary) are excavated to allow for the placement of at least 2 feet of properly compacted fill beneath footings. The floor slab may be supported on grade if all existing fill soils are excavated and replaced as properly compacted fill; all existing fill should also be excavated and replaced as properly compacted fill for support of new pavement or other exterior concrete walks and slabs on grade. Where adjacent footings are required at different elevations, the higher footing should be located below a 1:1 plane extending upward from the bottom of the lower footing to avoid imposing surcharge loads on the lower footing. New footing excavations should not extend below a 1 Va :1 (horizontal vertical) plane extending downward from adjacent existing footings. 6.2 Foundations Bearing Value Spread/continuous footings that are at least 2 feet wide, underlain by at least 2 feet of properly compacted fill (with no existing fill remaining between undisturbed natural soils and new properly compacted fill), and extending at least 2 feet below the lowest adjacent grade or floor level may be designed to impose a net dead - plus -live load pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot. The above bearing value may also be used for analyses of existing spread/continuous footings supporting the existing building to be renovated. A one-third increase may be used for wind or seismic loads. The recommended bearing value is a net value, and the weight of concrete in the footings may be taken as 50 pounds per cubic foot; the weight of soil backfill may be neglected when determining the downward loads. Settlement Based on an assumed maximum dead -plus -live column load of 100 kips, we estimate that the settlement of the proposed building addition, supported on spread/continuous footings in the manner recommended above, will be on the order of 1 inch or less, with differential settlements of less than 1/2 inch between adjacent columns. If additional Toads will be imposed on the existing foundations as a result of the proposed renovations, the additional settlement will depend on the additional loads imposed. We can evaluate the additional settlement if we are provided with the existing and proposed loads on the existing foudnations. Lateral Resistance Lateral loads may be resisted by soil friction and by the passive resistance of the soils. A coefficient of friction of 0.4 may be used between the footings and the floor slab and the supporting soils. The passive resistance of the soils may be assumed to be equal to the pressure developed by a fluid with a density of 250 pounds per cubic 10 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 foot. A one-third increase in the passive value may be used for wind or seismic loads. The frictional resistance and the passive resistance of the soils may be combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance. Ultimate Design Factors When considering an ultimate design approach, the recommended allowable design values provided in the previous sections may be multiplied by the factors shown in the table below: Design Item Ultimate Design Factor Footing Bearing Value Passive Resistance Coefficient of Friction 3.0 1.2 1.0 In no event, however, shall foundation sizes be less than those required for dead -plus -live loads when using the working stress design values. 6.3 Seismic Design Parameters We have determined the mapped seismic design parameters in accordance with the 2019 CBC and ASCE 7-16 Standard (ASCE, 2017) using the SEAOC/OSHPD Seismic Design Map Tool. The CBC Site Class was determined to be Site Class "D" based on the results of our explorations and a review of the local soil and geologic conditions. The mapped seismic parameters may be taken as presented in the following table: Parameter Mapped Value 5, . S1 Project Site Class F, F„ SMs = F,Ss (0.2 second period) SMa = F.,SI (1.0 second period) 0:849".. .._.._._._a SOS = 2/3 x Sr,,s(0.2 second period) IM . 0.92g*.,._.___._. ' 50� = 2/3 x SMi (1.0 second period) i 0.56g* 1.38g" 0.49' 1.0* 1.7* *See note in text below By: LT 4/7/2021 Checked: JF 4/20/2021 It should be noted that, based on the project Site Class and the SI value, per Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-16, a site - specific ground motion hazard analysis would be required unless Exception No. 2 under Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-16 is utilized; we have assumed that this exception will be utilized for this project. 6.4 Floor Slab Support If the subgrade is prepared as recommended in the following section on grading, new building floor slabs may be supported on grade. 11 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Construction activities and exposure to the environment can cause deterioration of the prepared subgrade. Therefore, we recommend that our field representative observe the condition of the final subgrade soils immediately prior to slab -on -grade construction, and, if necessary, perform further density and moisture content tests to determine the suitability of the final prepared subgrade. Where vinyl or other moisture -sensitive floor covering is planned, we recommend that the floor slab on grade in those areas be underlain by a capillary break consisting of a vapor -retarding membrane over a 4-inch-thick layer of gravel. A 2-inch-thick layer of sand should be placed between the gravel and the membrane to decrease the possibility of damage to the membrane. We suggest the following gradation for the gravel: Sieve Size Percent Passin. 3/4" 90-100 0-10 No.100 f 0-3 No.4 A low -slump concrete should be used to minimize possible curling of the slab. A 2-inch-thick layer of coarse sand should be placed over the vapor retarding membrane to reduce slab curling. If this sand bedding is used, care should be taken during the placement of the concrete to prevent displacement of the sand. The concrete slab should be allowed to cure properly before placing vinyl or other moisture -sensitive floor covering. 6.5 Paving To provide support for paving, the subgrade soils should be prepared as recommended in the following section on grading. Compaction of the subgrade, including trench backfills, to at least 90%, and achieving a firm, hard, and unyielding surface will be important for paving support. The preparation of the paving area subgrade should be performed immediately prior to placement of the base course. Proper drainage of the paved areas should be provided since this will reduce moisture infiltration into the subgrade and increase the life of the paving. To provide data for design of paving sections, the R-value of a sample of the upper soils collected during our current investigation was determined. The test result, which indicated an R-value of 56, is presented in the Appendix. Asphalt Concrete Paving The required paving and base thicknesses will depend on the expected wheel loads and volume of traffic (Traffic Index or TI). Assuming that the paving subgrade will consist of on -site or comparable soils compacted to at least 95% as recommented, the minimum recommended paving thicknesses are presented in the following table. Assumed Traffic Index Asphalt Concrete Base Course (Inches) (Inches) 4 and 5 (Automobile Parking and Driveways with Light Truck Traffic) 3 4 L.6 (Driveways with Heavy/Fire Truck Traffic)._____ 4 4V The asphalt paving sections were determined using the Caltrans design method. We can determine the recommended paving and base course thicknesses for other Traffic Indices if required. Careful inspection is 12 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 recommended to verify that the recommended thicknesses or greater are achieved, and that proper construction procedures are followed. Portland Cement Concrete Paving Portland cement concrete paving sections were determined in accordance with procedures developed by the Portland Cement Association. Concrete paving sections for a range of Traffic Indices are presented in the following table. We have assumed that the paving subgrade will consist of on -site or comparable soils compacted to at least 90% as recommented and that the portland cement concrete will have a compressive strength of at least 3,000 pounds per square inch. Assumed Traffic Index 1. Concrete Paving • (Inches) Base Course (Inches) 4 (Automobile Parking) 61 4 5 and 6 (Driveways with Light or Heavy/fire Truck Traffic) 7 The paving should be provided with joints at regular intervals no more than 15 feet in each direction. Load transfer devices, such as dowels or keys, are recommended at joints in the paving to reduce possible offsets. The paving sections in the above table have been developed based on the strength of unreinforced concrete. Steel reinforcing may be added to the paving to reduce cracking and to prolong the life of the paving. Base Course The base course should meet the specifications for Class 2 Aggregate Base as defined in Section 26 of the latest edition of the State of California, Department of Transportation, Standard Specifications. Alternatively, the base course could meet the specifications for untreated base as defined in Section 200-2 of the latest edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction. The base course should be compacted to at least 95%. 6.6 Stormwater Infiltration As previously stated, the upper natural alluvial soils are medium dense at present moisture content and may become weaker and more compressible when wet. In addition, the alluvial soils are underlain at relatively shallow depths (13 to 17 feet) by relatively impermeable sedimentary bedrock of the Monterey Formation consisting of silty claystone and clayey siltstone. Therefore, stormwater infiltration facilities could adversely impact the proposed addition and other settlement -sensitive project features through saturation of soils susceptible to hydroconsolidation. In addition, storwater infiltration could lead to a perched water condition at the relatively shallow bedrock contact and the overlying medium dense alluvial soils could become saturated and susceptible to liquefaction. Therefore, infiltration is not recommended as a means of disposal of on -site stormwater runoff. 6.7 Grading General Records documenting the placement and compaction of the existing fill soils are not available. Therefore, the existing fill soils are not considered suitable for support of the shallow foundations, paving, or floor slabs on grade. All existing fill soils (and the upper natural soils as necessary) should be excavated to allow for the placement of at least 2 feet of properly compacted fill beneath footings. The floor slab may be supported on 13 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 grade if all existing fill soils are excavated and replaced as properly compacted fill; all existing fill should also be excavated and replaced as properly compacted fill for support of new pavement or other exterior concrete walks and slabs on grade. The recommended excavation beneath foundations should extend laterally beyond foundations a distance equal to the depth of removal beneath the foundation; the excavation need not extend laterally beyond floor slabs, pavement, and other exterior concrete walks and slabs. The recommended excavation should not extend below a 11/2:1 (horizontal:vertical) plane extending downward from the bottom edge of existing footings. All required fill should be uniformly well compacted and observed and tested during placement. The on -site soils may be used in any required fill. Site Preparation After the site is cleared and the existing fill soils (and the upper natural soils as necessary) are excavated 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 (by either adding water or by drying out the soils), and rolled with heavy compaction equipment. 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 method of compaction. Good drainage of surface water should be provided by adequately sloping all surfaces. Such drainage will be important to minimize infiltration of water beneath floor slabs and pavement. Furthermore, heavy landscaping immediately adjacent to the building should be avoided. Excavations and Slopes Where excavations are deeper than about 4 feet, the sides of the excavations should be sloped back at 1:1 (horizontal:vertical) or shored for safety. Unshored excavations should not extend below a plane drawn at 11:1 (horizontal:vertical) extending downward from adjacent existing footings. We would be pleased to present data for design of shoring, if required. 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. Compaction All 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 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. 14 Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Trench backfill All required backfill should be mechanically compacted in layers; flooding should not be permitted. Proper compaction of backfill will be necessary to minimize settlement of the backfill and to reduce settlement of overlying slabs and paving. Backfill should be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum thy density obtainable by the ASTM Designation D1557 method of compaction. The on -site soils may be used in the compacted backfill. The exterior grades should be sloped to drain away from the foundations to prevent ponding of water. Some settlement of the backfill should be expected. Provisions should be made for some settlement of pavement and concrete walks supported on backfill; proper compaction of trench backfill will be important to minimize settlement of overlying pavement and concrete walks. Material of Fill The on -site soils, less any debris or organic matter, may 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 (at least 15% passing the No. 200 sieve) 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. 6.8 Geotechnical Observation The reworking of the upper soils and the compaction of all required fill should be observed and tested during placement by a representative of our firm. This representative should perform at (east the following duties: • Observe the clearing and grubbing operations for proper removal of all unsuitable materials. • Observe the exposed subgrade in areas to receive fill and in areas where excavation has resulted in the desired finished subgrade. The representative should also observe proofrolling and delineation of areas requiring overexcavation. • Evaluate the suitability of on -site and import soils for fill placement; collect and submit soil samples for required or recommended laboratory testing where necessary. • Observe the fill and backfill for uniformity during placement. • Test backfill for field density and compaction to determine the percentage of compaction achieved during backfill placement. • Observe and probe foundation materials to confirm that suitable bearing materials are present at the design foundation depths. The governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the project should be notified prior to commencement of grading so that the necessary grading permits can be obtained and arrangements can be made for required inspection(s). The contractor should be familiar with the inspection requirements of the reviewing agencies. 15 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 7.0 BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS The recommendations provided in this report are based upon our understanding of the described project information and on our interpretation of the data collected during our subsurface explorations. We have made our recommendations based upon experience with similar subsurface conditions under similar loading conditions. The recommendations apply to the specific project discussed in this report; therefore, any change in the structure configuration, Toads, location, or the site grades should be provided to us so that we can review our conclusions and recommendations and make any necessary modifications. The recommendations provided in this report are also based upon the assumption that the necessary geotechnical observations and testing during construction will be performed by representatives of our firm. The field observation services are considered a continuation of the geotechnical investigation and essential to verify that the actual soil conditions are as expected. This also provides for the procedure whereby the client can be advised of unexpected or changed conditions that would require modifications of our original recommendations. In addition, the presence of our representative at the site provides the client with an independent professional opinion regarding the geotechnically-related construction procedures. If another firm is retained for the geotechnical observation services, our professional responsibility and liability would be limited to the extent that we would not be the geotechnical engineer of record. Project labor agreements are often written in such a manner to preclude non -union firms from providing inspection and testing services during construction. If your project is considering being signatory to a project labor agreement or other union labor agreement, it would be beneficial for the labor agreement to include language that specifically excludes construction soils and materials inspection. Failure to exclude construction inspection from the project labor agreement would likely preclude the geotechnical engineer of record from continuing services during construction and limit construction inspection and testing to union firms. We would be pleased to meet with you to discuss the implications associated with project labor agreements. 16 Report of Geotechnical Investigation Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 2S, 2021 8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY California Department of Conservation, Geologic Energy Management Division (CaIGEM), 2020, CaIGEM Well Finder, <https://www.conservation.ca.gov/calgem/Pages/WellFinder.aspx>, accessed April 20, 2021. California Department of Water Resources (DWR), 2003, "California's Groundwater," Bulletin 118, Update 2003. California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1997, "Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Anaheim and Newport Beach 7.5-Minute Quadrangles, Orange County, California', Seismic Hazard Zone Report 03, updated 2006. California Emergency Management Agency, California Geological Survey, and University of Southern California CEMA, CGS, and USC,) 2009, 'Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning," State of California -County of Orange, Newport Beach Quadrangle, March 15, 2009. California Geological Survey (CGS), 2021a, EQ Zapp: California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application, accessed April 15, 2021, <https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/geohazards/eq-zapp>. California Geological Survey (CGS), 2021b, "Landslide Inventory (Beta)," Online database, <http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Isi/>, Accessed April 3, 2021. California Geological Survey (CGS), 2021c, "Indoor Radon Potential," Online Map, <https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/radon/>, Accessed April 20, 2021. California Geological Survey (CGS), 2018, "Earthquake Fault Zones, A Guide for Government Agencies, Property Owners/Developers, and Geoscience Practitioners for Assessing Fault Rupture Hazards in California," Special Publication 42, Revised 2018. California Geological Survey (CGS), 2017, Seismic Hazard Zones Newport Beach 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation, Newport Beach Quadrangle, Revised Official Map, Includes Seismic Hazard Zones Official Map released April 17, 1997 and April 15, 1998; Earthquake Fault Zones Official Map released July 1, 1986. California Geological Survey (CGS), 2008, "Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California," Special Publication 117A. California Office of Emergency Services (CaIOES), 2007, Dam Inundation Maps, vector spatial data. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2021, Maps of Radon Zones EPA website for California, <https://www.epa.gov/radon/find- information -about -local -radon -zones -and -state -contact -information>, accessed April 20, 2021. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2008, Flood Insurance Rate Map, Map Number 06059CO2861, <http://msc.fema.gov> . MACTEC, 2003, "Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Addition to James Irvine Surgery Center, Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian, Newport Beach, California," Project No. 4953-03-0901, dated April 4, 2003. 17 Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Morton, D.M. and Miller, F.K., 2006, Geologic map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30' x 60' quadrangles, California: U.S. Geological Survey, Open -File Report OF-2006-1217, scale 1:100,000. Morton, P.K., and Miller, R.V., 1981, Geologic map of Orange County, California, showing mines and mineral deposits: California Division of Mines and Geology, Bulletin 204, scale 1:48,000. Newport Beach, City of, 2021, Charter and Municipal Code, < https://newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/city-clerk/city-charter-and-municipal-code>, accessed April 20, 2021. Newport Beach, City of, 2006, "City of Newport Beach General Plan," adopted July 26, 2006. Orange, County of, 2012, "County of Orange General Plan," updated 2012. U.S. Geological Survey and California Geological Survey (USGS-CGS), 2020, Quaternary Fault and Fold Database for the United States, accessed 01-01-21, data timestamp 10-19-2020, <https://www.usgs.gov/natural- hazards/earthquake-hazards/faults>. Vedder, J.G., 1975, Revised geologic map of the San Joaquin Hills - San Juan Capistrano area, Orange County, California: U.S. Geological Survey, Open -File Report OF-75-552, scale 1:24,000. Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP), 2019, Fault Database Tools, <http://www.wgcep.org/tools-fault_db> Yerkes, R. F., McCulloch, T. H., Schoellhamer, J.E., and Vedder, J. G., 1965, "Geology of the Los Angeles Basin -An Introduction," U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 420-A. 18 Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Figure 1 Site Vicinity Map • E.‘FilenWodM 117.56.40'W 117.58'2c'W 117.560W 117.5540'W 117'55'20 "W 1171510'W 117.51.10W 117.54'20'W Base USGS Iopograpnc mops of Ino Newport Bee01 and Newport Basal OE Sown 7.5•minute Quadrangles. 2018. 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 Feet 0 0.2 0.4 0.8 Miles wood. weed en•Yem.M a Ineaslmcwo Salueocs. Ina. 0001 RKkanWWo Read Lea AngMa, CWorr4 9004e T )2)ee9s300 waodpK,rnm w SITE VICINITY MAP N s LAT. 33.82554 LON: .117.93004 SCALE: 1.24.000 DRAWN: PER CHECK RM DATE: 4720Roz, Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive Newport Beach, California FIGURE: 1 PROJECT: 4953-20-0782 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Figure 2 Plot Plan • Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Appendix A CURRENT FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TEST RESULTS • Report of Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25. 2021 Appendix A Current Field Explorations and Laboratory Test Results Current Field Explorations The soil conditions beneath the site were explored by drilling two borings to depths of about 25 feet below the existing grade.The borings were drilled using 8-inch-diameter hollow stem auger -type drilling equipment. The locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2. The soils encountered were logged by our field technician, and undisturbed and bulk samples were obtained for laboratory inspection and testing. The logs of the borings are presented on Figures A-1.1 through 1.2; the depths at which undisturbed samples were obtained are indicated to the left of the boring logs. The number of blows required to drive the Crandall sampler 12 inches using a 140-pound automatic hammer falling 30 inches is indicated on the logs. The soils are classified in the accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System described on Figure A-2. Current Laboratory Test Results Laboratory tests were performed on selected samples obtained from the borings to aid in the classification of the soils and to evaluate their engineering properties. The field moisture content and dry density of the soils encountered were determined by performing tests on the undisturbed samples. The results of the tests are presented to the left of the boring logs. Tests to determine the percentage of fines (material passing through a -200 sieve) in selected samples were performed. The results of these tests are presented on the boring logs. Direct shear tests were performed on selected undisturbed samples to determine the strength of the soils. The tests were performed after soaking to near -saturated moisture content and at various surcharge pressures. The testing procedure was in general accordance with ASTM Designation D3080. The results of the tests are presented on Figure A-3, Direct Shear Test Data. Confined consolidation testing was performed on two undisturbed samples to determine the compressibility of the soils. Water was added to the samples during the tests to illustrate the effect of moisture on the compressibility. The testing procedures were in general accordance with ASTM Designation D2435. The results of the tests are presented on Figure A-4, Consolidation Test Data. To provide information for paving design, a stabilometer test ("R" value test) was performed on two samples of the upper soils. The results of the test are presented on Figure A-5.1 and 5.2, R-Value Test Data. Soil corrosivity tests were performed on samples of the on -site soils. The results of the tests are presented on Figure A-6. • HI ISDII. CHANDAZ LL:VATIONI C:IUSERSUIMMY.FRANCISCOIDESKTOPFLIIlRARY AMF.CFW 201/I (?I.GLH P:'4 S3 (iI;OTECH12ONI.PROR2011TR2 ONE I IOAG LEADERSI IIP CIeNTEMOS F.NGC7RI.IFII LD NOTFS49 3--'_1dg82 LOOS. PJ 5/2 • • Proposed OneHoag LeadershipCenter Hoag Memorial Hospital Preshvterian One Hoag Drive, Newport Beach, California TI IIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT TILE EXPLORATION LOCATION. LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE OF BORING LOCATION SIIOWN ON LOGS ARE APPROXIMATE; REFER TO PLOT PLAN FOR MORE ACCURATE LOCATION INFORMATION. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT. OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTIIFR TIMES MAY DIFFER. INTERFACES BETWEEN STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE. TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL. 4. U $ c N I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I ELEVATION (ft) i 1 1 C 1: 1 1 . , , , 1 1 1 1 o , , , 1 1 1 a , , , , 1 1 1 o , , t , 1 1 I 1 u , _ , . 1: 1 s v. I . , . 1 1 1 , DEPTH (ft) N w . o — « « oo .n b « MOISTURE (%of drywt.) .� Ino _ a DRY DENSITY (PC() A ,, _ BLOW COUNT" (blows/ft) SAMPLE' LOC. 1 1 l.laaa:I 1;1•:I;l:I;1; :1;I:h.ilall:jall:ja l,l •.o❖.•. """ 1111=1 I=I:I;j;j;I=I:I: 1= I I I I I •. (.1 Po"oa o �,3 �w C�a. 6. °� g� „qi r 3 rnr� g a43; g. a oB. co 7 v, 3+ o '° °9 v �•r a'. -I m 7�. m q HN — (LA rii; r 8' § yy O PW cm 93 w '' 0, a s s Q W S N D• '7 O S( o ',0, tR = 2 C yti v— .� . r ri �% .� g (rta C) d' J fD N Cl 1'= F S g�R �'La ° �t s 3 F 4 m a. R oy G �'4 a a o 7_' , 20 i - H n P d 3 N £ Z _ S O r N =.� S .^ j P o_ GO o 3 9 p3g 3 a , S ,_ ,. In n. • o Q i' n C • tp c el /,gyp c d P. . a. BORING 1 DRILLED: March 25.2021 'MENT USED: Hollow Stem Auger DIAMETER (in.): 8 ATION (IIJ: 82** LOG OF BORING Project: 4953-20-0782 Figure: A-1.1 THIS RECORD IS A REASONA FILE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT TI IE EXPLORATION LOCATION. LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE OF BORING LOCATION SHOWN ON LOOS ARE APPROXIMATE REFER TO PLOT PLAN FOR MORE ACCURATE LOCATION INFORMATION. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER. INTERFACES BETWEEN STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE. TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL ELEVATION (ft) DEPTH (ft) MOISTURE (% of dry wt.) DRY DENSITY (Pa) BLOW COUNT* (blowsift) SAMPLE LOC. BORING 2 DATE DRILLED: March 25, 2021 EQUIPMENT USED: Hollow Stem Auger HOLE DIAMETER (in.): 8 ELEVATION (4.): 81 *• SO ll — - ••❖:•• • + :::•::: .❖:$ ••• •' 4-inch thick Asphalt Concrete over 3-inch thick Base Course FILL - SILTY SAND - moist, light brown. fine gained 4-inch thick slurry g Fine to medium grained Dark gray with some organic odor •" :: SM TERRACE DEPOSITS ' SILTY SAND - medium dense, moist. light brown, fine to medium 75— — 5 — 9.8 9.5 124 119 26 21 grained 7U— 10 6.7 97 16 ',;: .; SP. SM POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT- loose, moist, light brown, fine to medium grained, (7% Passing No. 200 Sieve) -. 15 10.7 107 25 • SM SILTY SAND - medium dense. moist, light brown, fine to medium grained, some clay 65— — 10 7 1 15 21 Thin faycr of Poorly Graded Sand with Silt, reddish brown, fine to mcdiun grained, — _ = trace claystone fragments JNONTEREY FORMATION 29.0 93 15 F• -- —4 CLAYSTONE - moist, reddish brown, interbedded with some fine sand Some very fine sand 60 — 20 30.4 90 12- SILTSTONE - moist, light brown 55-- — 25 - END OF BORING AT 25 FEET Notes: Hand augcred upper 5 feet to avoid damage to utilities. Groundwater was not encountered. Bonng was backfillal with soil cuttings, tamped. and patched with asphalt concrete. 50 — — 30 45 — — 35 - 40 Field Tech: AR Prepared By: !F Checked By: GA/RM Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Hoag Memorial Hospital LeadershipCotter One Hoag Drive, Newport Beach, California �� O LOG OF BORING Project: 4953-20-0782 Figure: A-1.2 • MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP SYMBOLS TYPICAL NAMES Undisturbed Sample Auger Cuttings COARSE GRAINED SOILS (Marc than 50% of material is LARGER than No. 200 sieve sizc) GRAVELS (More than 50% of coarse fraction is LARGER than the No. 4 sieve size) CLEAN r OP 111 j / GW Well graded gravels.pivot • sand mixtures, Moor no lines. Split Spoon Sample � Bulk Sample GRAVELS (Little or no fines) ,Lt ° Cy ) Gp `< Poorly graded gravels or grave - sand mixtures. little or no lines. Rock Corc Crandall Sampler GRAVELS WITH FINES a ° c ' GM < Silty gravels. gravel - sand - silt mixtures. Dilatomcter Modified Califomia Sampler Packer O No Recovery (Appreciable amount of fines) GC Clayey gravels. gravel • sand - day nt• ixlures. SANDS (More than 50% of coarse fraction is SMALLER than the No. 4 Sieve Sire) CLEAN : ':':' ••" '•" SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands. little or no fines. Water Table at time of drilling Z Water Table after drilling SANDS Link or no fines ( ) , ' SP poorly graded sands or gravelly sands. little or no fines. SANDS WITH FINES • • • ; SM • Silty sands. sand - silt mixtures (Appreciable amount of fines) �� j/� SC Clayey sands. sand - clay mixtures. FINE GRAINED SOI LS (More than 50% of material is SMALLER than No. 200 sieve size) ML Inorganic silis and very line sands. rock flour. silty of clayey fine sands or clayey w pIJSl1C1(1 Correlation of Penetration Resistance with Relative Densityand Consistency SILTS AND CLAYS (Liquid limit LESS than 50) '� / CL norgantc ays o ow to tum p asuc(`Tk uy, — gravelly days, sandy clays. silty clays. ken clays. SAND & GRAVEL SILT & CLAY No. of Blows Relative Density No. of Blows Consistency __ = - r OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low p y 0 - 4 Very Loose 0 - I Vcry Soft 5 - 10 Loose 2 - 4 Soft 11 - 30 Medium Dense 5 - 8 Medium Stiff SILTS AND CLAYS MH Inorganic silts. micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils. dusk sins. 31 - 50 Dense 9 - 15 Stiff (Liquid limit GREATER than 50) pi CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity. fat clays Over 50 Very Dense 16 - 30 Very Stiff Over 30 Hard SANDSTONE Reference; The Unified Soil Classification System, Corps of Engineers, BEDROCK = SILTSTONE• A , i) % =,' GRANITE U.S. Army Technical Memorandum No. 3-357, Vol. I , March, 1953 (Revised April, 1960) BOUNDARY CLASSIFICATIONS: Soils possessing characteristics of two groups are designtated by KEY DESCRIPTIONS TO SYMBOLS AND cotnbinations of group symbols. SAND GRAVEL WO o SILT OR CLAY Finc Medium Coarse Fine Coarse Cobbles Boulders No.200 Nu.40 No 10 No.4 3/4" 3" 12" U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE Figure A-2 1 0 g 1000 cu ra Q' 2000 0 tt3 3000 C7 4000 Q U c4 cA 5000 6000 0 1000 SHEAR S"IRENG"I'I I in founds per Syuarc root 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 IaT/o 2a5' 0 0 c 2@to s Boring Designation Depth (ft.) and iris l3'h Sample I a T/o 2 n,5'/. 0 2aIO% 0 0 I@I3'h 0 0 o Samples soaked to a moisture content near saturation -Natural Soil Bedrock Prepared/Date: JF 4/15/2021 Checked/Date: GA 4/19/2021 Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center I Ioag Metnorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive, Newport Beach, California wood. DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA Project No. 4953-20-0782 Figure A-3 0.00 0.02 LLB 0. 0.04 t.4 U Z Z 0.06 Z O Q j 0.08 O to Z 0 0.10 0.12 LOAD IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 2 0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 —" "—t-__`_ — L Boring 2@5%' SAND / SILTY �� • Boring SILTY I a 7'/' SAND Note: Water added to samples after consolidation under a load of 18 kips per square foot. Prepared/Date: JF 4/16/2021 Checked/Date: GA 4/19/2021 Proposed One I loag Leadership Center Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive, Newport Beach, California wood. CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA Project No.: 4953-20-0782 Figure A-4 LM LaBelle Marvin PROJECT No. DATF: R - VALUE DATA SHEET 47060 4/12/2021 BORING NO. B -1 @ 3'-8' Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center P.N. 4953-20-0782.01.02 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION: Brown Fill / SM '....„ �; ''c• . ..:- -VA411E;11EStINGIDAT4.1c. fgr:1401� ., f ,, SPECIMEN ID v a b c Mold ID Number 1 2 3 Water added, grams 50 39 33 Initial Test Water, % 9.0 8.0 7.5 Compact Gage Pressure,psi 80 280 350 Exudation Pressure, psi 170 410 751 Height Sample, Inches 2.55 2.50 2.48 Gross Weight Mold, grams 3111 3099 3099 Tare Weight Mold, grams 1954 1946 1958 Sample Wet Weight, grams 1157 1153 1141 Expansion, Inches x 10exp-4 0 0 10 Stability 2,000 Ibs (160psi) 33 / 61 19 / 34 17 / 26 Turns Displacement 4.97 4.19 3.87 R-Value Uncorrected 45 69 77 R-Value Corrected 45 69 77 Dry Density, pcf 126,1 129.4 129.7 DESIGN CALCULATION DATA Traffic Index Assumed: 4.0 4.0 4.0 G.E. by Stability 0.56 0.32 0.24 G. E. by Expansion 0.00 0.00 0.33 Equilibrium R-Value 61 by EXUDATION Examined ` & Checked: 4 /12/ 21 FESSlp4,�( REMARKS: F'4, . �q'P `c4- c(;)I et• ?�rry Gf = 1.25 0.0% Retained on the 3/4" Sieve. \ � Or 4659 �� OF MO The data above is based upon processing and testing samples as received from the field. Test procedures in accordance with latest revisions to Department of Transportation, State of California, Materials & Research Test Method No. 301. LaBelle Marvin, tnc. 12700 South Grand Avenue I Santa Ana, CA 927051714-514-3565 Figure A 5.1 L LaBelle Marvin R-VALUE GRAPHICAL PRESENTATION PROJECT NO. 47050 DATE: 4 /12/ 21 BORING NO. B -1 @ 31-8' REMARKS: Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center P.N. 49 53-20-0782.01.02 YCOVER:THICKNESIB, tEXUDATION;v5:CoN111 TICKNES'BYrEXPANSIbN COVER THICKNESS BY EXUDATION, FT. 600 10A 9.0 6.0 7.0 60 5.0 4,0 3.0 1.0 L0 0.0 700 600 500 400 Sao 200 100 0 - • 1 ' - " • :: t^f 1 . :. .^.tom --I�!"r^ . : _ : 1 Cam .. 4.... I F4-6. _I . 4^ ! .. .. L acr i[J� emuC ' .. ..�i-F....® fie ylT . ` ' . Y:=I:i .ice .....i .:. 1::::!. MIi'^sz'^7pCj37 w'� .,NsWfflkil .t:=.....-- _.----== ;-= tvg,,•„1M riiii 4 �� M �-^o —. -' ==== 3 ;__ •Ae: MEM ---_ G66�� G� WYifYtiYYR��I i •-. - • •. 't'.'- 4___`i i 00 L0 30 30 4.0 5C 60 70 COVER THICKNESS BY EXPANSION, T. fl EXUD. Tvs. Expan.' •R•VALUEvs- EXUO. PRES. 8.0 IOC 90 so 70 60 S0 40 30 20 10 0 COMPACTOR PRESSURE. LBS. 350 I • '1--I— 69 75 35 MOISTURE (%1 AT FABRICAITON 95 COVER THICKNESS BT E XPANSION/EXUOATION, FT. 10.0 9.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 a.o 1.0 20 1.0 0.0 COVER.~T;HICKNESSWMOIST.URE.%' • I 1 �--,--• , . I I , AS 7.5 MOISTURE I') 85 A EXPANSION El EXUDATION 95 F32 • • Table 1 - Laboratory Tests on Soil Samples WOOD, PLC Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Your #4953200782.01.02, HDR Lab #21-0288LAB 8-Apr-21 Sample ID YKM" �tA 1 @ 3-8'as. ��r ruts !J.v JA�Y/_�cl varL�,tl3 i q�c3� ,S4�f:i� CA 1� •G�" it�ii7..N °�`�li`-u dRAagT4•:AtmiSA��•' -'l.�''N�'.�7.3�e'es:•itabw^lJ.:?�.f+��s�a'=./rtltt'tilsJwW�sRz'K�s'f4�:C:.4sA+l.F��:vY.:.`1Z8�?.'li�utlN Resistivity Units as -received ohm -cm 20,800 saturated ohm -cm 2,920 pH 8.7 Electrical Conductivity mS/cm 0.16 Chemical Analyses Cations calcium Ca2' mg/kg 36 magnesium Mg2' mg/kg 4.1 sodium Na" mg/kg 57 potassium K1a mg/kg 6.9 ammonium NH41- mg/kg ND Anions carbonate C032- mg/kg 47 bicarbonate HC031• mg/kg 61 Fluoride F'- mg/kg 3.8 chloride CO- mg/kg 29 sulfate SO4`- mg/kg 1,152 nitrate NO31' mg/kg 13 phosphate PO4.4. mg/kg 7.6 Other Tests sulfide S2• qual na Redox mV na MaS'.,..'." Lir arWi.wW 'F tz°.f rtrArr$'Yr..`!ff"t! ;i+3C giagl.q:O ii "ZreTa: Resistivity per ASTM GI a7, pH per ASTM G51, Cations per ASTM 06919, Anions per ASTM 04327, and Alkalinity per APHA 2320-B. Electrical conductivity in millisiemenstcm and chemical analyses were made on a 1'5 soil -to -water extract. mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram (parts per million) of dry soil. Redox = oxidabon-reduction potential in millivolts NO = not detected na = not analyzed 431 West Baseline Road • Claremont, CA 91711 Phone: 909.962.5485 • Fax: 909.626.3316 Figure A-6 Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Project 4953-20-0782 May 25, 2021 Appendix B PRIOR PERTINENT FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TEST RESULTS • %W KANfinI .V.Imi z xl Hoag Memorial Medical Center zi Torrance. California 100 — 91S- 911— S5- 5 IS rt1 8.7 Z C 117 35 :n BORING 1 DATE DRILLED: March 20. 2003 EQUIPMENT USED: Hand Auger. HOLE DIAMETER lin.t: h ELE\ ATION: 101.8 SM CL FILL - SILTY SAND. It1u e, moist. brown. with u:me Clay. some gravel and asphalt and concrete pieces Cl_ • SANDY CLAY - medium stilt. moist. light brown. line sand END OF BORING AT 5.5' Notes: Water not encountered. Boring hacktilled with soil cuttings and tamped. " Number of blows required iu drive the Crandal sampler 12 inches using a 50 pound hammer falling 12 incites. " Elevations based on benchmark shown on Figure 2. Site Plan. MACTEC Field Tech: GMC/AR Prepared By: JA Checked By: LOG OF BORING ProjecC 4953413-0431 Figure: A-I.I TI II S KIiCI nRII IS A REAM INAKIk INTI-:RI'NF;TATION t 11: St. 'HAIR Ci)N'I.»TIONS AT TIIE EXPLORATION 1.(1('A.114IN. SIABSUKI'ACH CON! I ['IONS AT ()11R I.n(:A 1'I(JN.S AND A'1't)I111;IC TIMES MAY 1111TER. I,N ERFA(:I:S i1ETWEEN STRATA ARE APPKOXI\1A1 E. TRANSITIONS RETWEIiN STRATA N1A1' HE (.7RAF 1I. I.. BORING 2 DATE DRILLED: March 26. 2003 EQUIPMENT USED: Hand Augers HOLE DIAMETER (tn.: 6 ELEVATION: 101 2 " =; ;a n 'v, = e z T.::x 3 Y �,, C U 3 3 r Q `-' = J _ i < ' - WO - - - 12.1 118 35 .: *4%4, Wei O'�'� i�i�i ..i:i:i +.. .••.Vi .:O.:i SM FILL - SILTY SARI) - loose. moist. liehl brown. with s�+ni asphalt and Krick CL - SANDY CLAY -medium soft', moist, light hmwn. fine scud END OF BORING AT 5.0. Notes: Water not encountered. Boring bud:filled with soil cuttings and tamped. I,ic1d Tech: CiM(:/Ak Prepared Hy: IA Checked I3y: / CI, _ 5 — In r — IS — _n Hoag Memorial Medical Center Torrance. California OMACTEC LOG O.F BORING Prnicn:495z-03-u,>;I Figure: .A-1.2 Li: e G • z _ - C -r BORING 3 DATE DRILLED: March 26. 2003 EQUIPMENT USED: Hand Augers MULE DIAMETER tin.): 6 ELE\ ATION: 99.9 ^" _ j -' _ ::J C w - D T u � ^, = 2 ?- _ Z� ct k - . z.__ n-- _ ) .. 3 . r^. SAMPLE 1.0C. v. .4 +• • • SM FILL - SILTY SAND - loose. 'Horst. light brown. with some Clay. line. with some z - •:•:.: fine gravel and concrete l ♦•••.+. zr L' t- _ ❖.�._ • ..41... •Poi = 13 rat. AI. u • yyy x _ p+.+.S ✓, r- - • ••• a+ . �, v END OF BORING AT 4.33' `: < 9C-- Notes: Water not encountered. Unable to advane due 10 asphlt obstructions. -Boring hakIiilled with soil cuttings and II le ti - I„ U y V -. r 90- . 1n ... V zz , - ti � x 4y x O. %.. r G l- - J L s F z= fz ` v= r`• IZ Bit 15 ti l L v l 7 lilti -rr Field Tech: GMC/Ak Prepared By: JA Checked I3y: Hoag Memorial Medical Center . MACTEC I LOG OF BORING Torrance California ' ; Project: 4951.03.09m Figure: A-1.3 I LI (;1 1 [,AN'_('R .N I;f17 ARAM BORING 4 DATE DRILLED: March 26. 2003 EQUIPMENT USED: Hand Augers HOLE DIAMETER tins. h ELEVATION: 99.1 " r r SM FILL - SILTY SAND- lose. moist. brown. some _•raeat and asphalt ENI) OF BORING AT?' Notes: Unable to advance due co possible uti?itics in area. Boring hac Willed with soil cuttings and tamped. Field Tech: GMCJAR Prepared By: JA Checked Hy: Hoag \lemorial Medical Center Torrance. California MACT EC I LOG OF BORING Prnic,.-t: 4 53.0t.trial Figure: A-1.4 5t —. s x ' i—s BORING 5 DATE DRILLED: March 26. 2003 EQUIPMENT USED: Hand .augers HOLE DIAMETER tin.): 6 ELEVATION: 99.3 " z _. — — M01S't'URE f`% ol(try M.) DRY DFNSFI'Y 1pd ) IBI.C)W COUNT* hkiws/ll) SAMPLE LOC. z s SM FILL • SILTY SAND • loose. moist. light brow n. with gravel =r 2 z< - - A little concrete and gravel round ,,, CL CL - SANDY CLAY • light Mmwn. medium star' L v < -Z Y :._ = F 1 z 45 ENL) OF BORING AT 3.5' 9. Notes: water not encountered. Roane hackfilled with .nil cuttings and tamped. YL z F C <F x < r 1 Y. = . t- �x i � V.. Z p. t—x t- _ v: r j .7 v• '- I Y v u .. v r V. Y Z 2 1< :- x = Y i y - L •- _.1. - - • s a : 85— nz r < r esf < a — 15 J.- = Z x< V z L NO _u Field Tech: GMCJAk Prepared By: JA Checked By: I1oag Memorial !Medical Center Torrance. California d `MACTEC LOG OF BORING Protect: 4953413.09M Figure.. A-1.5 • • MAJOR DIVISIONS (rRUIIP SYMI3OE..S TYPICAL NAMES Undisturbed Sample Auger Cuttings CI.I{AN `. / G W 14'cII graded gtnnels, gravel - sand mixtures. little or nu lines. Split Spoon Sample p p p > C Bulk Sample p GRAVIiLS Ihan 511%of GRAVELS,Lt 11 .iule in no lines) . ) < GP Po rly graded gravels tN grave' .. sandtNbire nlixulres, illikor On lines. Rock Core Crandall Sampler COARSE coarse fraction is I .AR( it l( Ihan the No. No. 4 sieve site) GRAVELS . , WI I Il FINES D co Silty gravels. gravel - sand - sib mixtures. Dilalnnleter •" Pressure Meter (GRA I NEi1) SOILS (Appleciahk amount of linest (IC Clay'cy gravels. gravel - sand - clay mi. uu Packern 0 NR Recovery ry rhlore Ihan c+t%or material is i,r\R(iliR dneaNn C.'1.h.AN S W Well gr nkd sands, gravelly sands, lisle or no fines. V.Water Table al time ol'driflin .Y.Water Table oiler 24 hours 200sieve sire) SANDS IMnrc than 511a of coarse Iraklion is SANDS Witte or no lines) sp Manly gr.•nkd sands or gravelly sands. IInIC IN no I1ncs. Sh1,11.I.1. i than, the NO 4 Sieve Si,cl SANDS WITH FINES S Ad Silty sands, sand - sill n,ixlnres (Appreciable amount of lines) / SC Clayey sands, sand - clay mixtures. MI.. Inorganic sills and very Tine sands, nna-- flour, silly of clayey fine sands nw clayey and with sli Ph lasricil '. C orrelallott of Penetration Resistance With senate and Consistencysills y FINE SII:I-S ANI) CLAYS (Liquid limit LI°55 than sn! 1 / Cl.. Inorganic Pays IA Into to met min plasticity, gravelly clays. sands clays. silty days. lean clays. SAND & GRAVEI. SILT & CLAY No. of Blows Rclalivc Density No. of Blows Consistency_ GRAINED SON S = - _ l)1. t)rganiesiltsnnrtdNganicsiltydaysoflow pl.•nricity 0-4 Very Loose 0 - I Very Soft 5 - 10 Lose 2 - 4 Soft 1htnlc than 5II"e OP material is ShtA'.t.rk than MI 1 Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous line sandy or silly wells, elastic silts. l I -fit) Firm 5 - 8 Firm 1 I - 30 Very Firm 9 - 15 Stiff No. 200 sieve sirei SII.1-S AND CLAYS 11.iqutd haul till! :\'I F.k than cut CI I Inorganic clays oI Itigl, plasticity, tat clays 31 - 50 Dense 16 - 30 Very Stiff Over 50 Very Dense Over 31 I lard .,.. 1.........A. t-lti OH 1 tganic clays of mcdiun! to high plasticity. organic silts. I'l IGI E LY ORGANIC SOII.S ; , , PT Peal and oilier highly organic sins. BOUNDARY CLASSIFICATIONS: Soils possessing charac crislics of two groups are designated by combinations of group symbols. KEY TO SYM BOLS AND DESCRI I'TIONS - SAND GRAVEL Cobbles Boulders slur OR CLAY Farr Medium Coarse Fine ('rr.•nrsc No.21111 No •0/ No 10 NE .4 1!4" 3" 12" U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE Reference: The Unified Soil Classification System, Corps of Engineers, U.S. Artny Technical Memorandum No. 3-357, Vol. I, March. 1953 (Revised April. 1960) LAW LAWGIBB Group Member FIGURE A-2 SURCHARGE PRESSURE in Pounds per Square Foot 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 SHEAR STRENGTH in Pounds per Square Foot 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 \ • • 82@4.5 0 • • \ • • \ B2@4.5 O VALUES USED IN ANALYSES • • • BORING NUMBER & SAMPLE DEPTH (FT.) \ \ • • • KEY: Samples tested after soaking to a rnoist.r•e content near saturation Natural soils DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA (PEAK VALUES) MACTEC FIGURE A - 3.1 • • • BORING NUMBER AND SAMPLE DEPTH: SOIL TYPE: CONFINING PRESSURE: (Ibs./sq.ft.) 5 at 2 1/2' SILTY CLAY 144 INITIAL MOISTURE CONTENT: 8.0 (% of dry wt.) FINAL MOISTURE CONTENT: 15.8 (% of dry wt.) DRY DENSITY: (Ibs.lcu.ft.) EXPANSION INDEX 117.7 • 9 TEST METHOD: ASTM Designation D4829-88 EXPANSION INDEX TEST DATA MACTEC FIGURE A - 6 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) One Hoag Leadership Center Attachment F — Reference Maps HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Attachment F North OC Priority WQMP Template August 17 2011 Page 36 o a • Hoag Hospilal Newport • B2oCh Emig any Room . Hoag I IOsnfivr, (HI �I`:.�nr nnri Mlirmry v • • 1 Hoag Dr. Newport Beath, CA 92663, USA Vtlei :: WE: .+,yp� .2T_6 L?: Hoag Hospiw. Newport Beach LEGEND- eieUQN.MCIa FAILS X I Jeffrey fd. Celan k lead 'i• i R Vascular Institule '.tl LUST Clearrop Sites • nLMOVE _ - `�' D gamut) P wgROAM!n Sitc9 - ROAM! Y ■ MilitwryCleanup Sites • Ia Mo I: i ' ■ Mi tory Privatized Sc-asall Maa: I • ■MlUtmy USI Shea- HI MON: . Alf:O •1 CI0.0V/p1M. ACTIVE MAP COVERAGES: I ` • MiUlaiy Baleen - 0 IS - ROAM: Y Sacs Shown on Map. •O Total Sic9 V U Open Sites 00 Closed sus ♦a son w/W1W Quaky Toots *HomeI Li' Thomhnai ,f, Download Data Tools • 0 Contact US uJ ;:, tcflite Nlgh1 Mode SITE SPECIFIC DATA PROJECT NUMBER 1.3344 PROJECT NAME ONE HOAG LEADERSHIP CENTER PROJECT LOCATION NEWPORT BEACH, CA STRUCTURE ID ---- TREATMENT REQUIRED VOLUME BASED (CF) FLOW BASED (CFS) N/A 0.068 TREATMENT HGL AVAILABLE (FT) N/K PEAK BYPASS REQUIRED (CFS) — IF APPLICABLE TBD PIPE DATA I.E. MATERIAL DIAMETER INLET PIPE 1 77.18 PVC 6" INLET PIPE 2 N/A N/A N/A OUTLET PIPE 75.68 PVC 15" PRETREATMENT BIOFILIR4T7ON DISCHARGE RIM ELEVATION SEE ELEVATION VIEW SURFACE LOAD PEDESTRIAN N/A PEDESTRIAN FRAME & COVER 24" X 42" OPEN PLANTER N/A WE7LANDMEDL4 VOLUME (CY) 2.16 ORIFICE SIZE (DIA, INCHES) 01.22" NOTES: PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. INSTALLATION NOTES 1. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE ALL LABOR, EQUIPMENT, MATERIALS AND INCIDENTALS REQUIRED TO OFFLOAD AND INSTALL THE SYSTEM AND APPURTENANCES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS DRAWING AND THE MANUFACTURERS' SPECIFICATIONS, UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED IN MANUFACTURERS CONTRACT. 2. UNIT MUST BE INSTALLED ON LEVEL BASE. MANUFACTURER RECOMMENDS A MINIMUM 6" LEVEL ROCK BASE UNLESS SPECIFIED BY THE PROJECT ENGINEER. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING PROJECT ENGINEERS RECOMMENDED BASE SPECIFICATIONS. 4. CONTRACTOR TO SUPPLY AND INSTALL ALL EXTERNAL CONNECTING PIPES. ALL PIPES MUST 8E FLUSH WITH INSIDE SURFACE OF CONCRLIL (PIPES CANNOT INTRUDE BEYOND FLUSH). INVERT OF OUTFLOW PIPE MUST BE FLUSH WITH DISCHARGE CHAMBER FLOOR. ALL PIPES SHALL BE SEALED WATERTIGHT PER MANUFACTURER'S STANDARD CONNECTION DETAIL. 5. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLATION OF ALL PIPES, RISERS, MANHOLES, AND HATCHES. CONTRACTOR TO GROUT ALL MANHOLES AND HATCHES TO MATCH FINISHED SURFACE UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE. 6. VEGETATION SUPPLIED AND INSTALLED BY OTHERS. ALL UNITS WITH VEGETATION MUST HAVE DRIP OR SPRAY IRRIGATION SUPPLIED AND INSTALLED BY OTHERS. 7. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING Bl0 CLEAN FOR ACTIVATION OF UNIT. MANUFACTURER'S WARRANTY IS VOID WITHOUT PROPER ACTIVAT7ON BY A BIO CLEAN REPRESENTATIVE. GENERAL NOTES 1. MANUFACTURER TD PROVIDE ALL MATERIALS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. ALL DIMENSIONS, ELEVA770NS, SPEC/FTCATTONS AND CAPACITIES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. FOR PROJECT SPECIFIC DRAWINGS DETAILING EXACT DIMENSIONS, WEIGHTS AND ACCESSORIES PLEASE CONTACT BID CLEAN. CONTRACTOR TO - INSTALL COMPOSITE HEADER AROUND PLANTER TO MEET FG. WET1ANDMEDL4 BED PATENTED PERIME 1tR VOID AREA COMPOSITE HEADER C/L ti ti t.' DRAIN DOWN LINE OUTLET PIPE SEE NOTES PRE—F1L 1 ER - INLET PIPE - C4RTRIDGE SEE NOIL5 PLAN VIEW CONTRACTOR TO + TX E AND GROUT TOP SLAB TO MEET FINLSH GRADE ELEVATION VIEW INTERNAL BYPASS DISCLOSURE: THE DESIGN AND CAPACITY OF THE PEAK CONVEYANCE METHOD TO BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD. HGL(S) AT PEAK FLOW SHALL BE ASSESSED TO ENSURE NO UPSTREAM FLOODING. PEAK HGL AND BYPASS CAPACITY SHOWN ON DRAWING ARE USED FOR GUIDANCE ONLY. BASE LEFT END VIEW _VEGETATION PLANT ESTABLISHMENT MEDIA RIGHT END VIEW TREATMENT FLOW (CFS) 0.073 OPERATING HEAD (FT) 3.4 PRETREATMENT LOADING RATE (GPM/SF) 2.6 WETLAND MEDIA LOADING RATE (GPM/SF) 1.0 'ETLANDS nma CAE s ncamw CI a[ a YEW Lf 1,04Dt 4WItt k9.am RICEEll Amos a Wit MPS FAVIlf PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL: PE NU9pnaW CONTMYFD W POD DOCUMENT IS nrt S (E HRCFFNTY La< FDRTERRA MD RS COMPAWYS 1FR5 DOCUMENT NOR ANY PART THEREOF. ANY NE USED REPRODUCED LIP AR.'1AFYIT !N MY MOANER i011 OUT of *RIMY CONSENT OF FORTh7 4 v Clean A Habana Compaq MWS-L-4-6-5'-10"-C STORMWATER BIOFILTRATION SYSTEM STANDARD DETAIL (64) III10 edelman irvine, ea 92618 p 949.660.9128 weremalcomb.com WARE MALCOMB CIVIL ENGINEERING & SURVEYING (83) — R.O.W. , (6 HOSPITAL ROAD BMP EXHIBIT HOAG - ONE LEADERSHIP CENTER 1 HOAG DR NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 10- MODULAR WETLANDS LINEAR MWS-L-4-6 RIM: 82.02' - 81.72' F INV IN: 77.18' NS INV OUT: 75.68' GIS COORDINATES NO. TREATED FLOWS F DISCHARGE TO EXISTING 15" - STORM DRAIN EXISTING. L.• DATE REMARKS — /•• id7 #2 AREA •� JOB NO.: IRV20-6131 PA / PM: LC J DRAWN BY: JP DATE: 12/812021 SHEET 1 Sheet 1 of 3 DESCRIPTION HARDSCAPE (IMPERVIOUS) LANDSCAPE (PERVIOUS) TOTALS NON-STRUCTURAL SOURCE CONTROL BMPS: N1 EDUCATION OF PROPERTY OWNERS, TENANTS, AND OCCUPANTS ON STORMWATER BMPS (NOT SHOWN) 0 LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT BMP'S. N4 BMP MAINTENANCE - NOT SHOWN, APPLIES TO ALL BMP'S. N10 UNIFORM FIRE CODE IMPLEMENTATION - NOT SHOWN, APPLIES TO WHOLE SITE N11 COMMON AREA LITTER CONTROL - NOT SHOWN, APPLIES TO WHOLE SITE N12 EMPLOYEE TRAINING - NOT SHOWN, APPLIES TO WHOLE SITE 63 COMMON AREA CATCH BASIN INSPECTION ®1 STREET SWEEPING OF PRIVATE STREETS AND PARKING LOTS STRUCTURAL SOURCE CONTROL BMPS: 0 STORM DRAIN STENCILING AND SIGNAGE S3 TRASH AND WASTE STORAGE 0 EFFICIENT IRRIGATION ® HILLSIDE LANDSCAPING LID BMP: AREA SUMMARY 1 COMPARISON EXISTING 11,827 SF 2,936 SF 14,763 SF AREA CLASSIFICATION TOTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA CREATED/REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREA PROPRIETARY BIOTREATMENT BMP PROPOSED 12,336 SF 2,427 SF 14,763 SF DIFFERENCE +509 SF -509 SF TOTAL 12,336 SF 12,336 SF AREA BREAKDOWN "TOTAL AREA PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS FRACTION DMA A 14,763 SF 2,427 SF 12,336 SF 0.836 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT CATEGORY PRIORITY PROJECT 8: SIGNIFICANT REDEVELOPMENT OF 5,000 OR MORE SQUARE FEET OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE ON AN ALREADY DEVELOPED SITE LAND USE SPECIAL PURPOSE - HOAG HOSPITAL DETERMINATION OF HCOC'S THE PROJECT SITE IS NOT LOCATED IN AN AREA THAT IS SUSCEPTIBLE TO HYDROMODIFICATION IMPACTS. -->DCV-CONTROLLED, SIZE BMP TO MITIGATE 85TH PERCENTILE 'STORM EVENT THE PROJECT CREATES/REPLACES LESS THAN 50% OF THE EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA. THEREFORE, LID BMPS SHOULD ONLY BE SIZED TO MITIGATE THE CREATED AND REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREAS. DMA A: EQUATION: DCV(cu-ft) = C(unitless) x d(inches) x A(ac) x 43,560 (sf/ac) x 1/12(ft/in) WHERE: C = (0.75 x 1)+0.15=0.90 d = 0.70 (FIGURE XVI.1: ORANGE COUNTY RAINFALL ZONES MAP) A = CREATED AND REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREAS = 12,336 SF = 0.283 AC DCV= 0.90 x 0.70 x 0.283 x 43,560 x1/12 DCV= 647 cu-ft SOIL TYPE "D" INFILTRATION IS DEEMED INFEASIBLE. FLOW -BASED BMP SIZING Q=CxdxA C = (0.75 X 1)+0.15=0.90 d = DESIGN INTENSITY = 0.2625 IN/HR A = 12,336 SF = 0.283 AC Q = 0.90 X 0.2625 X 0.283 AC Q = 0.067 CFS PROPOSED MODULAR WETLANDS UNIT TREATMENT CAPACITY = 0.068 CFS. REFER TO THE WQMP'S ATTACHMENT B FOR CALCULATIONS AND ATTACHMENT E FOR THE SOILS REPORT. 10 edesman Irvine, ca 92618 p 949.660.912B waremalcomb.com WARE MALCOMB CIVIL ENGINEERING S SURVEYING BMP CALCULATIONS HOAG - ONE LEADERSHIP CENTER 1 HOAG DR NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 NO. DATE REMARKS JOB NO.: IRV20-6131 PA / PM: LC DRAWN BY: JP DATE: 12/8/2021 SHEET 2 Sheet 2 of 3 SITE SPECIFIC DATA PROJECT NUMBER 13J44 PROJECT NAME ONE HOAG LEADERSHIP CENTER PROJECT LOCI110N NEWPORT BEACH, CA STRUCTURE 10 ---- TREATMENT REQUIRED VOLUME 845E0 (co now BASED (CFS) N/A 0.068 TREATMENT HGL AVAILABLE (FT) N/K PEAK BYPASS REQUIRED (CFS) - IF APPLICABLE MD PIPE DATA I.E. *LATERAL DIAMETER INLET PIPE 1 77.18 PVC 6' INLET PIPE 2 N/A N/A N/A OUTLET PIPE 75.68 PVC 15' PRETREATMENT 810FILTP41)ON DISCHARGE RIM ELEVATTON SEE ELVVATTON VIEW SURFACE LOAD PEDESTRIAN N/A PEDESTRIAN FRAME A• COVER 24' X 42' OPEN PLANTER N/A WETLANOMED1 VOLUME (CY) 2.16 ORIFICE 517E (DOA. INCHES) 01.22' NOTES: PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. INSTALLATION NOTES 1. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE ALL IA80R, EQUIPMENT,MATERIALS AND INCIDENTALS REQUIRED TO OFFLOAD AND INSTALL THE SYSTEM AND APPURTENANCES IN ACCORDANCE WAH THIS DRAWING AND THE MANUFACTURERS' SPECIFICATIONS UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED IN MANUFACTURERS CONTRACT. 2. UNIT MUST BE INSTALLED ON UWL BASE. MANUFACTURER RECOMMENDS A MINIMUM 6' LEVEL ROCK BASE UNLESS SPECIFIED BY THE PROJECT ENGINEER. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING PROJECT ENGINEERS RECOMMENDED BASE SPECIFICATIONS. 4. CONTRACTOR TO SUPPLY AND INSTALL ALL EXTERNAL CONNECTING PIPES. ALL PIPES MUST BE FLUSH WITH INSIDE SURFACE OF CONCRETE (PIPES CANNOT INTRUDE BEYOND RUSH). INVERT OF OUTFLOW PIPE MUST 8E FLUSH WITH DISCHARGE CHAMBER FLOOR. ALL PIPES SHALL BE SEALED WATERTIGHT PER MANUFACTURERS STANDARD CONNECTION DETAIL. 5. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLATION OF ALL PIPES, RISERS, MANHOLES AND HATCHES. CONTRACTOR TO GROUT ALL MANHOLES AND HATCHES TO MATCH FINISHED SURFACE UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE. 6. VEGETATION SUPPLIED AND INSTALLED 8Y OTHERS. ALL UNITS WITH VEGETATION MUST HAVE DRIP OR SPRAY IRRIGATION SUPPLIED AND INSTALLED BY OTHERS. 7. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING BIO CLEAN FOR ACTIVATION OF UNIT. MANUFACTURERS WARRANTY 15 VOID WITHOUT PROPER ACTIVATION BY A 810 CLEAN REPRESENTATIVE. GENERAL NOTES 1, MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE ALL MATERALS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. ALL DIMENSIONS, ELEVATIONS, SPECIFICATIONS AND CAPACITIES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. FOR PROJECT SPECIFIC DRAWINGS DETAILING EXACT DIMENSIONS, WEIGHTS AND ACCESSORIES PLEASE CONTACT B10 CLEAN. WETLANDMmk BED PATENTED PERIMETER VOID AREA COMPOSITE HEADER • • DRAIN DOWN LINE 1 OUTLET PIPE� SEE NOTES PRE-FTLIER INLET PIPE CARTRIDGE SEE NOTES PLAN VIEW ELEVATION VIEW INTERNAL BYPASS DISCLOSURE: THE DESIGN AND CAPACITY OF THE PEAK CONVEYANCE METHOD 10 BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD. HGL(5) AT PEAK FLOW SHALL BE ASSESSED TO ENSURE NO UPSTREAM FLOODING. PEAK HCL AND BYPASS CAPACITY SHOWN ON DRAWING ARE USED FOR GUIDANCE ONLY. LWOROO a!AIMM II of O AMIMA O a MOO lmrm EMS** &AIM SIM A',IO* Aloe o wmor CONTRACTOR 70 INSTALL COMPOSITE HEADER AROUND PLATER ]0 MEET FG. LEFT END VIEW RIGHT END VIEW TREATMENT FLOW (CPS) 0.073 OPERATING HEAD (FT) J.4 PRETREATMENT LOADING RATE (GPM/SF) 2.6 WETLAND MEOL4 LOADING RATE (GPM/SF) 1.0 1`LA V PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL: 77E MARI= OWNED M NfS COWMEN! 6 71E SCYf MO_ far Of FORTE R4 NC r6 CNRVeS fl. DOCUENI.. -- ..m' ROT 77007f. go' 7[ rbtA RIYROOLC D OR WOOED M Mr NANNY MAN OUT Dt Ma17E7 COrSENT Of ITNIEM4 Bio8Clean A r-IErn c-.—.I MINS-L-4-6-5 -10"-C STORMWATER BIOFILTRATION SYSTEM STANDARD DETAIL 1 10 edelman Irvine, ca 92618 p 949.660.9128 waremalcomb.com WARE MALCOMB CIVIL ENGINEERING & SURVEYING BMP DETAILS HOAG - ONE LEADERSHIP CENTER 1 HOAG DR NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 NO. DATE REMARKS JOB NO.: IRV20-6131 PA / PM: LC DRAWN BY: JP DATE: 12/8/2021 SHEET 3 Sheet 3 of 3 !xi ! h 1.n...iw, HOSPITAL RD FOOTPRINT: 6.635 SF 11 HOAG DR : r;...... :14.2-72 ��r � E::7711. � },+.., S S� t s . f•.71T� 1 ,r.. j�i;Tu Tr:111•-. C.c.: ��S V Reference: Conceptual Site Plan dated January 18, 2021 prepared by Ware Malcornb LEGEND 2 • Current Boring Location 5$ Prior Boring Locations (4953-03-0931) • 0 15' 30' ue SCALE: 1' = 30' 0 Y'T\�� Z • • - oh.. . ef:..u• c 'V- • Y wood. Proposed One Hoag Leadership Center Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian One Hoag Drive, Newport Beach, California L7.1II MPEeAPIDIe VMN Wood Environment & Inhasan,co,.e SdVUons. In , 6001 Ric kenbackel PA Los Anyllak CA 900/0 Phone (323) 019.5300 fax 1323) 721.6700 $CAI' 1' 30' P•. 1F Cnc0 lF/LT 0A1E 04/19/2021 _ Plot Plan 2 PeQ1IC711D 4953-20-0782 E. 3 m u P Susceptibility %41 Potential Areas of Erosion. Habitat, & Physical Structure Susceptibility Channel Type er1, Earth (Unstable) - Earth (Stabilized) mamma Stabilized Tidel Influence <- Mean Nigh Water Line (4.28) Water Body Basin Cam Lake Reservoir Other Lands -,� Airport/Military Santa Ana River Watershed PROJECT SITE LOCATION AnahelmBay- EluntingtonHarbor watershed 4,4" j nnuer ttpi �a2'1.1i.3nrhn ,u� Milli Ci CrV Olr Santa Ana River Watershed %ii"iivv, IE 1C0 PEN ad, fl L,. • RS,,OFi h r. �Frb NEWGOR Soule Ora^.ge Co.:n'y SUSCEPTIBILITY MAP UPATE (FEB 2013) Feet 9,000 18,000 8 0 0 o - grE �a� Q 00 • a gpQ O 0o c( • z zsz 0 0 0 0 tiQ FICA IRE C c 0 trd St x E tri N 0 allZones 2 tionFeasability \9526E\6-GIS\Mx lowbro • k Long Beach Middle N_ bor Long Beach Harbor Long Beach Namur Rose °Paramount ardlow Rd 5-n heoro Bay San Pedro Bay Pacific Ocean abra Ralghtsv Ent Rd East la Ia Mkads 0 ndra Blvd Cerritos Sea, BoaCh Huntington Bea San Pedro Channel Newpo PROJECT SITE LOCATION RAINFALL DEPTH = 0.7 IN 6r 8a:,.r st Ccsta tIPsa J fill O `:I ass —aasiioassriisi l rr:1er.r, r r-!i1Jiif/ Jr.rai , nta Ana •1us[In In Pacific Ocean ()Chino Hills Pratte Regiona: Par. F• •thi! ca M:SSICR • swat 3a Norco y e �C LEGEND o Orange County Precipitation Stations 24 Hour, 85th Percentile Rainfall (Inches) 24 Hour, 85th Percentile Rainfall (Inches) - Extrapolated r City Boundaries Rainfall Zones Design Capture Storm Depth (inches) 0.65" :°! 0.7 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 railii4 1.10" Note: Events defined as 24-hour periods (calendar days) with greater than 0.1 inches of rainfall. For areas outside of available data coverage, professional judgment shall be applied. ocr.tiH Fla 5t Prnaltioll 6 a. Cleveland National Foram R;vE..--' ele C'^vnlF San Dreg° County ke Elsinore ke and Village ci • Y a ti 0 N ae c O Is 0Wildo Q,i Ait • °arad�iO m° vos w J F 0 m to II w J 0 w 0 0 FIGURE rc g 0 w LL°1 r 0 PACE Advanced Water Engineering xvI-1 U ORANGE CO. O Z O w rn P:\9526E\6-GIS\Mxds\Reports\InfiltrationFeasability 201 10215\9526E_ FigureXV I-2a_HydroSoils_201 10215.mxd C on O E 223ed St kat Canon Lang Beath Middle H r Lorrq Beach Harbor Lang Beach Harbor _pa EA AEW Rose °Paramount 0 Q San Pedro Bay San Pedro gay Belitlowero Long ach 0 Hawaiian Pacific Ocean Huntington Bea San Pedro Channel' 12 Ittier East la °La Mirada ra Med PROJECT SITE LOCATION HYDROLOGIC SOIL TYPE "D" Costa Nfe• 1 Hewpor,, •7 'VI OP A+t Santa Ana ?tell a new Ave Pacific Ocean Chino Hills Slate Park land H+I Piano Roaranal Park .dissron'. Caprst ►r•O Citrus St Norco LEGEND City Boundaries Hydrologic Soil Groups A Soils B Soils C Soils D Soils Source: Soils: Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey - soil_ca678, Orange County & Western Riverside Date of publication: 2006-02-08 http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm Lake Mathews Dr Ct.vslano Nalinn,u Hartford Springs Reserve Lake Elslnore ak : rid Village o =o r& 2' . Ef TITLE V VC 5 n VLF) SOILS G Q Q U L ` .1 ?2 C 0 C 0 w Q n Q r O U w o m w o o PAGE Advanced Water Engineering E G03640b.t91 N 2181744.944 N 2165944.977 E 6036406.765 54 30 0 200 400 600 800 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 FEEI : 42'v • 1A72 : (30) ` Q.E.a / / \400x1V / 1 1 1 1 1 1 \-2-00X�f 2 (6b) 1 TRANSITION 1 1 1 1 1 1 EiEnasa (8- -... tt 12 4 ',a n• , . If 1 (45Y''„\ : .r 181 E.y.. ••= �q .,r 4) O O „a / u2O / °�/.o a / (18)° �'�. a;, 4t1511 diEt d 18 t', 1- _ NOTICE 71. ' 011111 1741 T Ea' '','0 ° ,,,, / is 1 (24if/ CI \ �°� 151 , a"12) \ 1-:-3 (36 rJ q ,°a - \ ( __ ,,,,,.,.kg .7 2).O,T _ ,,'245'a — •a ,,a The drainage information has been prepared for information purposes only. The location, ownership, facility information and limits have been determined from available information provided by public agencies, but may not be exact, accurate, or up-to-date. The user of this information is responsible for verifying exact location, ownership, accuracy, and the regional versus local character of drainage facilities. Additional information may be obtained from public plans and recorded deeds. Facility designations included with this information are for convenience only and are not controlling or intended to imply ownership by the County or the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD). The information is being provided as a courtesy and neither the County of Orange nor OCFCD assume any liabilities for inaccuracy of the information. To notify OC Public Works Flood Control Section of additions or corrections, please contact Sal Gutierrez at (714) 834 5396 or by ernail at sal.gutierrez@ocpw.ocgov.com (2; 0 O r /, 4 -� r ,,,, p `IIX3J• °dod r• ;,D,. °- 7 or —Et =-(36) r' i .o- ,21, y27) 27) 121,c 0,� . p rrL� 4c�, ',lily tp i a 18)° 0•a .� 0 4 ,°a:18) H ' 9 J18).oz:'.0, 0 i �'o r i.i8,l T rI ix a a, Y4,,, �_' (36' a '-_ b,oea P1, -. . 21 - a o u. :.�,- \ / 0 4,o�24J '� / •N I3 ( 't 611° \ • • / \• \ 1.', 0 0 / 6' ° / \ \ , d'\ \ / ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT BASE MAP OF DRAINAGE FACILITIES IN ORANGE COUNTY REVISION 5. GUr/ERREZ DA I JANJ2/2000 SHI-FI NO 54 DWG. NO. MAPS-113-3 Q •a 1 � (45) 4') o (Qe) ,,,,,,,,,,,r,,o a o- ° x��a ,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, `n ''- `; �° :39') ,48)-'q ill \ (42X,; , y4 si--• / .a5 •A,<,18) \ (36) in ,�l - 24'a_ q 4.0 - _ Cr a (30) 42) ail� 6 r.18 )/ / \ • 9X4 5JJy Z� -0 (4 ) �, ( 24 ) . / \ `'i ` \ • •F p , ` cl°� I ( IS) o (33')\ 0"- / Y` • / • 14 17 ( 8)• \ \r• • / 1 • / • • a�(30)• / • • / /r' ''Q (413) /- / sor . \ / . a , o ' '. '39)'•.i8 J • • \ ♦ • • f� 4 ` oaf'° `fyQ) • • j /•\ \ 0, a \ • / ` ` r \ \% 21 •o p r24, / 0, - ° A • / - o(I8); a a a \ \ 1b d;I8) 4 I_SX4 S_1 / 61.0 • ° (18) r ' 39) I_5X5 j r" '0 C. z4Y7 )r, %1 9 O a — 9,0 't \ \ '132 'r= f• V / - 1 t12i re* „. „ P 23: N z a+� (3D) r 9X5 18x4 0 "v—n ,,, Qr • ° ° `Otl\ p rl a3s� (42`�p ;42) °• -�z-� 1 \ =atOr — 'j.18�O,0,0'.,, qrq 811\ .) ; =r a . 7„ �--3QA 9,(21', ('367_ 1_1.5X6Te Ts g1211/ .30�,t7 Thy, p,,,,p 6.5 (30 ) 24)1 . \- J .\ . r 811; =r- �,• 6 a 000•7„ ; -( 15 ) /(i5 T17,01:15,;t J I_3X_5 2° • �o a 10°p'IS) i i ;36J\ / / \ / • ( 21 ) 0 \ / •, /\ D°4/ r4p/ •,(36)-'' (21) • 44n .24' ;::36 ). (24}. / /; � O .0.a c-. . . 1 o, --(36) - 10c{i,,pq)30. IED (it) (42CP/30 000P0I(24) 54 '18) E 6057906.963 \ \a • tl 7.5 �;15 rl 18 � 4 .= .T P (24�F,(2 0 (18) ag 3.5 ,....6 0, :Oa:: I-2 9 -9 ei- 1:1-:: Os ,,,,, i -if:11:12;0s: _.... LI, ceCia , Et ..z.2.2 or \14:::1718,1):: ....„, 3-.0- ....„..s: - ,„ _- •:E. itili•i: , lab' . --..."- 'fib' ,,,,, 9:;113°0 % --.'; - (r;0-‘) .1, 0 ,sci..., s. ,,,,,,, ::: '0401(10:i ,i8) , • 3.5 MO 7 Channel Drainage Area Boundary Major Sub Area Drainage Boundary Minor Sub -Area Drainage Boundary Existing 0.C.F.C.D. Facility Existing Local Facility Existing Retarding Basin or Reservoir Natural Watercourse City Limits Greenbelt P.S. Pump Station Catch Basin (length in feet) Drop Inlet or Other Entry OCFCD Basins or Reservoirs Ownership (If other than City or County): Private p State= S FeAleral - F LXIS1ING FACILITIES 0 0 A • - est Earth Trape7oidal Channel (base width by height in feet) Reinforced Reinforced Reinforced Reinforced Concrete Trapezoidal Channel (base width by height in feet) Concrete Rectangular Channel (base width by height in feet) Concrete Box (RCB) (number of barrels -span by height in feet) Concrete Pipe (RCP) (diameter in inches) Metal Sheet Channel (MSC) (Base width by pile height in feet/Sheet pile total length) Corrugated Metal Pipe (CMP) (diameter in inches) Concrete Pipe (diameter in inches) Concrete Oval Pipe (width by height in inches) Steel Pipe (diameter in inches) Reinforced Concrete Arch (base span by height in inches) Corrugated Metal Arch (base span by height in inches) - • 0 If 12 ti • 54 1s P rgca Ne Adopr18D3Te Doc npmn CA101 VIM CODE AMENDMENT TO CHANGE APPROVING A ZONING n ulsnn N•I THE ZONMG3ORE DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED Al OL R1 TO (3 FROM Rn1 UNIT MULTI -UNIT ReyIN RM SI DUI (MUM PROPERTY O ERTY RESIDENTIAL) D At 1810 ZONING DRIVE FROM Of M(28)(MULIUNIT ATMOTIA TO DRIVE iflUI(MIXEDUE EDIT RESIDENTIAL i0 MNW3(I DUI (MIXED -USE WATER Rn.5Tm1 CAIOI1-02 PA2012A3 P0012.031 PA2011.134 1112111.w3 CA3011-007 PA3011-Ohl CAMII-005 CA2010-0I1 CA1010-0I1 CArouml PA1011-024 PAIDI0112 PA1010-1w PA2011-014 101E-7 CA2011.010 PN011-130 62)R2012 CA20114708I PA2011.082/ 937I2011 CA20IIp9 PAgl l-105 CA1010-09 PA10I1.114 94112011 16 CA20(1004 PANT IA17 5244011 / Banning Ranch • RM I7' PR '4 CV/' R-1 i 0110UR013 APPROVED ZONING CODE AMENDMENT CA1012.001-FMERSON ISLAND -ANNEXATION EPEECOVEDATE 0311911013 0111212013 APROVEDPCR AMENDMENT NO roMl l-0AANO POOP AOO9110N NO. PC2012.001 FOP. THE 15.05 ACRE PLANNED COMMUNITY- UPTOWN NEWPORT 1-4311 JAMBOREE ROAD 0W1Y1011APPROVINGA ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO CHANGE I I I I I511011V THE ZONING DEIGNATOI OF PROPERTY LOCATED Al 105 ESA STREET FROM R-] (TWOUNrt RESIDENTIAL) TO MUCV(I5111 REMIXED -WE CANNERY VILLAGm5TM STREET) MINIM APPROVING A ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO CHANGE (I II153001' ENE )]3 3336698N 3377 VIA LIDO AND 3G DESIGTION OF 370taVIA OPORTO FROM NuJTPLE.UNr RESIDENTIAL 10 IRM) TO MIXED -USE SERDCALIMU-V) 05/142011 APPROVING CODE AMENDMENT NOS CA20E0-0I3, (111152011P CA20II.003 AND CA21l0-012 TO REVISE ZONING MAP TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATEDAT 6480 MESSY COAST MIGMVAY PROM R.2 TO CG (COMMERCAL GENERAL) IPA10161901: AND TO CHANGE 6904, AND :906 THROUGH 6936 WEST COAST HIGHWAY FROM DI TO MU-V (MIXED -USE VERI1CA) (PAID11-014 AND PAAIRI RI APPROVING A ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION FOR THE MLOPERTYLOCATED AT 14195111£RIOR AVENIR FROM MJLTI-UNIT REM/NTIAS TO MEDICAL OHIO (OM 0.49) AP ROVING A ZONING CODE AMENDMENT 10 CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF CWIIIES LOCATED A 137 AND 1539 MONROVIA AVENUE FROM MULTI -UNIT RESIDENTIAL TO GFNFRAL INDUSTNAL IG OS) APPROVING CHEF AMENDMENT LON1aN9 INCREASING THEOADEVELOPMENT LIMITFOR PROPERTY9OCATEDAT IEEETW WEST COAST T IIIGMWAY TO19.905 SOUARE FEET 04ANOE 1HE ZONING CLASSRG010N FROM PC3] TO PCs6 FOR PRGITR.Y LOCATED A'r R00, RISE 060. AND 080 NEWPORT CENTER d11VE RM 51 du R-1 R-2 31 Do/ 2420) RM 28 MI Zoning Map City of Newport Beach Adopted Date: October 26,2010 Effective Date: November 25, 2010 Coastal Zone Boundary Industrial Zoning Districts m,.,,. Pna.d Commlulm Approval PA1015-225 W1v2010 CHANGE OFFICE -AIRPORT (OA) TO KZ@O.WI STABLISHED NEWPORI AIRPORT NANNE3 COMMUNITY NEWPORT KRPORT VILLAGE (Rd0) FOR 111.6361T: em aM . AND 4501 BIRCH STREEl,1360. 4100. 1500.1510. 4.540. 4570.4600. AND 1630 CAMPUS DRIVE: AND 6E5,433, NO 4647MACARTHUR BOULEVARD 7016-32 CA2016005 201613 CA2016CO3 291616 CA1012.006 2016-7 CA2013-009 CA2011.00 2015-31 P02015-003 2015.12 CA20I5.01 CAmum1 PA201612.7 1111112016 CHANGE R TO MUM FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT IT0109120171. 191 RIVERSIDE AVENUE PA2016-061 r6M12015 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3300/22 RT PLVO 10Q07(30124) AND 47532NO 5T (LIDO HOUSE NOTEDINCREASE THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE HIM 90,625 SQUARE FEET TO 103.470 SQUARE FEET (ANOMALY NUMBER 85 AS REFERENCED ON THIS MAP) PAI011A9I 1,m n016 CHANGE RT TO PI FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATEDAT 717 711 BAY AVE W AND 706 & 700 BA BOA BLVD W AND CHANGE Rso TO n FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED At BM BAY AVE W PA1011.316 04/261016 PORYION OP MC( BAY LANDING MANNED COMMUNED ZONIGN DISTINCT GUNGE FROM COMMERCIAL RECREATIONAL AND MARINE (CM 0] FAR( TO BANNED COMMUNITY (PC) PA2012-031 I2/041015 APPROVING ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO CHANCE (03/I021016G THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PEED NEWLY BTA&6MD ZONING DISTRICT CV-LV TO THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT MO NEWPORT BOULEVARDAND 475 32ND STREET ANNED COMMUNITY AMENDMENT PD2015-003 REMOVE 2071 AND 21015AN10AWIN HILLS RD FAON BLOCK 500 MANNED COMMUNITY To NORTH NE VI OR r CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY. PA10I5-l0 I )1101015 PA1015-047 05012015 ZONING CODE AMENDMENT FOR A HEIGHT OVERLAY ZONE FOR PROPERTBSLOCATED IN THE RM ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN STATISTICAL AREA AI PAIOMD16 0uui/015 ADOPTING 1M BKHOA PARKING MANAGEMENT OStRICT MAN AND ESTABLISHING THE BALEOA VILLAGE PARKING MANAGEMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT GA2012.83 PA20I2.146 I I/26/2013 APPROVING A ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO CHANGE L K ZONING DELGNAnDN OP PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3303 MALOO FROM N Im1VAWE INSTITUTIONS) 10 PC (PLANNED COMMUVITYI 1017-10 CA20I1.013 IODA CANT 1-012 (03117120141 PA7011309 W102012 PANT I -I% (1I1IYNI3 ) 01/151203.) APPROVINGA ZONING CODEAMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 20O NTH STREET FROM R.2 n WO -UNIT RESIDENTIAL) TO CV (0.5 EAR) (COMMERCEµ VISIIORSERVING) 021M11012 APPROVING A ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO GUNGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 514OCEAN MIONTE FROM R-2 (TWO -UNIT R6SIIlE'NTAL TO MUM (MIXED USE VERPCAL) 1L11-P 6P79CV O.551:0 i ,.l 0 11) RM-MHP-H ewe / 2420) RM /8 du ° `R, ,• OG. •, 0,5 , ,• f ~`N•� •i PF e I oG 0.5 PC-38 r\ R-1 PR R-2 SF1= DF1A11 A \ PC-6 0.3 � SEE DETAIL B PC-51 “••9 City Boundary Residential Zoning Districts Single -Unit Residential R-A R-1 R-1-6000 R-1-7200 R-1-10000 Two -Unit Residential R-2 R-BI (Balboa Island) R-2-6000 Multi -Unit Residential RM RMD RM-6000 Commercial Zoning Districts Commercial CN - Commercial Neighborhood CC - Commercial Corridor CG - Commercial General CV - Commercial Visitor -Serving CV-LV- Commercial Visitor -Serving Lido Village CM - Commercial Recreational and Marine Commercial Office OM - Office - Medical OG - Office - General Commercial OA - Office - Airport OR - Office - Regional Commercial Mixed -Use Zoning Districts MU-V - Mixed Use Vertical MU-CVIISTH ST-Cannery Village MU-DW - Dover I Westcliff MU-MM - Mariner's Mile MU -WI - Mixed Use Water Related MU-W 2 - Mixed Use Water Related IG - Industrial Special Purpose Zoning Districts OB- Open Space PR - Parks and Recreation PF - Public Facilities PI - Private Institutions PC - Planned Community Overlay Zoning Districts Specific Plans SP-7 - Santa Ana Heights Other Overlay Districts e B - Bluff Development H - Height Overlay PM - Parking Management MHP - Mobile Home Park Other Zoning District Symbols Residential Districts- 1. A number following the district symbol designates the minimum site area required per dwelling unit if the requirement differs from the district standard minimum. Example: RM 12178) 2. Two numbers following the district symbol Indicates that both the minimum and maximum number of dwelling units is regulated. The first number designates the site area used to calculate the minimum number of units required. The second number designates the site area to be used t0 calculate the maximum number of dwelling units allowed. Example: RM (3100 / 2420) 3- A number followed by the DU symbol indicates the maximum number of dwelling units allowed for the area designated. Where two numbers are shown, the first number represents the maximum number of units allowed, the second number represents the minimum number of units required. Example: RM6O DU or RM358/300 DU Nonresidential Districts -A number following the district symbol designates the maximum floor area ratio allowed for the nonresidential area designated. Example: CG 0.5 or PI 0.5 Anomaly Locations - Anomaly locations designates the Zoning Map with a reference number that coincides with an Anomaly Tebb included on the Zoning Map Example: i Planned Communities (PC) - Each PC Dismct shown on the Zoning Map with a -PC' designator along with a sequential reference number. Example: fl.fl RM (2178) • PI A 0.3 R-2 PI PC-4 PI 0,5 OG 0.25 MU-W RM 23 DUC ra% MU-V PC-t,MHP MU-W2 ,` SEE ULIAILC R-2 7200 ,' LPN RMD 1 1000 OG0:4 UPPER JE_WPOpT 10� MU W2 R BI R R-1 CV 0.75 "RC4 CG^ Erg ft N. 45. • e OA • •� OA • • • • OA CG 0.5 OG i� 0.5 ! l s r CN ' -"-k-/R-1-6000 SEE DETAIL D PC-56 l P/-11 PC-56 PC-4 A RM 48 lit' PI 0.8 Detail B PC51 it MIl-CV 1151 H S PF 0.- PC P PC-42 PC-24 • ,PC-46 RM 52 du RM 1Q4183 du R-1-6000 50 cc RM W. 0.75• 8 du'.. ..� 9�... R-1 PC= 0 R-1-6000 RM DU RM 9 DU RM 10 DU 1 1 0.5 101 / BO du R.1-6000 RM-6000 R-1-6000 PM - Balboa Pa Management 0 ing rlay Crystal Cove State Park scs pa, fthZ Detail D PC-53 Newport Coast 0 PC Number PlannedCommunity Name Bayside Village Mobile Home Park with Mobile Home Path Overlay - UP 463 PC-1-MHP PC-2 Newport Harbor Lutheran Church PC-3 Harbor View Hills PCJ Oakwood Apartments - UP 1370, UP 1405 PC-5 North Ford PC-6 Lido Peninsula - UP 1390, UP 1638 PC-7 Park Newport - UP 1412, UP 1557 PC-8 Big Canyon PC-9 Back Bay Landing PC-10 Vesailles on the Bluff PC-11 Newport Place PC-12 Promontory Point - UP 1494 PC-13 Jasmine Creek PC-14 Newport Crest- UP1585 PC-15 Koll Center PC-16 Newport Terrace - UP 1621 PC-17 Corporate Plaza PC-18 Broadmoor8 Pacific View PC-19 San Joaquin Plaza PC-20 Land Rover PC-21 Sea Island Apartments PC-22 WestcliB Grow PC-23 Bbck•006-Newport Banter Ordinance 2011-16 PC-24 Aeronutranic Ford PC-25 Banning Newport Ranch PC-28 Caltrans West (NOT USED) PC-27 Newport Village PC-28 Block 400 Newport Center PC-29 Corona del Mar Homes PC30 Villa Point Apartments PC-31 Jasmine Park PC32 Baytiew PC-33 Corona del Mar Senior's Project PC34 Point Del Mar PC35 Fashion Island (NOT USED) PC-36 Emerald Village - UP 3342 PC-37 Castaways Marina PC-38 Hoag Hospital PC39 Bayeew Landing PC40 Corporate Plaza West PC-41 Newporter North PC42 San Diego Creek North PC43 Upper Castaways PC-94 Upper Newport Bay Reglonat Park PC-45 Balboa Bay Club PC48 Block 500 Newport Center PC-47 Newport Beach Country Club / Armstrong Nursery UP 3641 PC48 Newport Dunes PC-49 Newport Tennis Club PC-50 Bonita Canyon PC-61 Marina Park PC-52 Newport Coast PC-53 Newport Ridge PC-54 Santa Bamare Residential PC55 Bayside Residential PC-86 North Newport Center PC-57 Newport Banning Ranch (Pending) PC58 Uptown Newport PC59 Lido Villas PC-60 Newport Airport Village Anomaly Number Development Limit (Sq. Ft.) Development Limit (Other) Additional Information 33 163,680 Administrative Office 8 Support Facilities- 30,00 st Community Mausoleum and Garden Crypts: 121,680 sf, Family Mausoleum: 12,000 sf 36 199,095 36 227.797 37 131,201 2,050 Theater Seats (Not Included in total square footage 41 327,671 43 611 Hotel Roams 61 20,000 62 979 Hotel Rooms 66 119,440 63 66,000 64 74,000 66 138,500 67 20,000 69 75,000 70 Parking Structure for Bay Island (No Residential Units) 71 11,830 72 8,000 73 350,000 76 0.5 FAR 1.0 FAR permitted, provided all four legal lots are consolidated into one parcel to proede unified site design 79 03. / 0.5 Deelopnent limit of 19.905 sq.0. permitted, pmtided all six legal lots am consdidated into one parcel to protide a unified site. 85 103,470 sf of hotel Accessory commercial floor area is allowed in conjunction with a hotel and it is included with n the hotel deSmIcpment limit. Municipal facilities are not restricted or included in any development limit. S 0.5 1 Miles 1 Name: Zoning_Map 9/22/2020