HomeMy WebLinkAboutX2011-0847 - SoilsCOAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
6 Z CAI W16A 'f
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation
MM
for av C(-I'
OF THESE PLANS
nu TO c:OfJSTRUGT
wu
OOE` � G '. 7 OR INC ONSI51'ENl`
ANY 3"° p }y NIssdPOR( R.ACH THI6
ANG WOUCIEP '�( THE-. IIJ A.a. HtSPECTS, IN
TF,wSE PANS ARE, POLICIES.
iEE TF'.'�" PLHNn ANY?
NQ ANIi IONINCi uHpINH'duES, v Th�=SE PLANS
NE5i:RVES '(HC. I'il( HT T 41 F'1NI�Ef.)ANY PPH WITHE NB
�OR IMPNGYEME.01 GOMP4Y
!,��iTRUCYIyLy IP iJECESSa' TO
r hre�monR(l7GACN'
VERMIT'(EE'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT^---^—""'�"�' (SIGNANRE) �A„
' . _.... .... ..mom— _
NADING,Y.,
N r
522 Catalina Drive
Newport Beach, California
BY:
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
W. O. 415511-01, dated February 17, 2011
FOR:
Mr. Richard Goold
38314 Hemingway
Irvine, CA 92606
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
14747 Artesia Blvd., Suite 1-D, La Mirada, CA 90638 Ph: (714) 521-0169br (714) 521-2827 Fax: (714) 521-0179
February 17, 2011
Mr. Richard Goold
38314 Hemingway
Irvine, CA 92606
Subject: Geotechnical Engineering
Proposed Addition, 522
Newport Beach, California
Dear Mr. Goold:
W.O.415511-01
Investigation of
Catalina Drive,
Pursuant to your request, a geotecluncal engineering investigation has been performed at the subject
site. The purposes of the investigation were to determine the general engineering characteristics of
the soils on and underlying the site and to provide recommendations for the design of foundations
and underground improvements.
This report completes authorized work under the executed proposal dated November 10, 2010.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
It is our understanding that existing garage will be demolished and residence remodeled with a one-
story addition to the rear of the existing residence and attached garage. Structural loads are
anticipated to be light.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES
The scope of the study was to obtain subsurface information within the project site area and to
provide recommendations pertaining to the proposed development and included the following:
1. A cursory reconnaissance of the site and surrounding areas.
2. Excavation of exploratory borings to determine the subsurface earth material profile and
groundwater conditions.
3. Collection of representative bulk and/or undisturbed earth material samples for laboratory
analysis.
4. Laboratory analyses of earth material samples including determination of in -situ and maximum
density, in -situ and optimum moisture content, shear strength characteristics, expansion
potential, and sulfate content.
5. Preparation of this report presenting results of our investigation and recommendations for the
proposed development.
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Mr. Richard Goold 2 W.O. 415511-01
Geotechnical Investigation February 17 20r1
SITE CONDITIONS
The subject site is located at 522 Catalina Drive, Newport Beach, California. The site is located on
the Site Vicinity Map, Plate 1.
The lot is rectangular in shape and essentially level. The existing site improvements consist of a
one-story, raised wood residential structure, detached garage, hadscape, and landscape.
Adjacent and nearby lots are developed in a similar manner. The existing residence shows signs
of distress with numerous cracks within exterior stucco emanating from comers of doors and
windows. The cracks are attributed to shallow footing (only 6 inches deep) lack of reinforcement,
expansive soil and poor site drainage.
The appended Site Plan Sketch, Plate 2, further illustrates site configuration.
EXPLORATORY PROGRAM
The subject site was explored by placement, logging and sampling of two exploratory borings
placed with hand auger equipment. See Plate 2 for exploratory locations.
Earth material samples were obtained at various depth intervals within the excavations.
Undisturbed earth samples were obtained by driving a thin -walled sampler lined with brass rings
into the earth material using a 35# slide hammer with 18 inch drop. Bulk samples were taken of
representative earth materials. Samples were placed in appropriate containers for transport.
EARTH MATERIALS
A COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. representative visually logged earth materials encountered in
the exploratory borings. The materials encountered were classified as artificial fill over native soil
Artificial fills encountered consisted of varied earth materials identified as dark brown, silty sand,
loose and very moist to wet. The artificial fill soils were encountered to a depth of about 2.5 feet
below existing grade, in the exploratory borings placed.
The underlying native soil consists of orange brown sandy silty clay, moist and stiff grading to
orange brown silty clayey sand and silty sand , moist and dense.
Earth materials are further described on the attached Boring Logs, Plates B and C.
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Mr. Richard Goold 3 W.O. 415511-01
Geotechnical Investigation Februaiy 17 2011
GROUNDWATER
Groundwater was not encountered to depth explored although surficial soil is wet and is
attributed to over irrigation of the neighborhood, poor site drainage and low permeability of
underlying native soil.
We do not recommend the use of bottomless trench drains to conform with infiltration best
management practice (BMP) such as infiltration trenches, infiltration basins, dry wells, permeable
pavements or similar systems designed primarily to percolate water into the subsurface soils. Due to
the physical characteristics of the site earth materials (expansive soil), infiltration of waters into the
subsurface earth materials has a risk of adversely affecting structures, building foundations and
slabs, and hardscape improvements. From a geotechnical viewpoint surface drainage should be
directed to the street or alley.
In accordance with the current WQMP requirements, we recommend the use of fossil filter catch
basins at the subject site instead of bottomless drains. The owner shall provide a biannual
replacement of catch basin filters.
SEISMICITY
Southern California is located in an active seismic region. Moderate to strong earthquakes can
occur on numerous local faults. The United States Geological Survey, California Division of Mines
and Geology, private consultants, and universities have been studying earthquakes in Southern
California for several decades. Early studies were directed toward earthquake prediction and
estimation of the effects of strong ground shaking. Studies indicate that earthquake prediction is
not practical and not sufficiently accurate to benefit the general public. Governmental agencies are
shifting their focus to earthquake resistant structures as opposed to prediction. The purpose of the
code seismic design parameters is to prevent collapse during strong ground shaking. Cosmetic
damage should be expected.
Within the past 40 years, Southern California and vicinity have experienced an increase in seismic
activity beginning with the San Fernando earthquake in 1971. In 1987, a moderate earthquake
struck the Whittier area and was located on a previously unknown fault. Ground shaking from this
event caused substantial damage to the City of Whittier, and surrounding cities. The
January 17, 1994, Northridge earthquake was initiated along a previously unrecognized fault below
the San Fernando Valley. The energy released by the earthquake propagated to the southeast,
northwest, and northeast in the form of shear and compression waves, which caused the strong
ground shaking in portions of the San Fernando Valley, Santa Monica Mountains, Simi Valley, City
of Santa Clarita, and City of Santa Monica.
Southern California faults are classified as: active, potentially active, or inactive. Faults from past
geologic periods of mountain building but do not display any evidence of recent offset, are
considered "inactive" or "potentially active". Faults that have historically produced earthquakes or
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Mr. Richard Goold 4 W.O. 415511-01
Geotechnical Investigation February 17 2011
show evidence of movement within the past 11,000 years are known as "active faults". There are
no known active faults within close vicinity of the subject property. The nearest known active fault
is the Newport -Inglewood.
The principal seismic hazard to the subject property and proposed project is strong ground shaking
from earthquakes produced by local faults. It is likely that the subject property will be shaken by
future earthquakes produced in Southern California. However, secondary effects such as surface
rupture, lurching, ridge shattering and landsliding should not occur at the subject property.
Liquefaction is discussed in sections that follow.
The near source fault is the Newport Inglewood Fault, about two km to the southwest. The
Newport Inglewood Fault is a Type B fault with a maximum magnitude of 6.9.
LIQUEFACTION
During earthquakes, major destruction of various types of structures has occurred due to the
creation of fissures, abnormal and/or unequal movement, and loss of strength or stiffness of the
ground. The loss of strength or stiffness of the ground may result in the settlement of buildings,
failure of earth dams, landslides and other hazards. The process by which loss of strength in soil
occurs is called liquefaction. The phenomenon of soil liquefaction is primarily associated with
medium to fine grained, saturated, cobesionless soils (sand and silts).
Based on the "Seismic Hazards Zone Map" published by the State of California, April 1998,
Laguna Beach Quadrangle, as shown on Plate 3, the site is not in an area where historic
occurrences of liquefaction, or local geologic, geoteclrnical or groundwater conditions indicate a
potential for liquefaction.
The liquefaction potential at this site is considered to be very low.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Development of the site as proposed is considered feasible from a soils engineering standpoint,
provided that the recommendations stated herein are incorporated in the design and are
implemented in the field. Recommendations are subject to change based on review of final
foundation and grading plans.
PROPOSED GRADING
Grading plans were not available at the time this report was prepared. It is anticipated that grading
will consist of removal and recompaction of the near surface soils for slab and foundation support
and to improve site drainage.
"OAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Mr. Richard Goold 5 W.O. 415511-01
Geotechnical Investigation February 17 2011
GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS
Removal and recompaction of existing loose or soft artificial fills beneath the proposed structure
and laterally three to five feet outside building lines will be required. Depths of removal shall be to
competent native materials or one foot beneath proposed footing bottoms, whichever is greater.
Removal depth of at least two and one-half feet below existing grade is anticipated. The bottom of
the excavation is expected to encounter stiff native soil conditions.
Existing surface soil has high moisture content that may prevent adequate compaction of earth
materials. Thorough mixing and aeration of soils and/or cement treating to lower moisture content
will be necessary to achieve compaction. Alternately, the wet soils may be exported and select
material import material utilized.
Subsequent fill soils shall be placed in six to eight inch loose lifts; moisture conditioned as
needed (dried) and compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction. This process shall be
utilized to finish grade.
During earthwork operations, a representative of COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. shall be
present to verify compliance with these recommendations.
GENERAL GRADING NOTES
All existing structures shall be demolished and all vegetation and debris shall be stripped and
hauled from the site. The entire grading operation shall be done in accordance with the attached
"Specifications for Grading".
Any import fill materials to the site shall not have an expansion index greater than 20, and shall be
tested and approved by our laboratory. Samples must be submitted 48 hours prior to import.
Grading and/or foundation recommendations are subject to modification upon review of final plans
by the Geotechnical Engineer. Please submit plans to COAST GEOTECHNiCAL, INC. when
available.
FOUNDATIONS
Foundations for the proposed structures shall consist of continuous footings placed a minimum of
24 inches into engineered fill. Foundations may utilize an allowable bearing value of 1,800 psf for
compacted fill soil. This value is for dead plus live load and may be increased 1/3 for total
including seismic and wind loads where allowed by Code.
Exiting footing of the residence was exposed and only extends about six inches below grade. If
addition loading is plamied the existing residence the existing footing shall be underpinned, Control
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Mr. Richard Goold 6 W.O.415511-01
Geotechivcal Investigation Febivaay 17 2011
joints should be used within brittle material at transitions of old to new structures, particularly
within stucco wall and tile floors.
All footings shall be reinforced with a minimurn of four #5 bars, two top and two bottom.
Foundation excavations shall be observed by a representative of COAST GEOTECFINICAL, INC.
prior to placement of steel and concrete, to verify compliance with geotechnical recommendations.
LATERAL DESIGN
Lateral restraint at the base of footings and on slabs may be assumed to be the product of the dead
load and a coefficient of fiction of .30. Passive pressure on the face of footings may also be used
to resist lateral forces. A passive pressure of zero at the surface of finished grade, increasing at the
rate of 300 pounds per square foot of depth to a maximum value of 4,500 pounds per square foot,
may be used for compacted fill may be used at this site. If passive pressure and friction are
combined when evaluating the lateral resistance, the value of the passive pressure should be limited
to 2/3 of the values given above.
SEISMIC DESIGN
Based on the 2007 CBC and latitude and longitude location of the site the following seismic design
parameters are provided.
• Site Class = D
• Mapped 0.2 Second Spectral Response Acceleration, Ss = 1.814g
• Mapped One Second Spectral Response Acceleration Si = 0.676g
• Site Coefficient from Table 1613A5.3(1), Fa = 1.0
• Site Coefficient from Table 1613A5.3(2), Fv = 1.5
• Maximurn Design Spectral Response Acceleration for short period, SMs = 1.814g
• Maximum Design Spectral Response Acceleration for one -second period, SMi=1.014g
• 5% Design Spectral Response Acceleration for short period, SDs = 1.209g
• 5% Design Spectral Response Acceleration for one -second period, SDI = 0.676g
TEMPORARY EXCAVATION SLOPES
Temporary excavation slopes in the existing surface soils may be made vertical for cuts of less than
three (3) feet. For deeper cuts, temporary excavation slopes shall be made no steeper than 1:1
(horizontal to vertical). In areas where soils with little or no binder are encountered, flatter
excavation slopes shall be made.
All excavations shall be made in accordance with the regulations of the state of California, Division
of Industrial Safety. These recommended temporary excavation slopes do not preclude local
raveling and sloughing.
COAST GEOT E CHNICAL, INC.
Mr. Richard Goold 7 W.O. 415511-01
Geotechnical Investigation VA 17 2011
SETTLEMENT
Total settlement of the new foundations as recommended and subject to the allowable loads is
anticipated to be on the order of one-half inch, accompanied by differential settlement on the order
of one-half inch over 40 feet of horizontal distance.
SHRINKAGE
Shrinkage of reworked materials should be on the order of ten to fifteen percent.
EXPANSIVE SOILS
Results of expansion tests indicate that the near surface earth materials have a very low to medium
expansion potential. The Medium recommendations on the accompanying Expansive Soil
Recommendations Cart, Plate A, shall be utilized in design of exterior hardscape.
]FLOOR SLABS
Where a slab on grade is utilized, the slab shall be supported on engineered fill compacted to a
minimum of 90% relative compaction.
Per CBC Section 1815, for slab on grade foundations, a value of 1.0 for Co and 1.0 for Cs is
recommended.
The computed effective plasticity index is 18, which shall be utilized in design of slab -on -grade.
It is recommended that slabs -on -grade shall be a minimum of five inches thick and reinforced with
No. 4 bars, 1.2 inches on center each way. The structural engineer's reinforcing requirements shall
be followed if more stringent.
Subgrade soil should be kept moist prior to casting the slab. However, if the soils at grade become
disturbed during construction, they should be brought to approximately optimum moisture content
and rolled to a firm, unyielding condition prior to placing concrete.
hi areas where a moisture sensitive floor covering will be used, a vapor banner consisting of a
plastic film (10 mil polyvinyl chloride or equivalent) should be used. The vapor barrier should be
properly lapped and sealed and underlain by two inches of clean coarse sand. Since the vapor
barrier will prevent moisture from draining from fresh concrete, a better concrete finish can usually
be obtained if at least two inches of sand is spread over the vapor barrier prior to placement of
concrete.
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Mr. Richard Goold 8 W.0.415511-01
Geotechnical Investigation Feb uary 17 2011
SOLUBLE SULFATES
Chemical analysis indicates a negligible soluble sulfate content of 30 ppm. Type 11 concrete may be
utilized with minimum 2,500psi compressive strength. Design and placement of concrete shall be
in accordance with appropriate CBC codes.
UTILITY LINE BACI£FILLS
All utility line backfills, both interior and exterior, shall be compacted to a minimum of
90% relative compaction and shall require testing at a minimum of two -foot vertical intervals.
DRAINAGE
Existing site drainage is poor with ponding conditions. Positive drainage should be planned for the
site. Drainage should be directed away from structures via non -erodible conduits to suitable
disposal areas. The structure should utilize roof gutters and down spouts tied directly to yard
drainage.
Unlined flowerbeds, planters, and lawns should not be constructed against the perimeter of the
structure. If such landscaping (against the perimeter of a structure) is planned, it should be properly
drained and lined or provided with an underground moisture barrier. litigation should be kept to a
minimum.
Minimum drainage for landscape shall be 2% and hardscape areas shaft be 1%. While Section
1803.3 of the 2007 CBC recommends 5% slope for landscape areas, 2% slope is allowable where
justified. Our justification is the use roof drains tied into area drains, the use of area drains, the use
of deepened footings, and site grading which will mitigate the potential for moisture problems
beneath a slab on grade or raised floor system.
Site waters shall not be allowed to drain in an uncontrolled manner. Waters shall be collected and
dispersed of in a mauler in accordance with governing guidelines. Bottomless trench drain to
contain runoff on -site is not recommended for this project. Run-off should be directed to the curb
and gutter of the street or approved area.
• ILTO ' �l
Hardscape slab subgrade areas shall exhibit a minimum of 90% relative compaction and shall be 2-
3% over optimum moisture content to a depth of at least two feet. Deeper removal and compaction
may be required if unacceptable conditions are encountered. These areas require testing just prior
to placing concrete.
Exterior hardscape slabs will be subject to stress from vohune changes in subgrade soils, which
may lead to cracking. The followings recommendations will minimize cracking and offsets, but will
not eliminate concrete cracks.
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Mr. Richard Goold 9 W.O.415511-01
Geotechnical Investigation February 17 9011
Minimum geotechnical recommendations for exterior slab design are five inches actual thickness
with. 93 bars at 12 inches on center each way.
Doweling slabs to perimeter footings can mitigate movement of slabs adjacent to structures.
Doweling should consist of No. 4 bars bent around exterior slabs. Doweling should be spaced no
farther than 36 inches on centers. As an option to doweling, an architectural separation could be
provided between the main structure and abutting appurtenance improvements. Presaturation of
exterior slab areas is also desirable. At exterior edges of patios and other flatwork, a cut-off wall to
at least twelve inches deep and containing reinforcement is highly recommended. If no significant
load is associated with the edge of the slab, the width of the cut-off wall may be limited to eight
inches. Reinforcement adopted for the main structure may be applied to the appurtenances.
Geotechnical recommendations will only minimize damage. As an alternative to ridged hardscape
or brickwork, flexible pavers may be utilized.
PROPERTY LINE WALLS
Property line and sight walls may be designed utilizing a bearing value of 1,000 psf, with a lateral
resistance of 200 psf per foot of embedment. Some mitigation of footing bottoms should be
anticipated by deepeiung or recompaction and will be field determined.
SUPPLEMENTAL CONSULTING
During construction, a number of reviews by this office are recommended to verify site
geotechnical conditions and conformance with the intentions of the recommendations for
construction. Although not all possible geotechnical observation and testing services are required.
The following site reviews are advised, some of which will probably be required by the City of
Newport Beach:
Foundation excavation review for main structures
Foundation excavation review for appurtenances
Reinforcement placement for all foundations
Slab subgrade moisture barrier membrane
Slab subgrade rock placement
Slab steel placement, primary and appurtenant structures
Drainage and rock placement behind retaining walls
Backfill compaction behind retaining walls
Compaction of utility trench backfill
Required
Required
Advised
Advised
Advised
Advised
Required
Required
Required
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Mr. Richard Goold 10 W.O. 415511-01
Geotechnical Investigation r'ebmary 17 2011
ENGINEERING CONSULTATION, TESTING & OBSERVATION
We will be pleased to provide additional input with respect to foundation design once methods of
construction and/or nature of imported soil has been determined.
Grading and foundation plans should be reviewed by this office prior to commencement of grading
so that appropriate recommendations, if needed, can be made.
Areas to receive fill should be inspected when unsuitable materials have been removed and prior to
placement of fill, and fill should be observed and tested for compaction as it is placed.
AGENCY REVIEW
All soil, geologic and structural aspects of the proposed development are subject to the review and
approval of the governing agency(s). It should be recognized that the governing agency(s) can
dictate the manner in which the project proceeds. They could approve or deny any aspect of the
proposed improvements and/or could dictate which foundation and grading options are acceptable.
Supplemental geotechnical consulting in response to agency requests for additional information
could be required and will be charged on a tune and materials basis.
LIMITATIONS
This .report presents recommendations pertaining to the subject site based on the assumption that
the subsurface conditions do not deviate appreciably from those disclosed by our exploratory
excavations. Our recommmendations are based on the technical information, our understanding of the
proposed construction, and our experience in the geotechnical field. We do not guarantee the
performance of the project, only that our engineering work and j udgments meet the standard of care
of our profession at this tirne.
In view of the general conditions in the area, the possibility of different 'local soil conditions may
exist. Any deviation or unexpected condition observed during construction should be brought to the
attention of the Geoteclulical Engineer. In this way, any supplemental recommendations can be
made with a minimum of delay necessary to the project.
If the proposed construction will differ from our present understanding of the project, the existing
information and possibly new factors may have to be evaluated. Any design changes and the
finished plans should be reviewed by the Geotechaical Consultant. Of particular importance would
be extending development to new areas, changes in structural loading conditions, postponed
development for more than a year, or changes in ownership.
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Mr. Richard Goold 11 W.O.415511-01
Geotechnical Investigation February 17 2011
This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his
representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are called to
the attention of the Architects and Engineers for the project and incorporated into the plans and that
the necessary steps are taken to see that the Contractors and Subcontractors cant' out such
recommendations in the field.
This report is subject to review by the controlling authorities for this project.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you.
Respectfully submitted:
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, Inc.
Ming-Tarng Chen
RCE 54011
2 No.54011
* Ezp.12-31-11
F C A'
Daniel E. Herc
Staff Geologist
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Mr. Richard Goold 12 W.O. 415511-01
Geotechnieal Investigation Bebruary 17 2011
APPENDIX A
This appendix contains a description of the field investigation, laboratory testing procedures and
results, plates and exploratory logs.
FIELD INVESTIGATION
Field investigation was performed on February 11, 2011, consisting of the excavation of two
borings by hand auger equipment at locations shown on the attached site plan sketch. As drilling
progressed, personnel from this office visually classified the soils and bedrock encountered, and
secured representative samples .for laboratory testing.
Undisturbed samples for detailed testing in our laboratory were obtained by pushing or driving a
sampling spoon into the material. A solid barrel -type spoon was used having an inside diameter of
2.5 inches with a tapered cutting tip at the lower end and a ball valve at the upper end. The barrel is
lined with thin brass rings, each one inch in length. The spoon penetrated into the soil below the
depth of boring approximately 6 inches. The central portion of this sample was retained for testing.
All samples in their natural field condition were sealed in airtight containers and transported to the
laboratory.
Descriptions of the soils encountered are presented on the attached Boring Logs. The data presented
on these logs is a simplification of actual subsurface conditions encountered and applies only at the
specific boring locations and the date excavated. It is not warranted to be representative of
subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
LABORATORY TESTING
Field samples were examined in the laboratory and a testing program was then established to
develop data for preliminary evaluation of geotechnical conditions.
Field moisture and dry densities were calculated for each undisturbed sample. The samples were
obtained per ASTM:D-2937 and tested under ASTM:D-221.6.
Maximum density -optimum moisture relationships were established per ASTM:D-1557 for use in
evaluation of in -situ conditions and for future use during grading operations.
Direct shear tests were performed in accordance with ASTM:D-3080, on specimens at near
saturation under various normal loads. The results of tests are based on an 80% peak strength or
ultimate strength, whichever is lower, and are attached.
Expansion tests were performed on typical specimens of earth materials in accordance with the
procedures outlined in ASTM D-4829.
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Mr. Richard Goold 13 W.O. 415511-01.
Geotechnical Investigation February 17 2011
TEST RESULTS
Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture (ASTM:D-1557)
Boring
Depth in Feet
Maximum Density, pef
Optimum Moisture, %
1
0-3
125.0
12.0
Direct Shear (ASTM:D-3080)
Boring No.
Depth in Feet
Cohesion
Angle of Internal Friction
(lbs./sq. ft)
(degrees)
1
0 — 3 (remolded to 90%)
200
30
1
4.5
400
23
Expansion Index (ASTM D-4829)
Boring No.
Depth in Feet
Expansion Index
Expansion Potential
1
0-3
18
Very Low
1
3-6
69
Medium
Chemical Analysis (USEPA Method 375.4)
Boring No.
Depth in Feet
Soluble Sulfate (ppm)
1
0-3
30
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING PAGE 2
Rollers shall be of such design that they will be able to compact the fill to the specified density.
Rolling shall be accomplished while the fill material is at the specified moisture content. Rolling of
each layer shall be continuous over the entire area and the roller shall make sufficient trips to ensure
that the desired density has been obtained. The final surface of the lot areas to receive slabs on grade
should be rolled to a dense, smooth surface.
The outside of all fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepfoot rollers or other suitable
equipment. Compaction operations shall be continued until the outer nine inches of the slope is at
least 90 percent compacted. Compacting of the slopes may be progressively in increments of three
feet to five feet of fill height as the fill is brought to grade, or after the fill is brought to its total height.
Field density tests shall be made by the Soils Engineer of the compaction of each layer of fill. Density
tests shall be made at intervals not to exceed two feet of fill height provided all layers are tested.
Where the sheepfoot rollers are used, the soil may be disturbed to a depth of several inches and
density readings shall be taken in the compacted material below the disturbed surface. When these
readings indicate that the density of any layer of fill or portion there is below the required 90 percent
density, the particular layer or portion shall be reworked until the required density has been obtained.
The grading specifications should be a part of the project specifications
The Soil Engineer shall review the grading plans prior to grading.
INSPECTION
The Soil Engineer shall provide continuous supervision of the site clearing and grading operation so
that he can verify the grading was done in accordance with the accepted plans and specifications.
SEASONAL LIMITATIONS
No fill material shall be placed, spread or rolled during unfavorable weather conditions. When heavy
rains interrupt work, fill operations shall not be resumed until the field tests by the Soils Engineer
indicate the moisture content and density of the fill are as previously specified.
EXPANSIVE SOIL CONDITIONS
Whenever expansive soil conditions are encountered, the moisture content of the fill or recompacted
soil shall be as recommended in the expansive soil recommendations included herewith.
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING
SITE CLEARING
All existing vegetation shall be stripped and hauled from the site.
PREPARATION
After the foundation for the fill has been cleared, plowed or scarified, it shall be disced or bladed until
it is uniform and free from large clods, brought to a proper moisture content and compacted to not less
than ninety percent of the maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM:D-1557 (5 layers - 25
blows per layer; 10 lb. hammer dropped 18' ; 4" diameter mold).
MATERIALS
On -site materials may be used for fill, or fill materials shall consist of materials approved by the Soils
Engineer and may be obtained from the excavation of banks, borrow pits or any other approved
source. The materials used should be free of vegetable matter and other deleterious substances
and shall not contain rocks or lumps greater than six inches in maximum dimension.
PLACING, SPREADING AND COMPACTING FILL MATERIALS
The selected fill material shall be placed in layers which, when compacted, shall not exceed six
inches in thickness. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during the
spreading to ensure uniformity of material and moisture of each layer.
Where moisture of the fill material is below the limits specified by the Soils Engineer, water shall be
added until the moisture content is as required to ensure thorough bonding and thorough compaction.
Where moisture content of the fill material is above the limits specified by the Soils Engineer, the fill
materials shall be aerated by blading or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is as
specified.
After each layer has been placed, mixed and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted to not
less than 90 percent of the maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM:D-1557 (5 layers -25
blows per layer; 10 lbs. hammer dropped 18 inches; 4" diameter mold) or other density tests which
will attain equivalent results.
Compaction shall be by sheepfoot roller, multi -wheel pneumatic tire roller, track loader or other types
of acceptable rollers.
Vicinity Map
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 415511-01
522 Catalina Drive
Newport Beach, California I Plate No.
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Site Plan Sketch
Catalina Drive
p
I
I
Patio
Existing Residence
To Remain
Exposed Footing
6" Deep
I
g I
Borin2 #2 1
Scale 1"=20'
Existing
Garage n �_-proposed Addition
To be Removed
Boring #1 !
i
I
Existing Block Wall'
To be Removed
1
Alley This plate is not a survey, it is intended
for illustration of Geotechnical data only.
The indicated scale is for rough measurement only.
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 415511-01
522 Catalina Drive
Newport Beach, California Plate No. 2
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Seismic Hazard Zone Map
• 1 9 •,8 STATE OF CALIFORNIA (— v
SEISMIC HAZARDS ZONES
..y �i, e.ILwrw ti wah L 1.
t�z,• °• 1 8` .' ��} t.e owwm t a vh. c.IMN. nave n..wmw Cea ST ''. E a r r
'••,•,• � .a // � rs.aade X.ead.Mpars xr/ � ��' Pak=� .
11.:
• �' 4 NEWPORT BEACH QUADRANGLE.
II J r
s
OFFICIAL MAP � _TQN d T
1
str ' 'i!»� A! � r a•e� �S aseh 1f—
Liquefaction Zone Released: April 7, 9997
04
Landslide Zone Ralaasad. April 15, 19IL
99
• , :+ 4 1 1L L C 'r II Trail
I a.
Res 1 Il
y(phl 'll }erL y Park f
G. 11 IJI JI ST_j �I`]yy�� '91'
9 L
IIola
l] — 39
L�Tr' ailer �I / Ma
i
®I
°.-.. ., • •.;; ...... .... -.c �.cas+:�asseesser._��
, ilm,�l\ ��l6;1 z!r \�L.. f/r
•�taq�
MAP EXPLANATION
�\ ,'
'
Zones of Required Investigation:
\� •„ �'
\
Liquaealon
Areas h
\
wirers ts.& acwnerca of Iiqusla�Xan, «brN gsobg' �,
naolechacal erld drnundwater saldltlons Indkae a pgenlla la
- ` •
pern"o' 9roune tlieplsawsnn euch Nat n flIpss n es delirred In
Puab Resarrcas Cods Section 2F83(c) weak Es requbed.
Eeahqua4a-Indueed Landtlidaa
SCALE: 1" = 2000'
Areas where wsd n occuaence of landslide nwwnarM1, or Iota
Ioecg,a I9n 91m1, pea ohni a"subsudecewater ,a
iM).1. a Planks lo, pemsnerA p,oun1 disjcnWosnls such na
rh
mitipatlon as tleanetl In PUE1k Paeowcas Code ssalen z (e) woNd
required,
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation
Work Order 415511-01
522 Catalina Drive
Newport Beach, California
Plate No. 3
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
COAST CEOTECHNICAL, INC.
(Text Supercedes)
EXPANSION INDEX
VERY LOW
L0
MEDIUM
HIGH
VERY HIGH
0 -20
21 - 50
51 90
91 - 130
130+
Footing Width
1 Story
12"
12"
12"
15"
15"
2 Story `
15"
15"
15"
15"
15"
3 Story
18"
is"
18"
18"
is"
Exterior Footing Depth
1 Story
18"
24"
24"
24"
36"
2&3_Story
24"
24"
24"
24"
36"
Interior Footing Depth
1 Story-
18"
18"
24"
24"
36"
2&3'Story
24"
24"
24"
24"
36"
Footing Reinforcement
4 #4 Bars
4 #4 Bars
4 #5 Bars
4 #5 Bars
4#5 Bars
2 Top
2 Top
2 Top
2 Top
2 Top
2 Bottom
2 Bottom
2 Bottom
2 Bottom
2 Bottom
Slab Thiclaiess
4" Nominal
4" Nominal
5" Nominal
5" Actual
5" Actual
Slab Reinforcement
#3 Bars on
#313ars on
#4 Bars on
#4 Bars on
#4 Bars on
18"
12"
12"
12"
12"
Centers Both
Centers Both
Centers Both
Centers Both
Centers Both
Ways
Ways
Ways
Ways
Ways
Moisture Barrier (2)
10 mil
10 mil
10 mil
10 mil
10 mil
Visqueen
Visqueen
Visqueen
Visqueen
Visqueen
2" Sand
2" Sand
2" Sand
2" Sand
2" Sand
Garage Reinforcement
#3 Bars on
#3 Bars on
#4 Bars on
#4 Bars on
#4 Bars on
18"
12"
12"
12" Center
12" Center
Centers Both
Centers Both
Centers Both
Both Ways
Both Ways
Ways
Ways
Ways
Free Floating
Free Floating
Grade Beam -
Same as Adj.
Same as Adj.
Same as Adj.
Same as Adj.
Same as Adj.
Garage Entrance
Ext. Ftg,
Ext, Ftg.
Ext. Ftg.
Ext. Ftg.
Ext. Ftg.
Subgrade
Not Required
Not
4" Coarse
4" Coarse
4" Coarse
Required
Sand (3)
Sand (3)
Sand (3)
Presaturation
Not Required
Above Opt.
110% of Opt
130% of Opt
130% of Opt
To
M/C to
M/C to
M/C to
Depth of Ftg.
Depth
Depth
Depth
(No Testing)
Footing
Footing
Footing
i. Inc Sul rounding areas should be graded so as to ensurc drainage away from the building.
2. Concrete floor slab in areas to be covered with moisture sensitive coverings shall be constructed over a 10 mil plastic
membrane, The plastic should be properly lapped, sealed and protected with sand.
3. Two inches of sand over moisture barrier maybe included in this four -inch total.
SUMMARY OF BORING NO. 1
Date: 2/11/2011 Elevation: E.G.
N
ID
�
U
o
o o
a
Description
—o
U
o
U
U B
FILL: SAND --- fine grained, silty slightly
Dark Brown
Loose
clayey, with roots, wet
NATIVE: CLAY --- sandy, silty, very moist to moist
Orange
Stiff
118.8
13.4
Brown
102.6
16.6
5
Grades to SAND --- fine grained, silty ,clayey
Orange
Dense
moist
Brown
109.9
15.6
Grades to SAND ---fine to medium
Yellow Brown
Dense
111.2
10.4
grained, silty, moist
End of boring at 9.0 feet
No groundwater
10
No caving
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation
Work Order 415511-01
522 Catalina Drive
Newport Beach, California
Plate No. B
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
SUMMARY OF BORING NO. 2
Date: 2/11/2011 Elevation: E.G.
li
N
C
o a
w
N-
o O
CL
@
L
a
Description
o
N
o
U
U
N
o
U B
U
FILL: SAND --- fine grained, silty, slightly clayey,
Dark Brown
Loose
with roots, wet
105.1
15.9
NATIVE: CLAY --- fine-grained, silty, sandy, very
Orange
Stiff
moist
Brown
115.9
14.0
5
Grades to SAND ---silty, clayey, moist
Orange
Dense
Brown
115.6
12.7
End of boring at 8.0 feet
No groundwater
No caving
10
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation
Work Order 415511-01
522 Catalina Drive
Newport Beach, California
Plate No. C
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
SHEAR TEST RESULT
Boring No.1 @ 0-3 Feet (Remolded)
5
4
Q
3
a
Y
N
N
a 2
U)
1
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Confining Pressure (kips/sq. ft.)
Campacted Fill samples were tested at saturated conditions.
The sample had a dry density of 112.5 lbs./cu.ft. and a moisture content of 18.2 %.
Cohesion = 200 psf
Friction Angle = 30 degrees
Based on 80% peak strength or ultimate strength, whichever is lower
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 415511-01
522 Catalina Drive
Newport Beach, California Plate D
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
SHEAR TEST RESULT
Boring No.1 @ 4.5 Feet
5
4
6
3
N
a
N
N
_P 2
1 -
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Confining Pressure (kips/sq. ft.)
Native soil samples were tested at saturated conditions.
The sample had a dry density of 102.6 lbs./cu.ft. and a moisture content of 23.5 %.
Cohesion = 400 psf
Friction Angle = 23 degrees
Based on 80% peak strength or ultimate strength, whichever is lower
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 415511-01
522 Catalina Drive
Newport Beach, California Plate E
COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Latitude and Longitude of a Point
Page 1 of 1
-00
iTouchMap,com
Mobs . inA p�xMtop Mops
I -tome n Latitude and Long tude of a Point
Maps i Country - State I Places i Google Earth I Cities i Earthquakes I IArn Here I Lat - Long
To find the latitude and longitude of a point Click on the map Drag the marker, or enter the
�. Address: 522 Catalina Drive, Newport Beach CA [ Go
Map Center: Get Address Land Plat Size - St at View - Ggggle Earth 3D Area Photographs
Try out the Gaggle Earth „Plug,jn. Google Earth gives you a 30 look of the area around the center of the map,
which is usually your last click point, and includes latitude, longitude and elevation information.
Latitude and Longitude of a Point
irouchMap.com 2007-2010
littp:Uitoucivnap.com/latlong.html
2/16/2011