Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPA2024-0069_2025.05.23_Draft EIR_Appendix H. Geotechnical Exploration CARL KIM GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 carlkimgeo@gmail.com GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION PROPOSED WAVEGARDEN COVE 3100 IRVINE AVENUE NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA Prepared For: Back Barrels, LLC. 1940 Continental Avenue Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Project No. PWAS_20240507 July 19, 2024 CARL KIM GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 carlkimgeo@gmail.com July 19, 2024 Project No. PWAS_20240507 Back Bay Barrels, LLC. 1940 Continental Avenue Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Attention: Mr. Adam Cleary Subject: Geotechnical Exploration Proposed Wavegarden Cove 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, California Per your request, Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. (Carl Kim Geo) has performed a geotechnical exploration for the subject project. The purpose of this study was to review and verify engineering properties of onsite soils, identify geologic and seismic hazards that may impact the site, and develop foundation and earthwork recommendations for the project that are in general conformance with the 2022 California Building Code (CBC). Based on plans prepared by X Engineering and 52nd Street Consultants LLC and a “geotechnical brief” prepared by LPC, Carl Kim Geo understands that the proposed Snug Harbor project will include construction of a 13-foot-deep surf lagoon, a 3-story 50,000-square-foot clubhouse building with one subterranean level, a building for athlete lodging, two additional pools, parking lots with solar panel canopies, a service yard, pavement, landscaping, and utilities. Retaining walls are planned to achieve design grades. The project site is located at the Newport Beach Golf Course, east of the intersection of Irvine Avenue and Mesa Drive. The project site is an irregularly shaped parcel that includes three holes, a driving range, pro shop, clubhouse, restaurant, and parking areas. The site generally slopes toward the northwest. An existing 15- to 20-foot-high slope descends from the southeast edge of the property from about Elevation (El.) +58 feet mean sea level (msl). The rest of the site generally slopes gently from about El. +50 feet msl to about El. +15 feet msl near the west corner of the property. Based on review of aerial photos, the golf course was constructed between 1972 and 1980. The site is bounded by the Santa Ana-Delhi channel and Irvine Avenue from the north, Mesa Drive from the south, and commercial properties from the southeast. Carl Kim Geo reviewed and incorporated subsurface geotechnical data previously collected by Moore Twining and performed additional subsurface explorations. Current explorations included two hand-auger borings and seven (7) cone penetration test soundings. This site is located in the Santa Ana Heights area adjacent to the Delhi Channel approximately ¾ mile north of Upper Newport Bay. Santa Ana Heights is located northwest of the San Joaquin Hills and is mapped as covered by coastal terrace deposits. PWAS_20240507 - 2 - The project site is underlain by engineered fill (thickness ranging from 0 to about 15 feet) described clayey sand, sandy lean clay, silty sand, and clay. The fill is underlain by late Quaternary to recent alluvium, which is underlain by Quaternary marine terrace deposits consisting primarily of lean clay with interlayers of fine to medium sand, silty sand, and silt layers. Groundwater below the site has been encountered in temporary piezometers at approximately El. +4 to +15 feet msl. However, this water level is likely the result of a pressurized confined or semiconfined aquifer. The recommended design groundwater level for the site is at El. +8 feet msl, which is approximately two feet above the adjacent concrete-lined Delhi Channel. Widespread dewatering or lowering of a water table is not anticipated to be required. However, isolated seepage zones may be encountered in excavations. Based on results of our study, it is our opinion that the proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint provided that the recommendations presented herein are implemented in the design and construction of the project. No evidence of extraordinarily adverse geological or geotechnical hazards at the site were noted that will preclude the development of the project as currently planned. We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. If you have any questions, or if we can be of further service, please call us at your convenience. Respectfully submitted, Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. Carl C. Kim Senior Principal Engineer Andrew Hillstrand Consulting Engineering Geologist ARH/CCK Distribution: (4) Addressee PWAS_20230915 - i - TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Site Location and Project Description ................................................................................. 1 1.2 Purpose and Scope............................................................................................................. 1 Task 1 - Document Review ................................................................................................. 1 Task 2 –Subsurface Exploration and Laboratory Testing ................................................... 2 Task 3 –Geologic/Seismic Hazards Evaluation .................................................................. 2 Task 4 - Engineering Analysis and Report ......................................................................... 2 2.0 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS .............................................................................................................. 3 2.1 Geologic Setting .................................................................................................................. 3 2.2 Site Geology ........................................................................................................................ 3 2.3 Groundwater ....................................................................................................................... 4 3.0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS .................................................................................................................... 6 3.1 Faulting and Seismicity ....................................................................................................... 6 3.1.1 Surface Rupture Hazard ........................................................................................ 6 3.1.2 Historical Seismicity ............................................................................................... 7 3.1.3 Seismicity ............................................................................................................... 7 3.2 Secondary Seismic Hazards ............................................................................................... 9 3.2.1 Liquefaction ............................................................................................................ 9 3.2.2 Seismically-Induced Settlement ............................................................................. 9 3.2.3 Lateral Spreading or Flow Failure .......................................................................... 9 3.2.4 Seismically-Induced Landslides ........................................................................... 10 3.2.5 Seiches and Tsunamis ......................................................................................... 10 3.3 Flooding Hazards .............................................................................................................. 10 3.4 Expansive Soils ................................................................................................................. 11 PWAS_20230915 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Section Page - ii - 3.5 Corrosive Soils .................................................................................................................. 11 3.6 Subsurface Gases ............................................................................................................. 11 3.7 Subsidence ....................................................................................................................... 11 4.0 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................. 12 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................................. 13 5.1 Earthwork and Grading ..................................................................................................... 13 5.1.1 Site Preparation ................................................................................................... 13 5.1.2 Subgrade Preparation .......................................................................................... 14 5.1.3 Fill Materials ......................................................................................................... 15 5.1.4 Fill Placement and Compaction ........................................................................... 15 5.1.5 Shrinkage ............................................................................................................. 16 5.1.5 Reuse of concrete and Asphalt in Fill .................................................................. 16 5.2 Shoring .............................................................................................................................. 16 5.2.1 Lateral Earth Pressures ....................................................................................... 16 5.2.2 Surcharge Pressure from adjacent buildings ....................................................... 17 5.2.3 Design of Soldier Piles ......................................................................................... 17 5.2.4 Lagging ................................................................................................................ 18 5.2.5 Deflection ............................................................................................................. 18 5.2.6 Monitoring ............................................................................................................ 18 5.3 Foundations ...................................................................................................................... 19 5.3.1 Spread Footings ................................................................................................... 19 5.3.3 Flagpole Type Foundations ................................................................................. 20 5.3.4 Auger Pressure Grouted Piles ............................................................................. 20 PWAS_20230915 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Section Page - iii - 5.4 Slabs-on-Grade ................................................................................................................. 23 5.5 Cement Type and Corrosion Protection ............................................................................ 24 5.6 Lateral Earth Pressures .................................................................................................... 24 5.7 Pavement Design .............................................................................................................. 25 5.7.1 Asphalt Concrete Paving ..................................................................................... 25 5.7.2 Portland Cement Concrete Paving ...................................................................... 26 5.7.3 Specifications ....................................................................................................... 26 5.8 Temporary Excavations .................................................................................................... 26 5.9 Trench Backfill ................................................................................................................... 27 5.10 Drainage and Landscaping ............................................................................................... 28 5.11 Additional Geotechnical Services ..................................................................................... 28 6.0 LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................................. 29 PWAS_20230915 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Section Page - iv - Figures Figure 1 – Site Location Rear of Text Figure 2 – Aerial Photos Rear of Text Figure 3 – Geologic Map Rear of Text Figure 4 – Historic High Groundwater Level Rear of Text Figure 5 – Regional Faults Rear of Text Figure 6 – Historic Seismicity Rear of Text Figure 7 – Seismic Hazards Rear of Text Figure 8 – Tsunami Hazard Rear of Text Figure 9 – Flood Hazards Rear of Text Figure 10 – Dam Inundation Rear of Text Plates Plate 1 – Explorations Rear of Text Plate 2 – Cross-Sections A-A through F-F’ Rear of Text Appendices Appendix A – References Rear of Text Appendix B – Explorations Rear of Text Appendix C – Laboratory Tests Rear of Text Appendix D – Seismic Design Parameters Rear of Text Appendix E – Liquefaction Analysis Rear of Text Appendix F – Earthwork Grading Guide Specifications Rear of Text Appendix G – Foundations Rear of Text PWAS_20240507 - 1 - 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 SITE LOCATION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site (latitude + 33.6585°, longitude -117.8819°) is located within a portion of the Newport Beach Golf Course located at 3100 Irvine Avenue in Newport Beach (Figure 1 – Site Location) (Figure 2 – Aerial Photos). The irregularly shaped property includes three holes, a driving range, pro shop, clubhouse, restaurant, and parking areas. The site generally slopes toward the northwest. An existing 15- to 20-foot-high slope descends from the southeast edge of the property from about Elevation (El.) +58 feet mean sea level (msl). The rest of the site generally slopes gently from about El. +50 feet msl to about El. +15 feet msl near the west corner of the property. Based on review of aerial photos, the golf course was constructed between 1972 and 1980. The site is bounded by the Santa Ana-Delhi channel and Irvine Avenue from the north, Mesa Drive from the south, and commercial properties from the southeast. Based on preliminary plans and specifications for the project, Carl Kim Geo understands that the proposed Snug Harbor project will include construction of a 13-foot-deep surf lagoon, a 3-story 50,000-square-foot clubhouse building with one subterranean level, a building for athlete lodging, two additional pools, parking lots with solar panel canopies, a service yard, pavement, landscaping, and utilities. Segmental and conventional retaining walls are planned to achieve design grades. A plinth structure approximately 40 feet wide by 350 feet long will be constructed along the central axis of the lagoon to generate waves. The plinth structure will be tied in with a continuous footing that will span the remaining length of the lagoon. The proposed project elements are shown on Plate 1, Explorations. 1.2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this study was to characterize engineering properties of onsite soils, identify geologic and seismic hazards impacting the site, and develop geotechnical recommendations for foundations and earthwork. The tasks completed as part of this study are described below in more detail. TASK 1 - DOCUMENT REVIEW Carl Kim Geo reviewed preliminary plans and specifications prepared by X Engineering, 52nd Street Consultants LLC, and La Playa Consulting Inc. (LPC). In addition, previous geotechnical data gathered by Moore Twining Associates (2019, 2020) were reviewed and incorporated into this report. The documents reviewed are referenced in Appendix A. PWAS_20240507 - 2 - TASK 2 –SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING Current exploration included seven (7) cone penetration test (CPT) soundings, sampling of the near-surface hand excavations for each of the CPTs, and two (2) hand-auger borings advanced to obtain representative subsurface data for grading and foundation design in addition to prior explorations conducted by others. Prior exploration data by Moore Twining included logs from 26 hollow stem auger borings and four CPT soundings. Six (6) of the hollow-stem-auger borings were converted to temporary piezometers. Explorations ranged in depth from 4 to 75 feet below ground surface (bgs). Exploration locations are shown on Plate 1 and logs of current and prior explorations are attached in Appendix B, Explorations. Laboratory test results from current and prior explorations are attached in Appendix C, Laboratory Tests. The testing included:  Soil classification (ASTM D2488);  Moisture and density (ASTM D 2216 and D 2937);  Expansion Index (ASTM D 4829);  Direct Shear (ASTM D3080);  Consolidation (ASTM D 2435);  Compaction (ASTM D 1557); and  R-value (CTM 301). TASK 3 –GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC HAZARDS EVALUATION Using available geologic data, we have developed information on the general geologic conditions beneath the project including the locations of documented active and potentially active faults near the site. This study addresses the potential for primary earthquake hazards (ground shaking and surface rupture) and secondary earthquake hazards (liquefaction, seismic settlement, seiches, and earthquake-induced landsliding) impacting the site. Seismic design parameters are attached in Appendix D. TASK 4 - ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND REPORT The results of subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, geologic-seismic hazards, and geotechnical design recommendations are summarized below. PWAS_20240507 - 3 - 2.0 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 2.1 GEOLOGIC SETTING The property is located in the Peninsular Ranges physiographic province of California. This geomorphic province is characterized by north-northwest trending geologic grain, meaning that its primary faults, folds, mountains and valleys are all aligned in north-northwest direction. The site is located northwest of the pediment of the San Juaquin Hills in the Santa Ana Heights area, approximately ¾-mile north of Upper Newport Bay. According to regional geologic mapping by Douglas M. Morton and others of the United States Geological Survey (USGS, 2006), the Santa Ana Heights area consists of “old paralic deposits overlain by alluvial-fan deposits”. A regional scale geologic map compiled by the indicates the site is underlain by Quaternary-age marine terrace deposits that may or may not be covered by river-derived alluvium in places. The older rock units underlying the region (e.g. Monterey, Topanga Formations, etc.) are generally folded into a series of anticlines and synclines with axes that trend and plunge toward the northwest roughly parallel to the Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone and Whittier-Elsinore Fault system to the north (Yerkes, 1965) (USGS, 2006). The regional geologic conditions of the site and vicinity are shown on Figure 3, Geology. 2.2 SITE GEOLOGY An improved concrete culvert known as the Santa Ana-Delhi Channel traverses the northwest and west edges of the site. The drainage course was known as the Delhi Drainage Ditch for some time prior to improvements (USGS, 1932). This drainage system locally formed the topographically lowest portion of the site as it meanders and drains from north to south generally toward the Upper Newport Bay (aka upper Back Bay). Aerial photos and geomorphology indicate the active channel and lowest fluvial flood plain (where Holocene to recent alluvial deposits would be deposited) was 250 to 300 feet wide extending from roughly the present Santa Ana-Delhi Channel southeastward (Figure 2 – Aerial Photos). Based on aerial photos reviewed (Appendix A) the site appears to have been used historically for agriculture and was fallow for several decades before it was developed into the Newport Beach Golf Course around or just before 1980. It appears that grading was performed along the periphery of the site and for construction of onsite infrastructure. Based on subsurface explorations, field mapping, and review of historic maps and aerials photos, earth materials at the site consist of man-made fill, alluvium, and older terrace deposits. The identified and interpreted limits of the earth materials are shown on Plates 1 and 2. The materials underlying the site are described below and in Appendix B. PWAS_20240507 - 4 - Undocumented Artificial Fill (afu): The site is mantled by variable thicknesses of man- made fill. Fill was identified in B-3, B-5, B-11, and B-19. A maximum of approximately 15 feet of fill was identified in B-11. Note that fill is expected to occur in other areas explored but was not specifically labeled in many of the explorations. As encountered, fill soils vary from soft to stiff sandy lean clay, and loose to dense and silty sand and clayey sand that is generally moist. Quaternary Alluvium (Map Symbol - Qal): Quaternary to recent age alluvium encountered in site explorations consisted of layers of lean clay, sandy lean clay, clayey sand, silty sand, and poorly graded sands. Soils with notable organic content were logged in B-3, B- 5, B-16, and CKG CPT-2. The materials were generally slightly moist to moist. Fine- grained soils varied from soft to stiff while granular soils encountered were logged as medium dense. Quaternary Terrace Deposits (Map Symbol - Qt): Quaternary-age terrace deposits encountered in site explorations consisted of layers of lean clay, sandy lean clay, and fat clay with interlayers or intermixed zones of silty sand, poorly graded sand, and silt. The materials were generally moist. Fine-grained soils varied from soft to hard while granular soils encountered were logged as medium dense to very dense. 2.3 GROUNDWATER According to the California Geological Survey (CGS, 1997a), the historic high groundwater level in the vicinity of the site is approximately 10 feet bgs (Figure 4 – Historic High Groundwater Level). Subsurface explorations indicate groundwater levels below the site are variable. Explorations appear to intersect laterally discontinuous aquiclude materials confined by clay layers. At most locations where granular materials were encountered, water levels appear to rise above granular soil layers. Six temporary piezometers were constructed in 2020 at B-17, B-18, B-19, B-22, B- 23, and B-24 (Moore Twining, 2020a,b). Available groundwater level measurements from prior explorations and six temporary piezometers are tabulated in Appendix B. Measured water levels and interpreted and perched water zone are also discussed below and shown on Plate 1 and 2. A pore dissipation test was conducted in CKG CPT-3 at 55.92 feet bgs May 28, 2024 indicates groundwater in the zone tested had the potential to rise to approximate El. +6 feet msl. Three accessible existing temporary piezometers were sounded by Carl Kim Geo May 28, 2024. The highest level measured was in B-24 at a depth of 18.52 feet below top of casing (approximate El. +9.5 feet msl). PWAS_20240507 - 5 - Free water was encountered in 7 of 26 hollow stem auger borings. The highest measured groundwater levels were in borings B-9 and B-11 in 2019 at depths of 18 and 20 feet bgs, respectively. The corresponding calculated (2019) groundwater levels are at approximately El. +14 to +16 feet msl. The water level measured in B-9 appears to be a localized perched water zone. Water levels below the site vary from unobserved to El. +15 feet msl. Given the variability of water levels across the site and the presence of the adjacent Delhi Channel with a flow line at approximately El. +6 feet msl, the recommended design groundwater level is 15 feet bgs. Perched water and groundwater would be expected to occur where granular soils are encountered. Fluctuation of the groundwater level and localized zones of perched water should be anticipated below grade. Irrigation of landscaped areas can also impact local groundwater levels or likelihood of perched water or seepage to be encountered in excavations. PWAS_20240507 - 6 - 3.0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS Geologic hazards include surface faulting, ground lurching, seismic shaking, landslides, liquefaction, seismically-induced settlement, lateral spreading, seismically-induced landslides, flooding, expansive soils, corrosive soils, and soil gas. The following sections discuss these hazards and their potential impacts at the site in more detail. 3.1 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY In general, the primary seismic hazards for sites in the region include strong ground shaking and surface fault rupture. Our discussion of faults potentially impacting the site is prefaced with a discussion of California legislation and state policies concerning the classification and land-use criteria associated with faults. By definition of the California Geological Survey (CGS), an active fault is a fault which has had surface displacement within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years). Similarly, a fault whose recency of past movement is older than 11,700 years is a pre- Holocene fault, and does not meet State criteria as “active.” Age-undetermined faults are those whose age of most recent movement is not known and is unconstrained. These updated definitions were necessary to eliminate agency and practitioner confusion for fault investigation reports as mandated by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Faulting Zones Act of 1972 (AP Act) and recently revised Special Publication 42 (CGS, 2018). The intent of this act is to prevent siting of habitable structures across traces of “active” faults. 3.1.1 SURFACE RUPTURE HAZARD According to the State of California Earthquake Fault Zones maps), the site is not located within a currently established Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Therefore, a surface fault rupture hazard evaluation is not mandated for this site. The closest zoned active fault is a segment of the Newport-Inglewood-Rose Canyon Fault Zone approximately 5.6 miles to the west (CGS, 1997a,b). Inferred/buried strands of the Newport-Inglewood-Rose Canyon Fault Zone are mapped trending south of the site but are not currently zoned as active. The closest mapped trace is approximately 0.9 mile south of the site. No photo lineaments or other geomorphic evidence of active or potentially active faults intersecting the site were observed or recognized as part of our review of aerial photos and historic topographic maps; therefore, potential for surface fault rupture at the site is expected to be low. Major active and potentially active faults in the site vicinity are shown on Figure 5, Regional Faults. PWAS_20240507 - 7 - 3.1.2 HISTORICAL SEISMICITY Although Southern California has been seismically active during the past 200 years, written accounts of only the strongest shocks survive the early part of this period. Early descriptions of earthquakes are rarely specific enough to allow an association with any particular fault zone. It is also not possible to precisely locate epicenters of earthquakes that have occurred prior to the twentieth century. A search of historical earthquakes was performed using the USGS database (https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/search/) for the time period between 1769 and the present. Within that time frame, 353 earthquakes of magnitude 4 or greater were found within a 100-kilometer radius of the site (Figure 6, Historical Seismicity). 3.1.3 SEISMICITY The principal seismic hazard to the site is ground shaking resulting from an earthquake occurring along any of several major active and potentially active faults in southern California (Figure 5). The intensity of ground shaking at a given location depends primarily upon the earthquake magnitude, the distance from the source, and the site response characteristics. Accordingly, design of the project should be performed in accordance with all applicable current codes and standards utilizing the appropriate seismic design parameters to reduce seismic risk as defined by California Geological Survey (CGS) Chapter 2 of Special Publication 117A (CGS, 2008). The 2022 edition of the California Building Code (CBC) is the current edition of the code. Through compliance with these regulatory requirements and the utilization of appropriate seismic design parameters selected by the design professionals, potential effects relating to seismic shaking can be reduced. PWAS_20240507 - 8 - The following code-based seismic parameters should be considered for design under the 2022 CBC: 2022 CBC Map Based Ground Motion Parameters Categorization/Coefficient Code-Based Site Latitude +33.6587° Site Longitude -117.8826° Site Class D Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Period (0.2 sec), SS 1.311 g Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at Long Period (1 sec), S1 0.468 g Short Period (0.2 sec) Site Coefficient, Fa 1.0 Long Period (1 sec) Site Coefficient, Fv 1.8321 Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Period (0.2 sec), SMS 1.311 g Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at Long Period (1 sec), SM1 0.8581 g Design Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Period (0.2 sec), SDS 0.874 g Design Spectral Response Acceleration at Long Period (1 sec), SD1 0.5721 g Site Amplification Factor, FPGA 1.1 Site Modified Peak Ground Acceleration, PGAM 0.620 g 1 See Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-16. A site-specific ground motion hazard analysis in accordance with Section 21.2 of ASCE 7-16 is required for this site. Per Supplement 3 to ASCE 7-16, a site-specific ground motion hazard analysis is not required where the value of the parameters SM1 and SD1 in the table are increased by 50%. The site is located within a seismically active region, as is all of Southern California. Based on the available subsurface information for the site, the site was designated as Site Class D. Details are presented in Appendix D. PWAS_20240507 - 9 - 3.2 SECONDARY SEISMIC HAZARDS In general, secondary seismic hazards for sites in the region could include soil liquefaction, seismically-induced settlement, lateral spreading, landsliding, seiches and tsunamis. These potential secondary seismic hazards are discussed below. 3.2.1 LIQUEFACTION Liquefaction is a seismic phenomenon in which loose, saturated, fine-grained granular soils behave similarly to a fluid when subjected to high-intensity ground shaking. Liquefaction occurs when three general conditions exist: 1) shallow groundwater; 2) low density, fine, clean sandy soils; and 3) high-intensity ground motion. Studies indicate that saturated, loose and medium dense, near-surface cohesionless soils exhibit the highest liquefaction potential, while dry, dense, cohesionless soils and cohesive soils exhibit low to negligible liquefaction potential. As shown on Figure 7, Seismic Hazards, a liquefaction hazard zone is delineated by the State of California (CGS, 1997a) along the northwest edge of the site. Based on our site- specific evaluation using a design high groundwater at 15 feet bgs, PGAM, and a mean magnitude of 6.7, liquefaction hazard is deemed low. The results are presented in Appendix E. 3.2.2 SEISMICALLY-INDUCED SETTLEMENT Seismically-induced settlement consists of dynamic settlement of unsaturated soil (above groundwater) and liquefaction-induced settlement (below groundwater). These settlements occur primarily within low density sandy soil due to reduction in volume during and shortly after an earthquake event. Based on our evaluation using the historic high groundwater level of 15 feet bgs, PGAM, and a mean magnitude of 6.7, the potential total earthquake-induced settlement is estimated to be less than ½ inch (Appendix E). Moore Twining’s CPT-3 indicated over 1 inch of seismically-induced settlement but most of the settlement occurred within the undocumented fill in the upper 10 feet, which will be removed and replaced as engineered fill during grading. The differential settlement can be taken as half the total settlement over a horizontal distance of 30 feet. 3.2.3 LATERAL SPREADING OR FLOW FAILURE Liquefaction may also cause lateral spreading. For lateral spreading to occur, the liquefiable zone must be continuous, unconstrained laterally, and free to move along PWAS_20240507 - 10 - gently sloping ground toward an unconfined area. Because liquefaction hazard is low, the potential for lateral spreading is deemed low. 3.2.4 SEISMICALLY-INDUCED LANDSLIDES As shown on Figure 7, Seismic Hazards, the site is not mapped within a seismically- induced landslide hazard zone identified by the State of California (CGS, 1999). In addition, due to project site lacking significant slopes, it is our opinion that the potential for seismically-induced landslide hazard at the site is low. 3.2.5 SEICHES AND TSUNAMIS Seiches are large waves generated in enclosed bodies of water in response to ground shaking. Tsunamis are waves generated in large bodies of water by fault displacement or major ground movement. Once built, the Wavegarden lagoon will be an enclosed body of water subject to accelerations from ground movements. An area immediately south of Mesa Drive is within a tsunami hazard Zone (Figure 8, Tsunami Hazard). As such, the site and periphery are subject to low to moderate seiche and/or tsunami hazards. 3.3 FLOODING HAZARDS According to a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance rate map (FEMA, 2008), the project site is located within a flood hazard area identified as “Zone X”, which is defined as an area of minimal flood hazard. Regionally, storm runoff flow is generally directed to the south toward Upper Newport Bay. As shown on Figure 9, Flood Hazards, the site is not located within a flood hazard zone. Earthquake-induced flooding can be caused by failure of dams or other water-retaining structures as a result of earthquakes. The site is not mapped within modeled inundation zone associated with proximal reservoirs (Figure 10). Therefore, the risk of seismically-induced flooding due to dam failure is considered very low. PWAS_20240507 - 11 - 3.4 EXPANSIVE SOILS Expansive soils contain significant amounts of clay particles that swell considerably when wetted and which shrink when dried. Foundations constructed on these soils are subject to uplifting forces caused by the swelling. Without proper mitigation measures, heaving and cracking of both building foundations and slabs-on-grade could result. Prior laboratory testing indicates that site soils have very low to medium expansion potential. Low to medium plasticity clays were encountered in explorations. Expansion Index test results range from 0 to 74 and are included in Appendix C. 3.5 CORROSIVE SOILS Results of corrosion testing are included in Appendix C. The underlying soil should be assumed to be moderately corrosive to buried ferrous metals per ASTM STP 1013. Concrete in contact with the soil is expected to have severe (S2) exposure to sulfate attack per ACI 318 (ACI, 2019). An exposure class of C1 may be assumed for concrete in contact with soil exposed to moisture per ACI 318 but not to external sources of chlorides. 3.6 SUBSURFACE GASES Based on review of State of California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM, formerly DOGGR) records, the project site is not located within an oil field boundary (CalGEM, 2024). Accordingly, the potential for methane hazards to affect the site is low. 3.7 SUBSIDENCE Based on review of referenced reports the site is not within an area of known significant subsidence associated with groundwater or petroleum withdrawal, peat oxidation, or hydro- compaction. PWAS_20240507 - 12 - 4.0 CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of our study, it is our opinion that the proposed project is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. In our opinion, the following geotechnical factors should be considered:  The project site is underlain by variable thicknesses of fill in areas up to 15 feet in thickness. The fill is described as sandy clay and silty sand. The fill is underlain by Quaternary age and younger alluvium and Quaternary age marine terrace deposits consisting of low plasticity clay, sandy clay, silt, and some sand layers.  Our review of the geologic literature (Appendix A) indicates there are no known active faults that intersect the site. In addition, site-specific data does not indicate the presence of faulting at the site.  The main seismic hazard that may affect the site is strong ground shaking.  Groundwater appears to occur in discrete confined layers at different elevations across the site. Perched water may occur at the site at approximately El. +16 feet msl. Design groundwater may be assumed at 15 feet below the existing ground surface.  The expansion potential of near-surface onsite soils is expected to be low to medium.  The onsite soils are expected to be severely corrosive to buried ferrous metals and have moderate sulfate exposure to concrete.  Due to shallow groundwater, the presence of thick clay layers underlying the site that would be expected to have very low to no permeability, and evidence of pressurized aquifers below the site, stormwater infiltration is deemed infeasible.  Existing temporary piezometers are a potential conduit for groundwater migration and nuisance conditions for the Wavegarden project.  The planned grading will place up to 20 feet of new fill to establish design elevations along the north side of the site. Raising the ground surface elevation at the site will induce settlement. We estimate about an inch of settlement per foot of new fill placed to raise site grades. Accordingly, we recommend that the rough site grading be performed as far in advance as possible before construction of the proposed improvements. PWAS_20240507 - 13 - 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided that the recommendations presented in this report are properly incorporated in design and construction. The recommendations presented below are based upon the exhibited geotechnical engineering properties of the soils and their anticipated response both during and after construction. The recommendations are also based upon proper field observation and testing during construction. The project geotechnical engineer should be notified of suspected variances in field conditions to determine the effect upon the recommendations subsequently presented. These recommendations are considered minimal and may be superseded by more restrictive requirements of the civil and structural engineers, the City of Newport Beach, and other governing agencies. Carl Kim Geo should review the grading and foundation plans and project specifications as they become available to verify that the recommendations presented in this report have been incorporated into the plans for this project. 5.1 EARTHWORK AND GRADING We recommend that earthwork on the site be performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report and the project specifications as prepared by others. The Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications included in Appendix F may be used for guidance in developing the project specifications. If conflict arises, the recommendations in Appendix F shall be superseded by the project specifications, recommendations contained in this report and/or the City of Newport Beach requirements, whichever is more stringent. All site grading should be performed in accordance with the applicable local codes and in accordance with the project specifications that are prepared by the appropriate design professional. 5.1.1 SITE PREPARATION Prior to clearing of the site, existing piezometers B-17, B-18, B-19, B-22, B-23, and B-24 should be destroyed and sealed in accordance with state and local requirements. After the site is cleared, the soils should be carefully observed for the removal of all unsuitable deposits. We recommend that after removal of pavements and hardscape, and complete demolition of existing structures within the proposed improvement footprints, all undocumented fill soils should be excavated from these proposed improvement footprints, which is expected to occur over most of the northern half of the site. Undocumented fill was encountered as deep as 15 feet bgs in the borings. Deeper fill may be encountered between boring locations. PWAS_20240507 - 14 - Overexcavation is not required for footings established directly on undisturbed natural soils. Any underground obstructions encountered should be removed. Those lines should be removed or rerouted where interfering with proposed construction. It is essential that excavation does not undermine foundations of any existing infrastructure that will remain in place along the boundaries of the project. As-built details of any structure to remain should be provided to Carl Kim Geo and the structural engineer prior to incorporation into the new design. Areas outside the structure footprint limits, planned for new asphalt and/or concrete pavement or pavers, should be over-excavated to a minimum depth of 24 inches below existing or finish grade or 18 inches below proposed pavement sections, whichever is deeper. 5.1.2 SUBGRADE PREPARATION Excavation bottoms should be observed by Carl Kim Geo prior to placement of any backfill or new construction. After overexcavations are completed, and prior to fill placement, exposed surfaces should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches, moisture- conditioned to 2 to 4 percent above optimum moisture content, and recompacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM D1557 standard test method (modified Proctor compaction curve). Based on the explorations (Appendix B) saturated subgrade conditions are expected in deep excavations for undocumented fill removal and the planned basement for the 3-story building, which will require stabilization for support of engineered fill or new structures. Adjustment to the stabilization limits should be anticipated based on observed performance during stabilization. The stabilization methodology may vary and it is the contractor’s responsibility to achieve a non-yielding compacted subgrade prior to fill placement or foundation construction. While the laboratory-indicated moisture contents alone may not cause subgrade instability, the exposed moisture conditions may vary from what is currently reported. As such, we provide this information for planning purposes. The following proven geotechnical solution may be considered should subgrade instability occur during grading. Rock Stabilization: If saturated subgrade conditions exist at the bottom of excavation, a 4- to 6-inch layer of 2- to 3-inch crushed rock should be placed in the excavation. Rock should be mechanically compacted under the weight of the equipment to push the rock into the underlying clay soils. Vibratory equipment should not be used to work in the rock blanket as the vibrations may aggravate locally soft saturated clays causing pumping conditions to expand laterally and destabilize the subgrade further. Clay soils removed from the excavation will require drying prior to reuse and are not considered suitable for use behind retaining walls. PWAS_20240507 - 15 - Depending upon the degree of subgrade instability, should it occur, the initial lift may completely penetrate the subgrade, and additional lifts will be necessary. Alternatively, the quantity of material may be reduced if a geogrid or geotextile fabric is considered to provide additional reinforcement effect after the placement of the initial lift. Geogrid or geotextile reinforcement should be placed with a minimum 3 feet of overlap between adjacent panels extending a distance of at least 5 feet beyond the footprint on all sides. 5.1.3 FILL MATERIALS On-site soil that is free of construction debris, organics, or rock larger than 4 inches in largest dimension is suitable to be used as fill for support of structures. Onsite clayey soils with an Expansion Index greater than 20 should not be used within 2 feet of concrete slabs-on-grade to avoid potential for lightly loaded concrete slabs to heave. Any imported fill soil should be approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to import or use onsite. Import soils should be uncontaminated, granular in nature, free of organic material (loss on ignition less than 2 percent), have a very low expansion potential (with an EI of 20 or lower) and have a low corrosion impact to the proposed improvements. Because of the medium expansive nature of some onsite clay soils, precautions should be taken to reduce the potential heaving of concrete slabs on grade if clay soil is exposed in the subgrade. A 24-inch-thick layer of relatively non-expansive, predominantly granular soils is recommended immediately beneath concrete walks and slabs on grade, including Portland cement concrete paving. This select, non-expansive granular soil should contain sufficient fines as to be relatively impermeable when compacted. Material of this type was observed onsite within the undocumented fill encountered at the boring locations. This granular undocumented fill material may be reused onsite. 5.1.4 FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION All fill soil should be placed in thin, loose lifts, moisture-conditioned, as necessary, to 2 to 4 percent above optimum moisture content, and compacted to a minimum 90% relative compaction as determined by ASTM D 1557 standard test method (modified Proctor compaction curve) within building footprints. Aggregate base for pavement sections should be compacted to a minimum of 95% relative compaction. At least the upper 12 inches of the exposed soils in roadways and access drives, parking and (concrete –paver) flatwork areas, should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D 1557. PWAS_20240507 - 16 - 5.1.5 SHRINKAGE The change in volume of excavated and recompacted soil varies according to soil type and location. This volume change is represented as a percentage increase (bulking) or decrease (shrinkage) in volume of fill after removal and recompaction. Field and laboratory data used in our calculations included laboratory-measured maximum dry density for the general soil type encountered at the subject site, the measured in-place densities of near surface soils encountered and our experience. Based upon the results of the in-place density and the moisture-density relationship exhibited by representative bulk samples of the near surface soils, recompaction of the soils is anticipated to result in volume shrinkage in the range of 10 to 15 percent. The estimated shrinkage does not include material losses due to removal of organic material or other unsuitable bearing materials (debris, rubble, oversize material greater than 6- inches) and the actual shrinkage that occurs during grading may vary throughout the site. 5.1.5 REUSE OF CONCRETE AND ASPHALT IN FILL Pulverized demolition concrete free of rebar and other materials and demolished asphalt pavement can be pulverized to particles no-larger-than (≤) 3-inches and mixed with site soils for use in compacted fill. Blended pulverized concrete and asphalt should be mixed with at least 25% soils by weight. Such materials must be free of and segregated from any hazardous materials and/or organic material of any kind. 5.2 SHORING A shoring system for the site may consist of soldier piles and lagging. Soldier piles may consist of steel H-beams vibrated into place or set in pre-drilled holes and backfilled with lean-mix concrete to the ground surface. If the depth of the excavation is less than about 20 feet, tieback anchors or internal bracing will not be required. Due to shallow groundwater, the potential for caving below groundwater may pose difficulties in the installation of soldier piles set in pre-drilled holes. Accordingly, the shoring contractor should be prepared to use special techniques and measures, if necessary, to permit the proper installation of the soldier piles. 5.2.1 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES For design of cantilevered shoring, where the surface of the backfill is level, it can be assumed that drained soils will exert a lateral pressure equal to that developed by a fluid with a density of 40 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). For design of braced shoring, where the surface of the backfill is level, it can be assumed that drained soils will exert a uniform lateral pressure of 30 pounds per square feet (psf). In addition to the recommended earth PWAS_20240507 - 17 - pressure, the shoring should be designed to resist any applicable surcharge loads due to foundation, storage, traffic, or other anticipated loads. In addition to the recommended earth pressure, the upper 10 feet of shoring adjacent to streets should be designed to resist a uniform lateral pressure 100 psf, acting as a result of an assumed 300 psf surcharge behind the shoring due to normal street traffic. If the traffic is kept back at least 10 feet from the shoring, the traffic surcharge may be neglected. We can determine lateral surcharge pressures for specific cases, such as construction crane, concrete trucks, and other heavy construction equipment adjacent to shoring, if requested. 5.2.2 SURCHARGE PRESSURE FROM ADJACENT BUILDINGS Where existing building foundations are within a 1:1 plane projected upward from the bottom of the planned shoring and basement walls, a lateral surcharge load should be applied to the active earth pressure to account for the pressure imposed by the foundation. To calculate the design surcharge pressures from adjacent building foundations, the tributary loading area may be assumed to extend from the shoring a distance equal to the depth of excavation. Gravity (dead plus live) loads from the existing building foundations within the tributary loading area should be included in the evaluation of surcharge loads. A coefficient of 0.45 may be used to convert gravity loads to horizontal surcharge loads. The horizontal surcharge load should be applied at a depth equal to 1/3 of the shored excavation height. 5.2.3 DESIGN OF SOLDIER PILES For the design of soldier piles spaced at least two diameters on centers (OC), the allowable lateral bearing value (passive value) of the soils below the level of excavation may be assumed to be 500 psf at the excavated surface, up to a maximum of 5,000 psf. To develop the full lateral value, provisions should be taken to assure firm contact between the soldier piles and the undisturbed soils. The concrete placed in the soldier pile excavations may be a lean-mix concrete. However, the concrete used in that portion of the soldier pile which is below the planned excavated level should be of sufficient strength to adequately transfer the imposed loads from the soldier pile to the surrounding soils. The frictional resistance between the soldier piles and the retained earth may be used in resisting the downward component of the design load. The coefficient of friction between the soldier piles and the retained earth may be taken as 0.3. This value is based on the assumption that uniform full bearing will be developed between the steel soldier beam and the lean-mix concrete and between the lean-mix concrete and the retained earth. In addition, provided that the portion of the soldier piles below the excavated level is PWAS_20240507 - 18 - backfilled with structural concrete, the soldier piles below the excavated level may be used to resist downward loads. The frictional resistance between the concrete soldier piles and the soils below the excavated level may be taken as equal to 500 psf. 5.2.4 LAGGING Continuous lagging will be required between the soldier piles. Careful installation of the lagging will be necessary to achieve bearing against the retained earth. The soldier piles should be designed for the full anticipated lateral pressure. However, the pressure on the lagging will be less due to arching in the soils. For clear spans up to 8 feet, we recommend that the lagging be designed for a semi-circular distribution of earth pressure where the maximum pressure is 400 psf at the midline between soldier piles, and 0 psf at the soldier piles. 5.2.5 DEFLECTION It is difficult to accurately predict the amount of deflection of a shored embankment. It should be realized, however, that some deflection will occur. To help protect adjacent existing buildings and infrastructure, the maximum allowable horizontal shoring deflection as measured at the top of the excavation is ½ inch. If greater deflection occurs during construction, additional bracing may be necessary to minimize settlement of adjacent structures and of any utilities in the adjacent streets. To reduce the deflection of the shoring, if desired, a greater active pressure could be used in the shoring design. 5.2.6 MONITORING Some means of monitoring the performance of the shoring system is recommended. The monitoring should consist of periodic surveying of the lateral and vertical locations of the tops of all the soldier piles. We will be pleased to discuss this further with the design consultants and the contractor when the design of the shoring system is finalized. We recommend that the adjacent existing streets be surveyed for horizontal and vertical locations. Also, a careful survey of existing cracks and offsets in the streets should be performed and recorded along with photographic records. A pre-construction benchmark survey establishing horizontal locations and vertical elevations for the adjacent buildings combined with documentation of existing cracks and offsets may be useful in responding to claims of building distress and damage (if any). PWAS_20240507 - 19 - 5.3 FOUNDATIONS Because structural loading information for the proposed buildings is not yet available, we assumed a maximum dead plus live column load of 450 kips in our evaluation. The design of the plinth structure is anticipated to be governed by dynamic loading with relatively small dead loads. The proposed new structures may be supported on a shallow spread footing foundation system established on engineered fill or undisturbed natural soils. 5.3.1 SPREAD FOOTINGS Footings for proposed structures should have a minimum embedment of 2 feet and have a minimum width of 24 inches. Footings for proposed temporary structures may be supported directly on grade. Bearing Value: Footings or post-tensioned concrete slabs with thickened edges established on engineered fill or undisturbed natural soils may be designed to impose an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf). The excavations should be deepened as necessary to extend into satisfactory soils. A 50 percent increase in the bearing value for short duration loading, such as wind or seismic forces, may be used. The ultimate bearing capacity can be taken as 9,000 psf. This value does not incorporate a factor of safety and may only be used for an ultimate bearing capacity check with appropriate factored loads. A resistance factor of 0.45 may be used for initial bearing capacity evaluation with factored loads. The recommended bearing value is a net value, and the weight of concrete in the footings can be taken as 50 pounds per cubic foot (pcf); the weight of soil backfill can be neglected when determining the downward loads. Settlement: The above recommended allowable bearing capacities are generally based on a total post-construction settlement of about 1 inch for column loads not exceeding 450 kips in dead plus live loads. Differential settlement due to static loading is generally estimated at ½ inch over a horizontal distance of 40 feet. Once developed by the structural engineer, we should review total dead and sustained live loads for each column including plan location and span distance, to evaluate if differential settlements between dissimilarly loaded columns will be tolerable. Excessive differential settlement can be mitigated with the use of reduced bearing pressures, deeper footing embedment, possibly changing overexcavation schemes and using imported base material under spread footings, or possibly other methods. PWAS_20240507 - 20 - Lateral Resistance: Soil resistance available to withstand lateral loads on a shallow foundation is a function of the frictional resistance along the base of the footing and the passive resistance that may develop as the face of the structure tends to move into the soil. The frictional resistance between the base of the foundation and the subgrade soil may be computed using a coefficient of friction of 0.3. The passive resistance may be computed using an equivalent fluid pressure of 250 pounds-per-cubic-foot (pcf) up to a maximum of 2,500 psf, assuming there is constant contact between the footing and undisturbed soil. The passive resistance can be increased by one-third when considering short-duration wind or seismic loads. The friction resistance and the passive resistance of the soils can be combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance. Modulus of Subgrade Reaction: For static loading, 20 pounds per cubic inch (pci) may be assumed as the modulus of subgrade reaction (k) for shallow foundations supported on engineered fill or undisturbed natural soils. For seismic loading, a k value of 100 pci may be assumed. 5.3.3 FLAGPOLE TYPE FOUNDATIONS Canopy structures, light poles, and fencing may be supported on flagpole-type foundations. Flagpole-type foundations may be designed to impose an allowable vertical bearing pressure of 2,000 psf and an allowable lateral bearing pressure of 500 psf per foot below grade. The allowable vertical and lateral bearing pressures may be increased by one-third for short-duration loading such as wind or seismic loading. The recommended bearing value is a net value, and the weight of concrete in the flagpole footings can be taken as 50 pounds per cubic foot. 5.3.4 AUGER PRESSURE GROUTED PILES Where required, pile foundations may be used to resist high uplift and moment demands, which is expected at the wave-generating plinth structure. Due to shallow groundwater, auger pressure grouted (APG) piles may be an efficient pile foundation option. APG piles are constructed by advancing a hollow-stem continuous-flight auger into the ground and pumping grout through the hollow shaft of the auger, producing shafts of grout in the soil. Piles are typically designed, built, and installed by specialty pile contractors. Foundation design parameters, including allowable capacities and estimated settlements, must be provided by the specialty contractor. Based on our recent field explorations, we recommend using allowable pile capacities for piles end bearing into dense to very dense sands encountered at depths greater than 25 feet below existing grades. PWAS_20240507 - 21 - The following preliminary axial and lateral design capacities may be used for planning purposes. Allowable Axial APG Pile Capacities (in Kips) Pile Length 16-inch- diameter 18-inch- diameter 35 115 130 40 120 140 45 135 160 50 145 180 The top of the pile is anticipated to be at least 3 feet bgs. Dead plus live load capacities are shown in the table above. A one-third increase may be used for wind or seismic loads. A factor of safety of 2 was used in determining the pile capacities. Uplift capacities may be taken as equal to 60 percent of the downward capacities. The capacities presented are based on the strength of the soils; the strength of the pile section should be checked to verify the structural capacity of the piles. Piles in groups may be spaced at 3 pile diameters on-centers. If the piles are so spaced, no reduction in axial capacity due to group action needs to be considered in the design. Settlement: The settlement of proposed improvements supported on APG piling in the manner recommended will be less than ½ inch. Differential settlement over a horizontal distance of 30 feet will be about ¼ inch or less. Lateral Resistance: Lateral loads may be resisted by the piles and by the passive resistance of the soils. The lateral capacity of the piles will depend on the pile type and size, the permissible deflection, and on the degree of fixity at the top of the pile. We have calculated the lateral load, maximum moments, and depths to zero moment for 16- and 18-inch-diameter APG piles using the computer program LPILE by ENSOFT, Inc. Our computations were performed for pile head deflections of ¼ inch and 3/8 inch. The results are summarized in the tables below. Values may be interpolated for other pile diameters. The results are summarized in the tables below. PWAS_20240507 - 22 - Lateral Load Design Data 16-inch APG Pile Pile Head Deflection (inch) ¼ 3/8 Pile Head Condition Free Fixed Free Fixed Lateral Load (kips) 8 19 11 25 Maximum Moment (inch-kips) 360 1,020 480 1,380 Depth to Maximum Moment (ft) 6 0 7 0 Depth to Zero Moment (ft) 18 20 18 20 Lateral Load Design Data 18-inch APG Pile Pile Head Deflection (inch) ¼ 3/8 Pile Head Condition Free Fixed Free Fixed Lateral Load (kips) 10 23 13 30 Maximum Moment (inch-kips) 480 1,605 660 2,395 Depth to Maximum Moment (ft) 7½ 0 8 0 Depth to Zero Moment (ft) 20 23 20 24 The capacities presented in the table above are for pile lengths equal to or greater than 30 feet below the bottom of pile cap. The lateral capacity and reduction in the bending moment are based in part on the assumption that any required backfill adjacent to the pile caps and grade beams are properly compacted. For piles in groups spaced at least 3 pile diameters on-centers, no reduction in the lateral capacity need be considered for the first row of piles. For subsequent rows in the direction parallel to loading, piles in groups spaced closer than 7 pile diameters on-centers will have a reduction in lateral capacity due to group effects. The lateral capacity of piles in groups spaced at 3 pile diameters on-centers may be assumed to be reduced by half. The reduction for other pile spacings may be interpolated between no reduction for piles spaced at 7 pile diameters on-centers and the reduction for piles spaced at 3 pile diameters on-centers. The passive resistance of properly compacted fill against pile caps, grade beams, and turn-down walls will depend on the method of installation and magnitude of lateral deflection. The passive resistance of properly compacted fill may be assumed to be equal to the pressure developed by a fluid with a density of 250 pcf. A one-third increase in the quoted passive values may be used for wind or seismic loads. The lateral resistance of the piles and the passive resistance of the soils may be combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance. PWAS_20240507 - 23 - Pile Installation: Drilling for new APG piles should not be performed within 5 feet of recently installed piles until the concrete has been allowed to set for at least 6 hours. We recommend that piles in groups be drilled and poured in an alternating sequence to minimize the potential for destabilizing adjacent recently installed piles. The pile excavations will extend below groundwater and through potentially unstable soils that would flow into open excavations. Although not expected to impact APG pile installation, the specialty contractor should evaluate the potential drilling conditions when planning installation methods. Ultimate Values: The various values recommended for foundation design are for use with loadings determined by a conventional working stress design. If the structures are analyzed based on an ultimate design concept, the recommended axial pile capacities may be multiplied by 1.5. In no event, however, should the pile lengths be reduced from those required for support of dead plus live loads when using the working stress design method. 5.4 SLABS-ON-GRADE Concrete slabs-on-grade should be designed by the structural engineer in accordance with 2022 CBC requirements for soils with a high expansion potential. More stringent requirements may be required by the structural engineer and/or architect; however, slabs-on-grade should have the following minimum recommended components:  Subgrade: The near-surface soils can be expansive and will shrink and swell with changes in the moisture content. Therefore, floor slabs-on-grade and adjacent concrete flatwork should be underlain by at least 24 inches of non-expansive fill (EI<21). Existing clay soils at planned basement levels are anticipated to be expansive. Accordingly, removal and replacement with non-expansive fill is recommended at the basement level. Slab-on-grade subgrade soil should be moisture conditioned to within 2% of optimum moisture content, to a minimum depth of 18 inches within building footprints and compacted to 90% of the modified proctor (ASTM D 1557) laboratory maximum density prior to placing either a moisture barrier, steel and/or concrete. Onsite soil may be suitable for this use; however additional expansion testing should be performed upon completion of grading to verify expansive properties of onsite soil.  Moisture Barrier: A moisture barrier consisting of at least 15-mil-thick Stego-wrap vapor barriers (see: http://www.stegoindustries.com/products/stego_wrap_vapor_barrier.php ), or equivalent, should then be placed below slabs where moisture-sensitive floor coverings or equipment will be placed. PWAS_20240507 - 24 -  Reinforced Concrete: A conventionally reinforced concrete slab-on-grade with a thickness of at least 5 inches within the building footprint and 6 inches for exterior SOG in pedestrian areas without heavy loads may be used. Reinforcing steel should be designed by the structural engineer, but as a minimum should be No. 3 rebar placed at 18 inches on-center, each direction (perpendicularly), mid-depth in the slab. A modulus of subgrade reaction (k) as a linear spring constant, of 75 pounds-per-square-inch per inch deflection (pci) can be used for design of heavily loaded slabs-on-grade, assuming a linear response up to deflections on the order of ¾ inch. Minor cracking of concrete after curing due to expansion, drying and shrinkage is normal and will occur. However, cracking is often aggravated by a high water-to-cement ratio, high concrete temperature at the time of placement, small nominal aggregate size, and rapid moisture loss due to hot, dry, and/or windy weather conditions during placement and curing. Cracking due to temperature and moisture fluctuations can also be expected. The use of low- slump concrete or low water/cement ratios can reduce the potential for shrinkage. 5.5 CEMENT TYPE AND CORROSION PROTECTION Based on the results of laboratory testing, concrete structures in contact with the onsite soil are expected to have moderate (S2) exposure to water-soluble sulfates in the soil. Type II/V cement plus pozzolan may be used for concrete construction onsite and the concrete should be designed in accordance with 2022 CBC requirements. The onsite soil may be considered moderately corrosive to ferrous metals. Ferrous pipe should be avoided by using high-density polyethylene (HDPE) or other non-ferrous pipe when possible. Ferrous pipe, if used, should be protected by polyethylene bags, tap or coatings, di-electric fittings or other means to separate the pipe from onsite soils. 5.6 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES Recommended lateral earth pressures are provided as equivalent fluid unit weights, in psf/ft. or pcf., for retaining walls in drained conditions using onsite sandy soils as backfill. Condition Equivalent Fluid Unit Weight (psf/ft) Level Backfill, Static Condition Active 45 At-Rest 65 Passive 250 Coefficient of Friction 0.3 The above passive resistance values do not contain an appreciable factor of safety, so the structural engineer should apply the applicable factors of safety and/or load factors during design. PWAS_20240507 - 25 - Cantilever walls that are designed for a deflection at the top of the wall of at least 0.001H, where H is equal to the wall height, may be designed using the active earth pressure condition. Rigid walls that are not free to rotate, walls that are braced at the top, and walls that provide indirect support for foundations should be designed using the at-rest condition. A seismic increment of 20 pcf may be added to the active earth pressure above to evaluate seismic loading on walls. The above lateral earth pressures are based on fully drained conditions. Infiltrating surface water may build-up behind proposed basement walls. Therefore, walls below grade should be designed to resist hydrostatic pressures (additional fluid pressure of 45 pounds per cubic foot) or be provided with positive drainage behind the wall. Lateral load resistance will be provided by the sliding resistance at the base of the foundation and the passive pressure developed along the front of the foundation. A frictional resistance coefficient of 0.3 may be used at the concrete and soil interface. In addition to the above lateral forces due to retained earth, the appropriate loads due to surcharges should be considered in the design of retaining structures. 5.7 PAVEMENT DESIGN 5.7.1 ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVING The paving thicknesses presented in the table below are based on our review of available subsurface data. We assumed an R-value of 5 for design (laboratory test results ranged from 0 to 17). 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 the on-site or comparable soils compacted to at least 95% of the maximum dry density obtainable by the ASTM Designation D1557 method of compaction as recommended, the minimum recommended paving thicknesses are presented in the following table. Area Traffic Index Asphalt Concrete (inches) Base Course (inches) Parking Areas 4 3 6½ Light Truck 5 4 7½ Heavy Truck 6 5 9½ Main Drives 7 6 11½ 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 recommended to verify that the recommended thicknesses or greater are achieved, and that proper construction procedures are followed. I I I I I PWAS_20240507 - 26 - 5.7.2 PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE PAVING We have assumed that the subgrade consisting of a layer of non-expansive fill below Portland cement concrete paving will have an R-value of at least 20, which will need to be verified during grading. 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 Portland Cement Concrete will have a compressive strength of at least 4,000 pounds per square inch. Area Traffic Index PCC (inches) Base Course (inches) Parking Areas 4 5½ 4 Light Truck 5 6 4 Heavy Truck 6 6½ 4 Main Drives 7 7½ 4 The paving should be provided with expansion 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. 5.7.3 SPECIFICATIONS The base course should conform to requirements of Section 26 of State of California Department of Transportation Standard Specifications (Caltrans), latest edition, or meet the specifications for untreated base as defined in Section 200-2 of the latest edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book). The existing asphalt paving may be used for base course if it is crushed and processed to meet the requirements of crushed miscellaneous base per the Green Book. The base course should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. The asphalt concrete should conform to the specifications outlined in Section 203-6 of the Green Book, and asphalt concrete construction methods should meet the requirements of Section 302-5 of the Green Book. 5.8 TEMPORARY EXCAVATIONS All temporary excavations, including utility trenches, retaining wall excavations, and foundation excavations should be performed in accordance with project plans, specifications, and all OSHA requirements. Excavations 4 feet or deeper should be laid back or shored in accordance with OSHA requirements before personnel are allowed to enter. Shoring recommendations are provided in Section 5.2 above. PWAS_20240507 - 27 - No surcharge loads should be permitted within a horizontal distance equal to the height of cut or 5 feet, whichever is greater from the top of the cut, unless the cut is shored appropriately. Excavations that extend below an imaginary plane inclined at 45 degrees below the edge of any adjacent existing site foundation should be properly shored to maintain support of the adjacent structure. Temporary excavations should be treated in accordance with the State of California version of OSHA excavation regulations, Construction Safety Orders for Excavation General Requirements, Article 6, Section 1541, effective October 1, 1995. The sides of excavations should be shored or sloped in accordance with OSHA regulations. OSHA allows the sides of unbraced excavations, up to a maximum height of 20 feet, to be cut to a ¾H:1V (horizontal:vertical) slope for Type A soils, 1H:1V for Type B soils, and 1½H:1V for Type C soils. Onsite soils are to be considered Type C soils which are subject to collapse in shallow unbraced excavations (i.e. approximately 3 feet in vertical height). During construction, the soil conditions should be regularly evaluated to verify that conditions are as anticipated. The contractor shall be responsible for providing the “competent person” required by OSHA standards to evaluate soil conditions. Close coordination between the competent person and the geotechnical engineer should be maintained to facilitate construction while providing safe excavations. 5.9 TRENCH BACKFILL Utility trenches should be backfilled with compacted fill in accordance with Sections 306-1 and 306- 6 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, (“Greenbook”), 2018 Edition. Utility trenches can be backfilled with onsite sandy material free of rubble, debris, organic and oversized material up to (≤) 3-inches in largest dimension. Prior to backfilling trenches, pipes should be bedded in and covered with either: (1) Sand: A uniform, sand material that has a Sand Equivalent (SE) greater-than-or-equal-to () 30, passing the No. 4 U.S. Standard Sieve (or as specified by the pipe manufacturer), water densified in place, or (2) CLSM: Controlled Low Strength Material (CLSM) conforming to Section 201-6 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, (“Greenbook”), 2018 Edition. Pipe bedding should extend at least 4 inches below the pipeline invert and at least 12 inches over the top of the pipeline. Native and clean fill soils can be used as backfill over the pipe bedding zone, and should be placed in thin lifts, moisture conditioned above optimum, and mechanically compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction, relative to the ASTM D 1557 laboratory maximum density. PWAS_20240507 - 28 - 5.10 DRAINAGE AND LANDSCAPING Building walls below grade should be waterproofed or at least damp proofed, depending upon the degree of moisture protection desired. Surface drainage should be designed to direct water away from foundations and toward approved drainage devices. Irrigation of landscaping should be controlled to maintain, as much as possible, consistent moisture content sufficient to provide healthy plant growth without overwatering. 5.11 ADDITIONAL GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES The geotechnical recommendations presented in this report are based on subsurface conditions as interpreted from limited subsurface explorations and limited laboratory testing. Our conclusions and recommendations presented in this report should be reviewed and verified by Carl Kim Geo during site construction and revised accordingly if exposed geotechnical conditions vary from our preliminary findings and interpretations. The recommendations presented in this report are only valid if Carl Kim Geo verifies the site conditions during construction. Geotechnical observation and testing should be provided during the following activities:  Grading and excavation of the site;  Overexcavation and compaction;  Compaction of all fill materials;  Excavation and installation of foundations;  After excavation of all slabs and footings and prior to placement of steel or concrete to confirm the slabs and footings are founded in firm, compacted fill;  Utility trench backfilling and compaction; and  When any conditions are encountered that varies significantly from the conditions described in this report. Carl Kim Geo should review the final grading and foundation plans and specifications, when available, to comment on the geotechnical aspects. Our recommendations should be revised, as necessary, based on future plans and incorporated into the final design plans and specifications. PWAS_20240507 - 29 - 6.0 LIMITATIONS The geotechnical engineering analyses presented in this geotechnical exploration report have been conducted in general accordance with current practice and the standard of care exercised by geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in the project area. No other warranty, express or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations, and opinions presented in this report. Please also note that our evaluation was limited to assessment of the geologic and seismic aspects of the site, and did not include evaluation of structural issues, environmental concerns or the presence of hazardous materials. Our conclusions, recommendations and opinions are based on an analysis of the observed site conditions, engineering characteristics of the observed site soils and our review of the referenced geologic literature and reports. If geologic conditions different from those described in this report are encountered, our office should be notified and additional recommendations, if warranted, will be provided upon request. FIGURES AND PLATES Delhi Ch a n n e l Upper Newport Bay San Diego Creek Santa Ana Heights CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NUMBER: Ü02,000 4,0001,000 Feet 1 inch =2,000 feet Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 CARLKIMGEO@GMAIL.COMFi l e : X : \ C a r l K i m \ C a l i f o r n i a \ N e w p o r t B e a c h _ C A \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e A v e \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e _ N e w p o r t B e a c h C A . a p r x 6 / 2 1 / 2 0 2 4 C r e a t e d b y : P M C h e c k e d b y : A H C o o r d i n a t e S y s t e m : N A D 1 9 8 3 S t a t e P l a n e C a l i f o r n i a V I F I P S 0 4 0 6 F e e t Legend Site Boundary PWAS_20240507 Site Location FIGURE 1 Imagery Source: California F&W. 2022. Back Bay Barrels, LLC Wavegarden Cove 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA July 2024 Site Location D CKGEO - CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NUMBER: š0 300 600150 Feet 1 inch =300 feet Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 CARLKIMGEO@GMAIL.COMFi l e : X : \ C a r l K i m \ C a l i f o r n i a \ N e w p o r t B e a c h _ C A \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e A v e \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e _ N e w p o r t B e a c h C A _ H i s t o r i c A e r i a l s . a p r x 6 / 1 9 / 2 0 2 4 C r e a t e d b y : P M C h e c k e d b y : A H C o o r d i n a t e S y s t e m : N A D 1 9 8 3 S t a t e P l a n e C a l i f o r n i a V I F I P S 0 4 0 6 F e e t Legend Site Boundary (approximate) Historic Aerial (1927) FIGURE 2APWAS_20240507 Back Bay Barrels, LLC Wavegarden Cove 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA July 2024 CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NUMBER: š0 300 600150 Feet 1 inch =300 feet Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 CARLKIMGEO@GMAIL.COMFi l e : X : \ C a r l K i m \ C a l i f o r n i a \ N e w p o r t B e a c h _ C A \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e A v e \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e _ N e w p o r t B e a c h C A _ H i s t o r i c A e r i a l s . a p r x 6 / 1 9 / 2 0 2 4 C r e a t e d b y : P M C h e c k e d b y : A H C o o r d i n a t e S y s t e m : N A D 1 9 8 3 S t a t e P l a n e C a l i f o r n i a V I F I P S 0 4 0 6 F e e t Legend Site Boundary (approximate) Historic Aerial (1938) FIGURE 2BPWAS_20240507 Back Bay Barrels, LLC Wavegarden Cove 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA July 2024 CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NUMBER: š0 300 600150 Feet 1 inch =300 feet Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 CARLKIMGEO@GMAIL.COMFi l e : X : \ C a r l K i m \ C a l i f o r n i a \ N e w p o r t B e a c h _ C A \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e A v e \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e _ N e w p o r t B e a c h C A _ H i s t o r i c A e r i a l s . a p r x 6 / 1 9 / 2 0 2 4 C r e a t e d b y : P M C h e c k e d b y : A H C o o r d i n a t e S y s t e m : N A D 1 9 8 3 S t a t e P l a n e C a l i f o r n i a V I F I P S 0 4 0 6 F e e t Legend Site Boundary (approximate) Historic Aerial (1963) FIGURE 2CPWAS_20240507 Back Bay Barrels, LLC Wavegarden Cove 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA July 2024 CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NUMBER: š0 300 600150 Feet 1 inch =300 feet Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 CARLKIMGEO@GMAIL.COMFi l e : X : \ C a r l K i m \ C a l i f o r n i a \ N e w p o r t B e a c h _ C A \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e A v e \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e _ N e w p o r t B e a c h C A _ H i s t o r i c A e r i a l s . a p r x 6 / 1 9 / 2 0 2 4 C r e a t e d b y : P M C h e c k e d b y : A H C o o r d i n a t e S y s t e m : N A D 1 9 8 3 S t a t e P l a n e C a l i f o r n i a V I F I P S 0 4 0 6 F e e t Legend Site Boundary (approximate) Historic Aerial (1968) FIGURE 2DPWAS_20240507 Back Bay Barrels, LLC Wavegarden Cove 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA July 2024 CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NUMBER: š0 300 600150 Feet 1 inch =300 feet Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 CARLKIMGEO@GMAIL.COMFi l e : X : \ C a r l K i m \ C a l i f o r n i a \ N e w p o r t B e a c h _ C A \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e A v e \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e _ N e w p o r t B e a c h C A _ H i s t o r i c A e r i a l s . a p r x 6 / 1 9 / 2 0 2 4 C r e a t e d b y : P M C h e c k e d b y : A H C o o r d i n a t e S y s t e m : N A D 1 9 8 3 S t a t e P l a n e C a l i f o r n i a V I F I P S 0 4 0 6 F e e t Legend Site Boundary (approximate) Historic Aerial (2001) FIGURE 2EPWAS_20240507 Back Bay Barrels, LLC Wavegarden Cove 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA July 2024 CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NUMBER: š0 8,000 16,0004,000 Feet 1 inch =8,000 feet Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 CARLKIMGEO@GMAIL.COMFi l e : X : \ C a r l K i m \ C a l i f o r n i a \ N e w p o r t B e a c h _ C A \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e A v e \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e _ N e w p o r t B e a c h C A . a p r x 6 / 1 9 / 2 0 2 4 C r e a t e d b y : P M C h e c k e d b y : A H C o o r d i n a t e S y s t e m : N A D 1 9 8 3 S t a t e P l a n e C a l i f o r n i a V I F I P S 0 4 0 6 F e e t Geologic Map FIGURE 3 Legend Site Boundary Geologic Map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30' x 60' Quadrangles, California, Douglas M. Morton and Fred K. Miller, 2006, USGS Open File report 2006-1217 Site Location PWAS_20240507 Back Bay Barrels, LLC Wavegarden Cove 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA July 2024 Newpo 1+ . .J3each ... •. D CKGEO - CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NUMBER: š0 5,000 10,0002,500 Feet 1 inch =5,000 feet Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 CARLKIMGEO@GMAIL.COMFi l e : X : \ C a r l K i m \ C a l i f o r n i a \ N e w p o r t B e a c h _ C A \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e A v e \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e _ N e w p o r t B e a c h C A . a p r x 6 / 1 9 / 2 0 2 4 C r e a t e d b y : P M C h e c k e d b y : A H C o o r d i n a t e S y s t e m : N A D 1 9 8 3 S t a t e P l a n e C a l i f o r n i a V I F I P S 0 4 0 6 F e e t Historic High Groundwater Level FIGURE 4 Base Map: Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Newport Beach 7.5 Quadrangle, Plate 1.2 Historically Highest Ground Water Contours and Borehole Log Data Locations Site Location Legend Site Boundary Estimated depth to historic high groundwater level in feet10 !(Borehole Site PWAS_20240507 Back Bay Barrels, LLC Wavegarden Cove 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA July 2024 I 9 t h <;J !2 ll. • • w 0 E W tl1 I • • .. O'". • • > a:i 0 .0 "' ::r CKGEO - -n; ... '.f. i '~ . C/1 :n WA Ii, nAtJc-e • • • • OS -~ • ' •• • • • .._ • si tfJ V) ED t ~ -- D ,;-, <-" " <: --:: ' "'· ~ ~ ... J~ ,;. ,..?J ~I,) C o" ,:,S' ') San qui n rt,., ::-,, <t: 7, Tl,e ['1·tr IT, 1111 L~g / Q:-1:S-Irv [ I Hi ll s JY te CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NUMBER: š0 50,000 100,00025,000 Feet 1 inch =50,000 feet Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 CARLKIMGEO@GMAIL.COMFi l e : X : \ C a r l K i m \ C a l i f o r n i a \ N e w p o r t B e a c h _ C A \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e A v e \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e _ N e w p o r t B e a c h C A . a p r x 6 / 1 9 / 2 0 2 4 C r e a t e d b y : P M C h e c k e d b y : A H C o o r d i n a t e S y s t e m : N A D 1 9 8 3 S t a t e P l a n e C a l i f o r n i a V I F I P S 0 4 0 6 F e e t Regional Faults FIGURE 5 Base Map: Fault Activity Map of California, California Department of Conservation Site Location Legend Historic Holocene Late Quaternary Quaternary Holocene PWAS_20240507 Back Bay Barrels, LLC Wavegarden Cove 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA July 2024 Sa nt a An ---- CKGEO - M1>,I 1 Vi~io L ag un J N i ual t.liru Lo m;i C ~nm Ft, ji~ n r ,~""" 1:01 9:1 Occo11&1d !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( 100 K i lo m e ter S ite Rad ius CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NUMBER: Ü0100,000 200,00050,000 Feet 1 inch =100,000 feet Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 CARLKIMGEO@GMAIL.COMFi l e : X : \ C a r l K i m \ C a l i f o r n i a \ N e w p o r t B e a c h _ C A \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e A v e \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e _ N e w p o r t B e a c h C A . a p r x 6 / 1 9 / 2 0 2 4 C r e a t e d b y : P M C h e c k e d b y : A H C o o r d i n a t e S y s t e m : N A D 1 9 8 3 S t a t e P l a n e C a l i f o r n i a V I F I P S 0 4 0 6 F e e t Historic Seismicity FIGURE 6 Base Map: Earthquake Hazards Program. USGS. Site Location Historic Earthquakes, 1769-2015 - California (Magnitude 5.0 Plus) Legend !(4 - 5 !(5 - 6 !(6 - 7 7+!( PWAS_20240507 Back Bay Barrels, LLC Wavegarden Cove 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA July 2024 rd - CKGEO - y, l o il le ···'"' ··~~·~ . ......... ~ ~ .. Lo s An ge tes Re don o ·,, B a 1 L O)~ e ~Cll . • ... ~. H un1111~l B ea \\re_st 1 ~ 11 ln:il An.ah 1111 Smt aAll . I dllQ'C- 1\, Corona ", ....... \ ~~ili, do ~ "· OLJ( 1'1t(~ .. ...._ L ;,;J Ui kl ,~1g1 1~1 t,Aur ri e4 a•,, Clc 1 ,e 111 0 c r F-'I> ,1.,lun ;a m,, ~ , p IJJ.oo ,~ '\, ~- S n S 11 f:t C; I I ti SIi CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NUMBER: Ü02,000 4,0001,000 Feet 1 inch =2,000 feet Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 CARLKIMGEO@GMAIL.COMFi l e : X : \ C a r l K i m \ C a l i f o r n i a \ N e w p o r t B e a c h _ C A \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e A v e \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e _ N e w p o r t B e a c h C A . a p r x 6 / 1 9 / 2 0 2 4 C r e a t e d b y : P M C h e c k e d b y : A H C o o r d i n a t e S y s t e m : N A D 1 9 8 3 S t a t e P l a n e C a l i f o r n i a V I F I P S 0 4 0 6 F e e t Seismic Hazards Base Map: CGS Seismic Hazards Program: Liquefaction and Landslide Zones, California Department of Conservation Site Location Legend Site Boundary Liquefaction Zones Landslide Zones FIGURE 7PWAS_20240507 Back Bay Barrels, LLC Wavegarden Cove 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA July 2024 J ~.:.m nan, Coro1 ..i L -1 -sru~:.:s~rs➔ ,;;, .., ~ CKGEO - ,..-.... ,7 (r----- f0,~IJ ,l /!' /./ D - c, CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NUMBER: Ü02,000 4,0001,000 Feet 1 inch =2,000 feet Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 CARLKIMGEO@GMAIL.COMFi l e : X : \ C a r l K i m \ C a l i f o r n i a \ N e w p o r t B e a c h _ C A \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e A v e \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e _ N e w p o r t B e a c h C A . a p r x 6 / 1 9 / 2 0 2 4 C r e a t e d b y : P M C h e c k e d b y : A H C o o r d i n a t e S y s t e m : N A D 1 9 8 3 S t a t e P l a n e C a l i f o r n i a V I F I P S 0 4 0 6 F e e t Legend Site Boundary Tsunami Hazard Area Tsunami Hazard FIGURE 8 Tsunami Inundation Source: California Department of Conservation. California Tsunami Maps. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps Site Location PWAS_20240507 Back Bay Barrels, LLC Wavegarden Cove 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA July 2024 r .. l fl.S.1 1"1!!- Gan r I Dr C11 r:11 -" Snt,.:ll::l llr S1 : J: ~ .,, F 1r O r Cos ta M Sil ... , s ~KGEO 5 .. t.11 • r:,.. h')' Ch.ob (jr~ ~ ,_,~<f S ~1LaAn..:1 H Al ~h CJ CJ ,.hit~,~ DiJ 11 I~ ,. LI M I T O F S T U D Y /[L9bd͗ twhW9/d͗ twhW9/d bha.9w͗ ÜϬϮ͕ϬϬϬ ϰ͕ϬϬϬϭ͕ϬϬϬ CĞĞƚ ϭ ŝŶĐŚ сϮ͕ϬϬϬ ĨĞĞƚ Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. ϵϰϱ .ĂŝůĞLJĂŶĂ wŽĂĚ IŝůůƐďŽƌŽƵŐŚ͕ / ϵϰϬϭϬ ϵϰϵͲϰϰϭͲϴϭϰϯ CARLKIMGEO@GMAIL.COMCŝ ů Ğ ͗ y ͗ Ͱ / Ă ƌ ů Y ŝ ŵ Ͱ / Ă ů ŝ Ĩ Ž ƌ Ŷ ŝ Ă Ͱ b Ğ ǁ Ɖ Ž ƌ ƚ . Ğ Ă Đ Ś ͺ /  Ͱ ϯ ϭ Ϭ Ϭ L ƌ ǀ ŝ Ŷ Ğ  ǀ Ğ Ͱ ϯ ϭ Ϭ Ϭ L ƌ ǀ ŝ Ŷ Ğ ͺ b Ğ ǁ Ɖ Ž ƌ ƚ . Ğ Ă Đ Ś /  ͘ Ă Ɖ ƌ dž ϲ ͬ ϭ ϵ ͬ Ϯ Ϭ Ϯ ϰ / ƌ Ğ Ă ƚ Ğ Ě ď LJ ͗ t a / Ś Ğ Đ Ŭ Ğ Ě ď LJ ͗  I / Ž Ž ƌ Ě ŝ Ŷ Ă ƚ Ğ ^ LJ Ɛ ƚ Ğ ŵ ͗ b  5 ϭ ϵ ϴ ϯ ^ ƚ Ă ƚ Ğ t ů Ă Ŷ Ğ / Ă ů ŝ Ĩ Ž ƌ Ŷ ŝ Ă s L C L t ^ Ϭ ϰ Ϭ ϲ C Ğ Ğ ƚ Flood Hazards CůŽŽĚ [ĂLJĞƌ ^ŽƵƌĐĞ͗ C9aΖƐ bĂƟŽŶĂů CůŽŽĚ IĂnjĂƌĚ [ĂLJĞƌ ^ŝƚĞ [ŽĐĂƟŽŶ [ĞŐĞŶĚ ^ŝƚĞ .ŽƵŶĚĂƌLJ ϭй ŶŶƵĂů /ŚĂŶĐĞ CůŽŽĚ IĂnjĂƌĚ Ϭ͘Ϯй ŶŶƵĂů /ŚĂŶĐĞ CůŽŽĚ IĂnjĂƌĚ FIGURE 9tt^ͺϮϬϮϰϬϱϬϳ .ĂĐŬ .ĂLJ .ĂƌƌĞůƐ͕ [[/ tĂǀĞŐĂƌĚĞŶ /ŽǀĞ ϯϭϬϬ LƌǀŝŶĞ ǀĞŶƵĞ bĞ ǁƉŽƌƚ .ĞĂĐŚ͕ / July 2024 J ~.:.m na n 1 Coro1 ..i L -1 -sru~:.:s~rs➔ ,;;, .., ~ D ~KGEO --~11 lrv!! _ " ... u111 c, .. " 9- E CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NUMBER: š0 3,000 6,0001,500 Feet 1 inch =3,000 feet Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 CARLKIMGEO@GMAIL.COMFi l e : X : \ C a r l K i m \ C a l i f o r n i a \ N e w p o r t B e a c h _ C A \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e A v e \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e _ N e w p o r t B e a c h C A . a p r x 6 / 1 9 / 2 0 2 4 C r e a t e d b y : P M C h e c k e d b y : A H C o o r d i n a t e S y s t e m : N A D 1 9 8 3 S t a t e P l a n e C a l i f o r n i a V I F I P S 0 4 0 6 F e e t Dam Inundation Dam Inundation Source: California Department of Water Resources, Division of Safety of Dams (DSOD). California Dam Breach Inundation Maps. Site Location Legend Site Boundary Dam Breach Inundation Scenario (Santiago Creek, No. 75-0) Dam Breach Inundation Scenario (Sand Canyon, No. 1029-2) Dam Breach Inundation Scenario (San Juaquin Reservoir, No. 1029-0) FIGURE 10PWAS_20240507 Back Bay Barrels, LLC Wavegarden Cove 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA July 2024 Ot n Co l ~ M!mnm, Vil v ,0 c:. a-- 3 q ',~:e1on 1 Wuke F Ar lU'l!J n Dr C os ta Me CKGEO - D D ~ D CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NUMBER: Back Bay Barrels, LLC Wavegarden Cove 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA PWAS_20240507 Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 CARLKIMGEO@GMAIL.COM EXPLORATIONS PLATE 1July 2024 Aerial Imagery Source: ©2024. Microsoft Corporation. 50 100 200 N X: \ C a r l K i m \ C a l i f o r n i a \ N e w p o r t B e a c h _ C A \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e A v e \ 3 1 0 0 I r v i n e _ N e w p o r t B e a c h C A - P l a t e 1 _ E x p l o r a t i o n s . d w g ; L a y o u t 1 J u l y 1 0 , 2 0 2 4 0 EXPLANATION CURRENT EXPLORATIONS HAND AUGER CONE PENETRATION TEST (CPT) PRIOR EXPLORATIONS BORING BY BACA ASSOCIATES (1989) BORING BY MOORE TWINING, (P) DENOTES TEMPORARY PIEZOMETER CONE PENETRATION TEST (CPT) BY MOORE TWINING OTHER SYMBOLS GROUNDWATER TOTAL DEPTH OTHER SYMBOLS (CONTINUED) GEOLOGIC CONTACT (APPROXIMATE, DOTTED WHERE BURIED, QUIERRIED WHERE UNCERTAIN) PROPERTY LINE CROSS SECTION TRANSECT EARTH MATERIALS ARTIFICIAL FILL (UNDOCUMENTED) QUATERNARY (TO HOLOCENE) ALLUVIUM (RIVERINE AND LAGOONAL FACIES) QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (UPLIFTED MARINE AND NEARSHORE) * CIRCLED WHERE BURIED (GW) (TD) afu Qal Qt ? UP DN ATHLETE ACCOMMODATIONS SERVICE / STORAGE UP 20% R A M P UP FF 29'0" M E S A D R I V E SANTA A N A - D E L H I C H A N N E L IRVIN E A V E N U E PAD=47.00 PAD=44.00 PAD=47.00 PAD=37.00 PAD=41.00 PAD=41.00 BASEMENT PAD=27.00 PAD=39.00 F' E' D' C' A' B' A B C D F E Qal Qt Qt Qt afu Qal (?) Qal Qal afu afu afu Qt Qal afu Qt afu Qal afu afu Qt Qt BB-3 BB-4 BB-2 BB-1 HA-2 HA-1 Qal (?)CPT-1 CPT-2 CPT-3 CPT-4 CKG CPT-7 CKG CPT-4 CKG CPT-5 CKG CPT-3 CKG CPT-6 CKG CPT-1 CKG CPT-2 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ???? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? B-1 B-2 B-8 B-7 B-4 B-3 B-5 B-23 (P) B-22 (P) B-21 B-6 B-24 (P) B-9 B-17 (P) B-10 B-11 B-12 B-14 B-13 B-15 B-26B-16 B-25 B-18 (P) B-20 B-19 (P) GW @30' (2020) Piezo. (TD 40') TD 39.5' GW @ 18' (2019) TD 51.5' GW @ 26' (2020) Piezo. (TD 35') TD 35' No free GW (2019) TD 21.5' GW @ 20' (2019) TD 46.5' No free GW (2019) TD 6.5' No free GW (2019) TD 20' TD 34.4' No free GW (2019) TD 20' No free GW (2019) TD 46.5' No free GW (2020) TD 25'No free GW (2019) TD 46.5' No free GW (2020) TD 30' No free GW (2019) TD 31.5' TD 47.58' No free GW (2020) Piezo. (TD 55') TD 76.5' No free GW (2019) TD 21.5' GW @ 18' (2020) Piezo. (TD 50') TD 51.5' No free GW (2019) TD 51.5' GW @ 29' (2020) Piezo. (TD 55') TD 56.5' GW @ 37' (2020) TD 66.5' No free GW (2019) TD 71.5' No free GW (2020) TD 21.5' GW @ 30' (2020) Piezo. (TD 35') TD 36.5' No free GW (2019) TD 40' TD 26.13' No free GW (2019) TD 41.5' GW @ 30' (2019) TD 31.5' TD 29.14' No free GW (2019) TD 21.5' TD 50.4' TD 50.5' TD 50.3' GW@~55.1' TD 75.3' TD 50.3' TD 50.3' TD 50.3' No free GW (1989) TD 15' No free GW (1989) TD 25' No free GW (1989) TD 15' No free GW (1989) TD 25' AREA WITH POTENTIAL FOR PERCHED WATER BELOW APPROXIMATE ELEVATION +16 FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL (MSL) .8 GREEN 23.3 \ 11;4 17,3 21.2 20,4 19.3 ,24.4 ..--LD.J -{\\Jt-X Ztf 511<\JI~ - X -~5.5 -?5.4 -f\SPr1 -- ooo't<>o • / x - ¥-ASPH ---- 27.6 \ • •• 'f\ I \\ \\~ d~83 \, .. •· ~OJ ' ----' -" v ------------~~~-------\---- , "' • ~\.--f', __,. 3'1\ X ' ' 55.4 56.6 " l----r1 ,, QQ 1 6 • ,----------, CKGEO 0 ----• • • • • • • • • • ------ El e v a t i o n ( F e e t A b o v e M S L ) -50 100 0 50 A 200 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t A b o v e M S L ) -50 0 50 A' Qal Qal afuafu ⅊ Exisiting Grade Proposed Grade Santa Ana-Delhi Channel T.D.50.5'T.D.50.4' CK G C P T - 2 CK G C P T - 1 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t A b o v e M S L ) -50 100 0 50 B 200 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t A b o v e M S L ) -50 0 50 B' T.D.41.5' T.D.40' ⅊ B- 5 ( P r o j . ~ 1 1 ' ⊥ ) Santa Ana-Delhi Channel Proposed Grade CP F - 1 ( P r o j . ~ 2 0 ' ⊥ ) B- 3 ( P r o j . ~ 3 2 ' ⊥ ) af af Qal Qal CROSS SECTION A-A'CROSS SECTION B-B' af ??? ? ?? Qt Qt Qt Qt ? ????? El e v a t i o n ( F e e t A b o v e M S L ) -50 150 600 0 50 100 ⅊⅊ IP IP IP C' Proposed Building 3-Story W/Basement C El e v a t i o n ( F e e t A b o v e M S L ) -50 0 50 Exisiting GradeCP T - 2 ( P r o j ~ 4 8 ' ) B- 2 ( P r o j ~ 2 0 ' ) Proposed Grade El e v a t i o n ( F e e t A b o v e M S L ) T.D.50' T.D.29.1' T.D.75.3' T.D.76.5' T.D. 71.5' T.D.50.3' T.D.21.5' CK G C P T - 6 CK G C P T - 3 B- 2 1 ( P r o j ~ 2 5 ' ) B- 2 3 ( P r o j ~ 1 7 ' ) CK G C P T - 5 Pr o p o s e d A c c e s s R o a d Pr o p o s e d B u i l d i n g Santa Ana-Delhi Channel T.D.21.5' T.D.36.5' IP 350 IP IP B- 1 ( P r o j ~ 2 6 ' ) B- 2 2 ( P r o j ~ 6 3 ' ) afuafu Qal Qal afu CROSS SECTION C-C' ? ?? Qt Qt Qt ? Qal ?? ?? Note: IP = Inflection Point El e v a t i o n ( F e e t A b o v e M S L ) -50 100 0 50 D El e v a t i o n ( F e e t A b o v e M S L ) -50 0 50 D' T.D.30' T.D.50.3' T.D.31.5'T.D.51.5'T.D.51.5' T.D. 50.5' ⅊ ⅊ Santa Ana-Delhi Channel CK G C P T - 4 B- 8 HA - 1 B- 1 8 ( P r o j . ~ 1 8 ' ⊥ ) B- 7 ( P r o j . ~ 8 1 ' ) Proposed Grade Plinth Structure Proposed Pathway af Afu Qal Qal Qt Qt Qt Qt 200 300 400 500 600 700 B- 2 5 ( P r o j . ~ 2 7 ' ⊥ ) B- 2 4 ( P r o j . ~ 1 2 ' ⊥ ) CROSS SECTION D-D' ?? ?? CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NUMBER: Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 CARLKIMGEO@GMAIL.COM CROSS SECTIONS PLATE 2A July 2024 50 50 HORIZONTAL SCALE (IN FEET) VE R T I C A L S C A L E (I N F E E T ) Back Bay Barrels, LLC Wavegarden Cove 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA PWAS_20240507 EXPLANATION BORING EXISTING GRADE PROPOSED GRADE PROPERTY LINE ARTIFICIAL FILL, UNDOCUMENTED/ DOCUMENTED ALLUVIUM TERRACE DEPOSIT MEAN SEA LEVEL GROUNDWATER LEVEL STATIC GROUNDWATER LEVEL PERCHED GROUNDWATER LEVEL Qal MSL ⅊ afu Qt +----_ _J _ ,, r-,,.-~~----;---~--------L-------...!--~-::-:-~_-d ..... l ..... . r _____ _.. / ................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . ----~~ .. :::::::::::: :: : : :: : : : : : : : : : : : : : .................................... . ------- .... ! ... 1 ----- / ·-·--·-·-r -·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-· r---7 ----------------------------------L ___ ...J r---7 L ___ ...J .I. CKGEO El e v a t i o n ( F e e t A b o v e M S L ) -50 0 50 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t A b o v e M S L ) -50 100 0 50 E 200 300 400 500 600 700 El e v a t i o n ( F e e t A b o v e M S L ) -50 0 50 E' T.D.66.5' T.D.51.5'T.D.51.5'T.D.51.5' T.D.35' T.D.50.3' B- 2 0 ( P r o j . ~ 2 4 ' ) Exisiting Grade Proposed Grade B- 7 ( P r o j . ~ 3 8 ' ) B- 1 8 ( P r o j . ~ 5 8 ' ) B- 9 ( P r o j . ~ 2 6 ' ) B- 1 7 ( P r o j . ~ 6 3 ' ) CK G - 7 B- 1 0 ( P r o j . ~ 9 ' ) HA - 2 ⅊ Proposed Walkway Proposed Plinth Structure CROSS SECTION E-E' Qt Qt Qt ? El e v a t i o n ( F e e t A b o v e M S L ) -50 100 0 50 F El e v a t i o n ( F e e t A b o v e M S L ) -50 0 50 F 200 300 400 500 ⅊ Exisiting Club House Exisiting Building Exisiting GradeProposed Grade Exisiting 2-Story T.D.20' T.D.46.5' T.D.50.3' T.D.21' B B - 1 ( P r o j ~ 7 5 ' ) HA - 2 B- 1 0 CK G C P T - 7 B- 1 1 ( P r o j . ~ 1 4 ' ) B- 1 4 ( P r o j . ~ 7 4 ' ) Qal Af (?)Af Qal Af T.D.15' CROSS SECTION F-F' Proposed Plinth Stucture ?? Qt Qt Qt??? CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NUMBER: Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 CARLKIMGEO@GMAIL.COM CROSS SECTIONS PLATE 2B July 2024 50 50 HORIZONTAL SCALE (IN FEET) VE R T I C A L S C A L E (I N F E E T ) EXPLANATION BORING EXISTING GRADE PROPOSED GRADE PROPERTY LINE ARTIFICIAL FILL, UNDOCUMENTED/ DOCUMENTED ALLUVIUM TERRACE DEPOSIT MEAN SEA LEVEL GROUNDWATER LEVEL STATIC GROUNDWATER LEVEL PERCHED GROUNDWATER LEVEL Qal MSL ⅊ afu Back Bay Barrels, LLC Wavegarden Cove 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA PWAS_20240507 Qt l j l ........................................................ . ... =r ..n-: . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I • .... .. . .... .. . .... -·-·-·-·-· . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .................... : : : : : : : : : : :: : : :: : : :: : : : : : : ... ::.:. ... :;.:.:_:;.:.:~----·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-· ---:. • •• • • •• • • • • •••••••• : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :: : : :: : : :: : : : : : •• ::.:::.:::.:::.:::.:::.: :.:::.:::.:::.:::.:::.:::.:=-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·--·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·=·--=-::===:::.I~==·-==:::~.~-=~.~~----~-~:.-:.-:.-:.-:.-::.:.-:.-_._ -·-·-·-·-·-· a7---·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-· ·-·-·---·-·-·-·-· :=::=::::.-=:,_, _____ , _______ , _______ , ___ , =-•-·-·-·-·-·- ..L r ..... . . . . . ,,, .i.. ·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-------------------------. -=~~:-=~ ......... "::~:..~~----·-·-·-·-·-·--·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-:: :::::·~:-::: ·-·-·-·-·-·-·-· ·-· ·-·-·-·-·--·-·-· -·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·- 1 r---7 L ___ ...J r---7 L ___ ...J .I. CKGEO APPENDIX A REFERENCES PWAS_20230915 APPENDIX A REFERENCES 52nd Street Consultants, LLC, 2024, Snug Harbor, Newport Beach, CA 92660, Site Development Review [Plans], sheets 1 through 4, scale of 1 inch to 60 feet, dated, 4/29/2024. Baca Associates, Inc (Baca), 1989, New Office Building Development, EMA Grading permit No. 89-233823, 20351 Acacia Avenue, Sana Heights, County of Orange, California, Project No. A-0675-F, dated August 19, 1989. California Department of Water Resources (DWR), 2024, SGMA Data Viewer, [Interactive Web Page], https://sgma.water.ca.gov/webgis/?appid=SGMADataViewer#gwlevels California Geological Survey (CGS; formerly California Division of Mines and Geology, CDMG), 1980, Classification and Mapping of Quaternary Sedimentary Deposits for Purposes of Seismic Zonation, South Coastal Los Angeles Basin, Orange County, California, Open File Report 80-19 L.A., September 1980. , 1981, Geologic Map of Orange County, California, Showing Mines and Mineral Deposits, Bulletin 204, Plate 1. , 1997a, Seismic Hazard Zone Evaluation Report for the Anaheim and Newport Beach 7.5-Minute Quadrangles, California, Seismic Hazard Zone Report 03. , 1997b, Seismic Hazard Zone Evaluation Report for the Laguna Beach 7.5-Minute Quadrangle, California, Seismic Hazard Zone Report 013. , 1998a, Seismic Hazard Zones, Laguna Beach Quadrangle, Official Map dated April 15, 1998. , 1998b, Seismic Hazard Zones, Newport Beach Quadrangle, Official Map dated April 15, 1998. , 2001, Seismic Hazard Zones, Tustin Quadrangle, Revised Official Map dated January 17, 2001. , 2008, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special Publication 117, Originally Adopted March 13, 1997, Revised and Re-adopted September 11, 2008. , 2009, Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning, Newport Beach Quadrangle, Official Map dated March 15, 2009. , 2010, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas (Scale 1: 750,000), Geologic Data Map No. 6, Compiled and Interpreted by Charles W. Jennings and William Z. Bryant. , 2015, Radon Potential in Orange County, California, Special Report 232, authored by Ronald K. Churchill, 2015 , 2018, Earthquake Fault Zones, A Guide for Government Agencies, Property Owners / Developers, and Geoscience Practitioners 2018. for Assessing Fault Rupture Hazards in California, Special Publication 42, Revised ______, 2024, Orange County Tsunami Areas, https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps/orange PWAS_20230915 California Department of Conservation, Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM) (formerly DOGGR), 2024, Interactive Wellfinder Website, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/wellfinder/ La Playa Consulting, Inc. (LPC), 2024, NPB2 - Wavegarden Cove, Newport Beach, CA, Geotechnical Brief for Lagoon, LPC Project #: 24003, dated April 8, 2024. Moore Twining Associates, Inc. (Moore Twining), 2019a, [DRAFT] Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Design Recommendations, Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant and Golf Driving Range, 3100 Irvine Avenue, Newport Beach, California, Project #: E40550.01, dated September 16, 2019. _____, 2020, [DRAFT] Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant and Golf Driving Range, 3100 Irvine Avenue, Newport Beach, California, Project #: E40550.01, dated April 18, 2020. Morton, P.K., et. al., 1979, Environmental Geology of Orange County, California, California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, OFR 79-08. Newport Beach (City of), 2024, CDD Docs [Parcel Records Interface], accessed June 2024 https://ecms.newportbeachca.gov/WEB/Browse.aspx?id=205567&dbid=0&repo=CNB NorCal Engineering, Soils Investigation, Proposed Leonard’s Golf Shop Expansion – Located at 3100 Irvine Avenue in the city of Newport Beach, California, Project number 7533-98, dated July 16, 1998. Orange County Water District (OCWD), 2017, Basin 8-1 Alternative, Submitted by Orange County Water District, City of La Habra, Irvine Ranch Water District, dated January 1, 2017 https://sgma.water.ca.gov/portal/alternative/print/3 Structural Engineers Association/Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, 2020, U.S. Seismic Design Maps, web site address: https://seismicmaps.org/ ; Date Accessed: February 5, 2020. Soils International, Inc., 1988, Geotechnical Investigation Report, Edwards Theatre, Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, California, Project S-1093-F, dated April 18, 1988. Tan, S.S., and Edgington, W.J., 1976, Geology and Engineering Geologic Aspects of the Laguna Beach Quadrangle, Orange County, California, California Division of Mines and Geology Special Report 127. United States Geological Survey (USGS), 1932, Newport Beach Quadrangle, Orange County, California, (Topographic), scale of 1: 31,680, contour interval of 5 feet, dated 1932. , 1949a, Laguna Beach Quadrangle, Orange County, California, 7.5 Minute Series (Topographic). , 1949b, Newport Beach Quadrangle, Orange County, California, 7.5 x 10 Minute Series, W/2 Santa Ana 15’ Quadrangle, contour interval 5 feet, scale of 1: 24,000 (Topographic). , 2006, Geologic Map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30’ x 60’ Quadrangle, Version 1.0, Open File Report 2006-1217, Scale of 1: 100,000, by Morton, D.M. and F.K. Miller, dated 2006 , 2020, Unified Hazard Tool, NSHM 2014 Dynamic Deaggregation Program; web site address: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/ PWAS_20230915 , 2024a, Interactive Fault Map [Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States], https://www.usgs.gov/programs/earthquake-hazards/faults , 2024b, Interactive Geologic Map, http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/maps/MapView/ , 2024c, Topoview Interactive Map https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview/viewer/#4/40.01/-100.06 , 2024d, Design Ground Motions, https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/ X Engineering & consulting, Inc. (X Engineering), 2024, Conceptual Site Plan/Grading (Lagoon) Exhibit, Wavegarden Cove, Scale of 1 inch to 50 feet, Yerkes, R.F., McCulloh, T.H., Schoellhamer, J.E. and Vedder, J.G. (Yerkes), 1957, Geologic Map of the San Juaquin Hills-San Capistrano Area, Orange County, California, [USGS] Oil and Gas Investigations Map OM 193, scale of 1:24,000, dated 1957 Yerkes, R.F., McCulloh, T.H., Schoellhamer, J.E. and Vedder, J.G. (Yerkes), 1965, Geology of the Los Angeles Basin, California -- An Introduction: U.S. Geological Survey, Professional Paper 420-A, 57 p. Yerkes, R.F., 1972, Geology and Oil Resources of the Western Puente Hills Area, Southern California: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 420-C, 63 p. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS REVIEWED Date Photograph Source 10-14-1939 5925-112 Continental Aerial Photo 11-18-1952 AXK-1K-43 Continental Aerial Photo 1-13-75 157 7-23 Continental Aerial Photo 1-20-1992 C85-13-20 Continental Aerial Photo _ PWAS_20230915 APPENDIX B EXPLORATIONS Proposed Wavegarden Cove Geotechnical Exploration B-1 APPENDIX B FIELD EXPLORATIONS General This appendix collates available relevant subsurface information from recent investigations by Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc (Carl Kim Geo) and from prior explorations by others. The bullet points below summarize the data attached in this appendix. Carl Kim Geo (2024)  Seven (7) cone penetration test soundings (CKG CPT-1 through CKG CPT-7)  Two (2) hand auger borings (HA-1 and HA-2) Moore Twining Associates, Inc. (Moore Twining) (2019-2020)  4 CPT soundings (CPT-1 through CPT-4)  26 hollow stem auger borings (B-1 through B-26) o Six (6) of the 26 borings listed above were converted to temporary piezometers (B-17, B-18, B-19, B-22, B-23, and B-24) Baca Associates, Inc. (Off site work 1989) (20351 SW Acacia Street)  Four (4) hollow stem auger borings (BB-1 through BB-4) Current Investigation Current geotechnical investigations by Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. consisted of cone penetration test (CPT) soundings. As applicable, explorations were supervised and logged by qualified representatives. Earth materials encountered in hand-augered excavations for utility clearance were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Interpreted stratigraphic boundaries are indicated on the logs. Some soil/material types transition gradually. Reconnaissance and Logistics Locations of the CPT soundings and hand auger borings were chosen to obtain subsurface information at locations appropriate for the objective of this report. Prior to conducting the subsurface explorations, Carl Kim Geotechnical personnel evaluated each drill site for equipment access and marked proposed locations. Locations were reviewed by Newport Beach Golf Course representatives. Prior to field explorations an exploration permit was obtained from the County of Orange Environmental Health Division and Underground Service Alert (USA) was contacted greater than 48 hours in advance of subsurface work. USA contacted members (i.e. utility infrastructure owners) to provide clearance for drilling with respect to underground utility lines. No underground utilities were encountered with drilling equipment during the current investigation. Proposed Wavegarden Cove Geotechnical Exploration B-2 Subsurface Exploration 7 CPT soundings and two hand auger borings were advanced May 28, 2024. Shear wave measurements and a pore dissipation test was conducted at CKG CPT-3. Shallow soils were logged and sampled from each location. Soil descriptions are tabulated below and CPT interpretations are included in this appendix. Temporary piezometers installed by Moore Twining were sounded using an a Solinst electric well sounder. The accessible wells included B-17, B-18, and B-19. The remaining wells (B-22, B-23, and B-24) were not located because they are located within the artificial turf covered driving range. Each well sounded appeared to be constructed with nominal 1- inch polyvinyl chloride (PVC) casing covered by a metal flush mount surface completion. Each well was outfitted with a compression cap. Depth to water (DTW) below top of casing (BTOC) was measured and recorded to the nearest hundredth of a foot (0.01 feet). Borehole Sealing Each borehole was abandoned using cement-bentonite grout emplaced via tremie pipe. Asphalt cold patch/soil was placed as needed to match the existing surface. Sampling by Carl Kim Geo Representative bulk (bag) samples of fill and native soils were obtained from CKG CPT-1 through CKG CPT-7 and HA-1 and HA-2. Samples were logged, labeled, and retained for laboratory testing. Bulk samples are designated with a B-[number] and California modified split spoon samples (ring samples) are designated with R-[number] below. No free groundwater was encountered in hand excavations. Proposed Wavegarden Cove Geotechnical Exploration B-3 Table B-1 - LOG OF HAND AUGER EXCAVATIONS, MAY 28, 2024 EXCAVATION DESIGNATION SAMPLE IDENTIFIERS. SOIL DESCRIPTION CKG CPT-1 B-1 at 0-5.0’ APPROXIMATE SURFACE ELEVATION +19 FEET ABOVE MEAN SEAL LEVEL (MSL) lean clay with sand (CL), soft to stiff, dark yellowish brown (10YR 3/6), moist, low plasticity, high dry strength, slow dilatancy; estimate 25-35% fine to coarse sand, trace gravel, few thin black organic-rich zones, trace rootlets TOTAL DEPTH OF HAND AUGER 5 FEET CKG CPT-2 B-1 at 0-5.0’ APPROXIMATE SURFACE ELEVATION +20 MSL organic soil (OL/CL), soft under hand auger, black (10YR 2/1), dry to slightly moist, low to medium plasticity, low toughness, no dilatancy, medium dry strength; feels low density, no odor, micaceous, estimate 10% fine sand TOTAL DEPTH OF HAND AUGER 5 FEET CKG CPT-3 B-1 at 0-5.0’ APPROXIMATE SURFACE ELEVATION +25 MSL silt with sand (ML), soft, dark yellow brown (10YR 3/6), dry to slightly moist, low plasticity, rapid dilatancy, low dry strength, estimate 15 to 20% fine to medium grained sand TOTAL DEPTH OF HAND AUGER 5 FEET CKG CPT-4 B-1 at 0-5.0’ APPROXIMATE SURFACE ELEVATION +24 MSL organic soil (OL/CL), soft under hand auger, black (5YR 2.5/1), slightly moist, low to medium plasticity, low toughness, no dilatancy, high dry strength; micaceous TOTAL DEPTH OF HAND AUGER 5 FEET CKG CPT-5 B-1 at 0-5.0’ APPROXIMATE SURFACE ELEVATION +19 MSL organic soil/ fat clay (OH/CH), soft under hand auger, black (5YR 2.5/1) with few light gray zones, slightly moist, high plasticity, low toughness, no dilatancy, high dry strength TOTAL DEPTH OF HAND AUGER 5 FEET CKG CPT-6 B-1 at 0-5.0’ APPROXIMATE SURFACE ELEVATION +43 MSL lean clay with sand (CL), soft to medium stiff under hand auger, dark yellowish brown (10YR 3/4), nonplastic, slow to rapid dilatancy (rapid, but faint reaction to test), high dry strength; estimate 40% fine to medium sand TOTAL DEPTH OF HAND AUGER 5 FEET Proposed Wavegarden Cove Geotechnical Exploration B-4 Table B-1 - LOG OF HAND AUGER EXCAVATIONS, MAY 28, 2024 EXCAVATION DESIGNATION SAMPLE IDENTIFIERS. SOIL DESCRIPTION CKG CPT-7 B-1 at 0-5.0’ APPROXIMATE SURFACE ELEVATION +37 MSL Asphalt (0-3”); Base (GW)(0.25’ to 1’) @1’ to 5’: well graded sand with gravel (SW), loose to dense under hand auger, yellowish brown (10YR 5/4), dry, fine to coarse sand, angular to subangular, estimate 15% subrounded fine gravel, estimate 5% fines; noncohesive – easy to excavate with hand auger; mostly “clean” sand TOTAL DEPTH OF HAND AUGER 5 FEET HA-1 B-1 at 0-5.0’ R-1 at 5.5’ APPROXIMATE SURFACE ELEVATION +45 lean clay/ silt with clay (CL/ML), very stiff under hand auger (difficult to excavate; appears to bulk considerably), dark yellowish brown (10YR 3/4), dry from 0 to 2.2’, moist below, low to medium plasticity, slow dilatancy, medium dry strength, micaceous; estimate 10% fine sand, massive, orange paleosol appearance TOTAL DEPTH SAMPLED ~5.8 FEET BACKFILLED WITH FILL SAND HA-2 B-1 at 0-4.0’ APPROXIMATE SURFACE ELEVATION +46 fat clay (CH), soft to 1.8’, medium stiff below, dry to slightly moist, light gray, high plasticity, no dilatancy, medium tough, high dry strength TOTAL DEPTH SAMPLED 4 FEET BACKFILLED WITH FILL SAND Proposed Wavegarden Cove Geotechnical Exploration B-5 Groundwater The highest reported saturated soils observed at the site were encountered at boring B-9 at a depth of 18 feet bgs (~EL +14 feet msl). Of the 26 hollow-stem auger borings drilled and logged by Moore Twining, free groundwater was observed in seven (7) of the points. Table B-2 below summarizes groundwater levels where encountered. Note that first encountered groundwater is shown in bold on Table B- 2, which differs from subsequent water level measurements. In most cases it appears that free water was encountered in granular strata that is confined by clayey layers and under some pressure (confined/semi-confined conditions). Similarly, a pore dissipation test was conducted in CKG CPT-3 at 55.92 feet BGS. The pore pressure in that zone was attenuating slowly when the test was concluded. The last pressure of 16 pounds per square inch was recorded suggesting that water in that zone could potentially rise to about EL +6 feet if overlying confining layers were not present. TABLE B-2 - GROUNDWATER MEASUREMENTS IN BORINGS FIELD POINT DTW (FEET BTOC) APPROX. SURFACE EL (FEET MSL) CALC. GW EL (FEET MSL) BORING TD (FEET) MEASURE DATE B-4 30 18 -12 31.5 7/22/2019 B-9 18 32 14 51.5 7/29/2019 B-17 - 34 - 35 2/24/2020 B-17 26 34 8 35 2/25/2020 B-18 35 33 -2 51.5 2/24/2020 B-18 18 33 15 51.5 2/25/2020 B-19 38.5 36 -2.5 55.5 2/24/2020 B-19 29 36 7 55.5 2/25/2020 B-20 42.5 34 -8.5 66.5 2/25/2020 B-20 37 34 -3 66.5 2/26/2020 B-22 - 30 - 55 2/28/2020 B-23 - 20 - 55 2/27/2020 B-24 30 28 -2 39.5 2/26/2020 B-24 24 28 4 39.5 2/27/2020 NOTES: TD = TOTAL DEPTH EL = ELEVATION DTW = DEPTH TO WATER MSL = MEAN SEA LEVEL 1. DEPTH TO 'FIRST ENCOUNTERED GROUNDWATER’ IN BOLD. 2. B-22 AND B-23 COMPLETED AS PEIZOMETERS IN DRY HOLES. Proposed Wavegarden Cove Geotechnical Exploration B-6 Table B-3 summarizes all available groundwater level measurements from temporary piezometers constructed at the direction of Moore Twining. TABLE B-3 - PIEZOMETER MEASUREMENTS FIELD POINT WELL TD (FEET) APPROX. DATUM EL (FEET MSL) GEOL./ TECH DTW MEASURE DATE DTW (FEET BTOC) CALC. GW EL (FEET MSL) NOTES B-17 35 34 2/28/2020 28 6 B-17 35 34 4/17/2020 27.7 6.3 B-18 50 33 2/28/2020 18 15 B-18 50 33 4/17/2020 19 14 B-19 55 36 2/28/2020 24 12 B-19 55 36 4/17/2020 22.2 13.8 B-22 55 30 2/28/2020 dry - B-22 55 30 4/17/2020 dry - B-22 55 30 ARH 5/28/2024 55.26 -25.3 WELL TD 55.40' B-23 35 20 2/28/2020 dry - B-23 35 20 4/17/2020 dry - B-23 35 20 ARH 5/28/2024 34.77 -14.77 WELL TD 34.96' B-24 40 28 2/28/2020 24 4 B-24 40 28 4/17/2020 18.4 9.6 B-24 40 28 ARH 5/28/2024 18.52 9.5 WELL TD 40.12' (soft) NOTES: TD = TOTAL DEPTH EL = ELEVATION DTW = DEPTH TO WATER MSL = MEAN SEA LEVEL BTOC = BELOW TOP OF CASING 1. DATA OBTAINED BY CARL KIM GEO IS IN BOLD. 2. SURFACE AND DATUM ELEVATIONS ESTIMATED BASED ON MAPS. 3. THE DATUM IS A MEASURING POINT AT TOP OF PIEZOMETER CASING. Proposed Wavegarden Cove Geotechnical Exploration B-7 APPENDIX B - ATTACHMENTS EXPLORATION LOGS (Current Investigation) CKG CPT-1 through CKG CPT-7 Well Permit EXPLORATION LOGS (Prior Investigation - Moore Twining Associates, Inc. (2019, 2020) Borings B-1 through B-26 CPT-1 through CPT-4 Piezometer Sounding Data Well Permit for Temporary Piezometer Installation EXPLORATION LOGS (Off-Site – Baca Associates (1989) Borings BB-1 through BB-4 Project: Carl Kim Geotechnical Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.423100 Irvine Ave, Newport Beach, CA CKG CPT-1 ft, Date: 5/28/2024Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 6005004003002001000 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone r esistance Sleev e friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleev e friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 40200-20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay Clay Organic soil Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand Sand Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 5/29/2024, 6:55:57 AM 1 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\CarlKim-NewportBeach5-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt - - ~ -I"-. I /~ 1 "'-:: ii!:.. \ • I!! -r ~ C --....... ~ > 11 .1:::: -\ • >- ~ ' ~ -- ~ / • ~ ,~ ,.~ l -( ~ ~ ., ,.ir-i==- -{. r-' ·~ < ~ -..... ' ·~ ~ ~ .. .. ~ z: ~ l... .. ~~ ~ _.::l T ~ ~ c:::::::::::. -I:> ~ ·~ _,... -t:> ,~ -IC:::: ~-_;:.~ > C~=---., .,.._;: i-c::::. t:::!,,,,. I~ ~ < i---\ '-..... ~ ).. --. Project: Carl Kim Geotechnical Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.483100 Irvine Ave, Newport Beach, CA CKG CPT-2 ft, Date: 5/28/2024Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 6005004003002001000 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone r esistance Sleev e friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleev e friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 40200-20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Sand Sand Sand Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Sand Sand Sand Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 5/29/2024, 6:55:57 AM 2 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\CarlKim-NewportBeach5-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt - ----- ~ --- J ~► l / \ \ ~ , ( ,,, T~ ~ ~ ~ -.~ ~ ~ ... ~ ") { -"IC r> ~ -f,c!:.. i..... ' "'i ..... _/,. "!; -;t t!_ -L --.{ ~ --~ -~ .I l'l... r-a--..,, -~ ..... .... ~ ... 1.--~ "I_ .. :=---7 fc::::: ,a ~ --I< -- C """-i"""2 ~ ~ ~ -r-~ ,-~ i:::-=-- l '-ltC't , , Project: Carl Kim Geotechnical Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 75.293100 Irvine Ave, Newport Beach, CA CKG CPT-3 ft, Date: 5/28/2024Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 6005004003002001000 De p t h ( f t ) 75 70 65 60 5 5 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Cone r esistance Sleev e friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 75 70 65 60 5 5 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Sleev e friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 40200-20 De p t h ( f t ) 75 70 65 60 5 5 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 75 70 65 60 5 5 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p t h ( f t ) 75 70 65 60 5 5 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 5/29/2024, 6:55:58 AM 3 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\CarlKim-NewportBeach5-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt ' -c;;;. ~ r--. - ( -~~ l _l.,iii" -- '-, ,.....--..... / ' lll ~ f -? ' -J ~ f I I ' ' ~~ • ,> ~ I \ r--,_ '1 -- • ' ""'!; ~· ..... I ...__ 'Ii ~ -_!m r ..,,z. ;;:► ~ ' --~ -.. ----~ .l.3 -~ ~ (__ e-- l r L.;9 _ ... -c; -----..... r,;_ _w:- ~ --- -r l -c! -- .a5 I -- ~ ~ ,,, ·7 ~ --,ii \i:.. Project: Carl Kim Geotechnical Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.273100 Irvine Ave, Newport Beach, CA CKG CPT-4 ft, Date: 5/28/2024Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 6005004003002001000 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone r esistance Sleev e friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleev e friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 40200-20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Sand Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 5/29/2024, 6:55:59 AM 4 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\CarlKim-NewportBeach5-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt - -, ---,p -~ I -L I ~- I ---> • ~ -, ~ ---........ --~ -- 1 r - L l ( ·~ iP"' .,.--~ C ~ --~ \ ~ r· ? 7 ----. ........ -I , i: I r I -'? I ir-- ~ c:::::;; -r-C> - ,~ ci--~ <:: -"'Ir--~ F; I r i--- t -~ / ·~ '),, 'I -J 11::; u ---> I - l::: ~ '-~ > Project: Carl Kim Geotechnical Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.343100 Irvine Ave, Newport Beach, CA CKG CPT-5 ft, Date: 5/28/2024Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 6005004003002001000 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone r esistance Sleev e friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleev e friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 40200-20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay Organic soil Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Sand Sand Sand Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 5/29/2024, 6:56:00 AM 5 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\CarlKim-NewportBeach5-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt - - 1---- ? --~ .., '\ < ~ ~ I .-- ◄ "' ~ . ◄• ~ 7 r (" .... ~ "\ 1' ~ ,:' - ----;;; ':at_ -~ ~ =-.., :, -,-;;;;; -:;;► -~ c;;... c;jz ,_ -... J r ,,,- > --- '" <... ..._ i:: --. ' ~ -----., == f ~ ... , J f .: !:: ... =--.. i.,.., -e ► .. -~ 'C 1::1, -- Project: Carl Kim Geotechnical Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.273100 Irvine Ave, Newport Beach, CA CKG CPT-6 ft, Date: 5/28/2024Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 6005004003002001000 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone r esistance Sleev e friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleev e friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 40200-20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand Sand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 5/29/2024, 6:56:01 AM 6 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\CarlKim-NewportBeach5-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt - - ~ -> ,-~ ,. ~ c:~ L } ) I"'? :;;__ --. > l> "!: ► ( (- ") • "'l;,. ") c; ~~· ' ~ I I 'l ~ ~ --.., t' (' - L '► , <. ""=• f ~ .a::::'.' - ~ • . -r--,, -.::= _t c; ....... ~ .. > "'I ,- . I ~ r--h.. ~ .... -·=- -:a I"\.. l .. ~ ... Project: Carl Kim Geotechnical Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.343100 Irvine Ave, Newport Beach, CA CKG CPT-7 ft, Date: 5/28/2024Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 6005004003002001000 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone r esistance Sleev e friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleev e friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 40200-20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 4 2 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 5/29/2024, 6:56:02 AM 7 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\CarlKim-NewportBeach5-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt - - 7 ' J l) , l r-(~ c:: -----.. ~ ['?-r----~ \. -r r < ,a::!!=" -r ...... I 1 ::: --I I. ~ . 1--:::::..... <II ~ -c;: e~ ~ ,.J ' I -IJ .,J r .,.J 1. ·t, ~ > ,_ <': - <:) ~ ' -~ ~ ....... -- ~ \.. -r ~ I-So ___,, ..... r r ., l_~ \ ~ - Carl Kim Geotechnical 3100 Irvine Ave. Newport Beach, CA CPT Shear Wave Measurements S-Wave Interval Tip Geophone Travel S-Wave Velocity S-Wave Depth Depth Distance Arrival from Surface Velocity Location (ft)(ft)(ft)(msec)(ft/sec)(ft/sec) CKG CPT-3 9.97 8.97 9.19 11.04 832 20.05 19.05 19.15 22.48 852 871 30.02 29.02 29.09 34.56 842 822 40.06 39.06 39.11 46.76 836 822 50.03 49.03 49.07 61.24 801 688 60.04 59.04 59.07 72.98 809 852 70.05 69.05 69.08 82.64 836 1036 75.07 74.07 74.10 87.46 847 1041 Shear Wave Source Offset -2 ft S-Wave Velocity from Surface = Travel Distance/S-Wave Arrival Interval S-Wave Velocity = (Travel Dist2-Travel Dist1)/(Time2-Time1) TEST ID: CKG CPT-3 PRESSURE (psi) TIME: (MINUTES) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 DEPTH (ft) 55.908 AP P L I CA T I O N F O R W E L L / EX P L O R A T O R Y BO R I N G PE R M I T OR A N G E C O U N T Y H E A L T H C A R E A G E N C Y 12 4 1 E . D Y E R R O A D , SU I T E 1 2 0 EH O C W E L L S @ O C H C A . C O M EN V I R O N M E N T A L H E A L T H D I V I S I O N SA N T A A N A , C A 9 2 7 0 5 -56 1 1 71 4 -43 3 -60 0 0 Fo r m u l t i p l e ci t i e s , ad d r e s s e s , or l o c a t i o n s , c o m p l e te a s e p a r a t e p e r m i t a p p l i c a t i o n . WELL PERMIT NO. CI T Y WE L L L O C A T I O N / S T R E E T I N T E R S E C T I O N LO N G T I T U D E ( D E C I M A L ) LA T I T U D E (D E C I M A L ) OV E R S I G H T A G E N C Y ( i f a p p l i c a b l e ) EM A I L P E R M I T T O : ☐ Co n s u l t a n t ☐ Dr i l l e r ☐ We l l Ow n e r SE R V I C E ☐ Co n s t r u c t i o n ☐ De s t r u c t i o n (Fe e i s p e r w el l ) WA T E R WE L L S (c o m p l e t e o n e p e r m i t a p p l i c a t i o n f o r pe r w a t e r we l l ) ☐ Pu b l i c Do m e s t i c /M u n i c i p a l ☐ Pr i v a t e Do m e s t i c & No . o f c o n n e c t i o n s _ _ _ ☐ Ir r i g a t i o n ☐ CA T H O D I C W E L L (c o m p l e t e o n e p e r m i t a p p l i c a t i o n f o r p e r c a t h o d i c w e l l ) NO N -P RO D U C T I O N WE L L S I e e L V W K e V D P e D V P R Q L W R U L Q J w e l l F R Q V W U X F W L R Q T o t a l N o . o f W e l l s _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ☐ Mo n i t o r i n g __ _ _ ☐ Ai r S p a r g e __ _ _ ☐ So i l V a p o r E x t r a c t i o n __ _ ☐ El e c t r i c a l G r o u n d i n g W e l l __ ☐ Wa t e r E x t r a c t i o n _ _ _ _ ☐ In c l i n o m e t e r _ _ _ _ ☐ In j e c t i o n / R e c h a r g e _ _ _ _ ☐ Ge o t h e r m a l H e a t E x c h a n g e _ _ ☐ Pi e z o m e t e r _ _ _ _ ☐ Ho r i z o n t a l _ _ _ _ ☐ So i l V a p o r P r o b e s _ _ _ _ ☐ Ot h e r _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ☐ Pr o b e Su r v e y ( C P T or Di r e c t Pu s h O n l y ) __ _ ☐ 3U R E e 6 X U Y e \ So i l Va p o r Pr o b e s ' L U e F W 3 X V K __ _ ☐ So i l Bo r i n g ( ho O O o w V t e P a X J e r , mu d ro t a r y , so n i c , o r b u c k e t au g e r  e t c    ) __ _ FO R A C C O U N T I N G U S E O N L Y HS O N O _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ CH E C K N O . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DA T E _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ AM O U N T _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ IN T L __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DI S P O SI T I O N O F P E R M I T ( F O R O F F I C E U S E O N L Y ) ☐ AP P R O V A L I S S U B J E C T T O T H E F O L L O W I N G C O N D I T I O N S : NO T I F Y T H I S A G E N C Y A T L E A S T 4 8 H O U R S : ☐ P R I O R T O A N Y C H A N G E S O F T H E W O R K P L A N . ☐ PR I O R T O S E A L I N G T H E A N N U L A R S P A C E . ☐ PR I O R T O F I L L I N G O F C O N D U C T O R C A S I N G . ☐ SU B M I T T O T H I S A G E N C Y  W I T H I N 3 0 D A Y S O F C O M P L E T I O N O F WO R K , A C O P Y O F T H E W E L L C O M P L E T I O N R E P O R T 6 A N D / O R DR I L L I N G LOG S . 3/ ( $ 6 ( 5 ( ) ( 5 ( 1 & ( 3 ( 5 0 , 7 1 2 . ☐ SE C U R E A L L W E L L S T O P RE V E N T T A M P E R I N G . ☐ NO T I F Y W H E N A L L W O R K I S C O M P L E T E D A N D I N C L U D E T H E D E P T H T O FI R S T E N C O U N T E R E D W A T E R , P H O T O D O C U M E N T A T I O N  A N D / O R CO P I E S O F C E M E N T T I C K E T S / C A L C U L A T I O N S . ☐ WO R K C O M P L E T E D P R I O R 72 SU B M I T T I N G P E R M I T A P P L I C A T I O N T O TH I S AG E N C Y ☐ OT H E R __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PE R M I T I S S U E D B Y DA T E __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PR I N T N A M E P H O N E N U M B E R AP P R O V A L B Y O T H E R A G E N C I E S JU R I S D I C T I O N __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ RE M A R K S _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ AU T H O R I Z E D S I G N A T U R E DA T E FO R OF F I C E U S E O N L Y NO P E R M I T I S D E E M E D C O M P L E T E D U N T I L TH E FO L L O W I N G A R E M A R K E D A N D S I G N E D O F F : ☐ NO T I F I C A T I O N O F C O M P L E T I O N R E C E I V E D ☐ FI N A L I N S P E C T I O N ☐ AL L R E Q U I R E D D O C U M E N T S R E C E I V E D __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PR I N T N A M E PH O N E N U M B E R W HE N S I G N E D B Y A N O R A N G E C O UN T Y H EA L T H C A RE A G EN C Y R E P R E S E N T A T I V E , T HI S A P PL I C A T I O N I S A V A L I D P E R M I T . (R  /2 1 ) (; 3 / 2 5 $ 7 2 5 < % 2 5 , 1 * 6 F R P S l e W e V e S D U D W e Se U P L W V I R U S U R E e V X U Y e \ D Q G V R L l E R U L Q J  $ l V R F R P S l e W e W K e W ( / / (; 3 / 2 5 $ 7 2 5 < % 2 5 , 1 * ' ( 6 7 5 8 & 7 , 2 1 V e F W L R Q RQ W K e Q e [ W S D J e  PR O P O S E D S T A R T D A T E PE R M I T E X P I R E S O N 0 5 - 1 0 - 2 0 2 5 JU A N A NZ O R A 05 - 0 9 - 2024 71 4 - 4 3 3 - 6287 $3 8 2 . 0 0 CA W E L L S T A N D A R D S & OC W E L L O R D I N A N C E US E A T R E M I E P I P E O R E Q U I V A L E N T T O B A C K F I L L TH E P R O B E S W I T H A N A P P R O V E D S E A L I N G MA T E R I A L F R O M B O T T O M T O W I T H I N 5 F E E T B. G . S . : - F R E E F A L L I S P R O H I B I T E D . - SOI L C U T T I N G S A N D U N A P P R O V E D S E A L I N G MI X T U R E S A R E P R O H I B I T E D T O B E U S E D A S BA C K F I L L . X X XXX 33 . 6 5 8 8 5 7 AP N 1 1 9 - 2 0 0 - 4 1 NE W P O R T B E A C H G O L F C O U R S E 31 0 0 I R V I N E A V E . 24-05-22 ... .. q f---- J @ 786163 CARL KIM GEOTECHNICAL, INC. BACK BAY BARRELS, LLC I hereby agree to comply with all applicable requirements of the Health Care Agency and with all ordinances and laws o f the County of Orange and of the State of California pertaining to well construction, reconstruction and destruction, including the requirements to maintain the integrity of all s ign ificant confining zones . A violation of the California Well Standards and the local Well Ordin ances may constitute a misdemeanor (County Well Ordinance Sec. 4-5-31). WELL OWNER WELL OWNER'S NAME EMAIL ADDRESS il§E~ llti¥ Hilffel§ bbe A@ilffl@§m:ffimfl :€@ffl WELL OWN ER ·s A DD RESS I CITY/ ST A TE/ ZIP CODE TELEPHONE NUMBER J94@gootiReffi§J A~ ~li M~ €~ ~~1 (949) 836-3055 WELL Owg SIGNAlURE I DATE 5-9-24 (\ CONSULTING FlRM NAME OF CONSUL TING FIRM '---' BUSfNESS A DD RESS/CITY /ST ATE/Z IP CODE PROFESSIONAL LICENSE NUMBER et1FI Kim fiesteehftiEtih lHe: 945 Baileyana Road PG 7720; CEG 2366 Hillsborough, CA 94010 CONSULTANTS SIGNATURE DATE I EMAIL ADDRESS ~,drew R H·11lstrand Digillllly 51gne<I by /\ndn,w R Hillstrand 5/8/2024 geoandy@gmail.com • Dale' 2024 OS 09 09·43'42 -07'00' DRJLLJNG CONTRACTOR NAME OF DRILLER I EMAfl ADDRESS I C-57 LICENSE NUMBER Kehoe Testing & Engineering, Inc. l~le3 @~hsete~iR§:E8m 7§9Jt~3 DRILLER'S SIGNATURE I DATE ~ f/t-L.. Digitally s igned by Steven P. Kehoe 05/09/2024 Date: 2024.05.09 10:09:15-07'00' REQUJRED DOCUMENTS WATER & STORMWATER DRY INJECTION WELL CONSTRUCTJON D An approval from the Division of Drinking Water (DOW) for public or municipal water wells. D A cross-section well diagram detai ling total depth, borehole diameter, depth and thickness of the sanitary seal(s). type(s) of casing(s). and length(s) of screen(s) /slotting.A top view is required for nested wells that demonstrate the radial thickness separation. D Indicate the number of water aquifers the well will be screened through. D A site map using a 250-foot radius from the proposed water well location that includes locati ons and distances to: • A ll existing, active. inactive, and/or abandoned water well s . • A ll existing. abandoned, and/or proposed sewer lines, recycled water lines, and storm drain lines . • A U active and/or abandoned leach fields, cesspits. and septi c tanks . • A ll anima l enclosures (e.g., stables. coops, kennels, etc.) . • A ll water courses and/or bodies of water. including. but no t limited to: rivers, creeks, ponds. retention ponds, and/o r swimming pools . • All other underground storage tanks and o pen (regulated ) remediation sites . • All nearby structures (e .g .. commercial and residential buildings, houses, storage sheds) sanitary hazards and their locations . NON-PRODU CTION WELL CONSTR UCTION D Written work plan. For regulated sites, an approved work plan by the overseein g regulatory agency must be included for the instalJat ion of any type of nested well. 0 Site map(s) showing the locations o f th e proposed wells (no topographical maps). D A cross-section well diagram detailing total depth, borehole diameter, depth and thickness of the sani tary seal(s), type(s) of casing(s), and length(s) of screen(s) / slotting. A top view is required for nested wells that demonstrates a 2-inch radial thickness separation between casings and casing and wall of the borehole. W ELL & EXPLORATORY BORING DESTRUCTION ■ Written work plan. For regulated sites. an approval of the work plan by the overseeing regulatory agency must be included. ■ Site map(s) showing the locations o f the wells to be destroyed {no topographical maps). ■ Type and amount of sealant (show calculations for water wells): Total depth 40-70 feet Borehole diameter 1.44 inches Sealing material lBENTONITE-CEMENT ■ Method of destruction: 0 Pressure grout / removal of top 5 feet casing / removal of well boxes D Overdrill D Excavation ■ Other Approved sealing materials wi ll be place via tremie from total depth to ground surface. (R 10121) CARL KIM GEOTECHNICAL, INC . 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 949-441-8143 May 8, 2024 Project No. PWAS_20240507 Orange County Health Care Agency 1241 East Dyer Road, Suite 120 Santa Ana, CA 92705-5611 Attn.: Water Quality, Wells Section ( EHOCWells@ochca.com ) RE: “Work Plan” for Geotechnical Boring Permit, 3100 Irvine Avenue, Newport Beach, California, Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 119-200-41 Dear Sir or Madam, Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. (Carl Kim Geo) is planning geotechnical explorations that will include approximately nine (9) cone penetration test soundings to depths of 40 to 70 below ground surface (BGS). The CPT subcontractor is currently scheduled to commence the work on or about May 20, 2024. Carl Kim Geo’s staff and subcontractors will use industry standard techniques to seal boreholes to surface. We will adhere to the requirements of the Orange County Well/Boring Permit and California Well Standards. As such, borings will be sealed with neat cement (Portland cement-bentonite grout) using positive displacement methods (tremie pipe) across the intervals explored. For convenience, the map below was excerpted from https://www.ocgis.com/ocpw/landrecords/ and includes the approximate locations of the proposed explorations, all of which are within parcel number 119-200-41. Note that depths and locations will be adjusted based on field conditions and other technical factors. 119-200-41 Page 2 The proposed work will be observed and documented by qualified staff or directly by the undersigned. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 805-573-0315 or geoandy@gmail.com. Respectfully submitted, Andrew R. Hillstrand PG 7720, CEG 2366 Senior Engineering Geologist Enclosure DR A F T B-1 E40550.01 APPENDIX B LOGS OF BORINGS This appendix contains the final logs of borings. These logs represent our interpretation of the contents of the field logs and the results of the field and laboratory tests. The logs and related information depict subsurface conditions only at these locations and at the particular time designated on the logs. Soil conditions at other locations may differ from conditions occurring at these test boring locations. Also, the passage of time may result in changes in the soil conditions at these test boring locations. In addition, an explanation of the abbreviations used in the preparation of the logs and a description of the Unified Soil Classification System are provided at the end of Appendix B. DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 4/6 4/6 3/6 7/6 7/6 7/6 5/6 8/6 12/6 9/6 13/6 15/6 8/6 11/6 12/6 9/6 7/6 10/6 SM SP CL SILTY SAND; loose, moist, fine, dark-brown Medium dense, fine to medium grained, trace fine gravel Weakly cemented POORLY GRADED SAND; medium dense, moist, fine to coarse grained, red-brown, trace fine gravel Iron oxide staining SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, blue and brown Bottom of boring DD = 100.7 pcf DD = 85.5 pcf 7 14 20 28 23 17 3.9 33.7 Test Boring: B-1 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pacific Drilling Date:July 29, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 11/6 10/6 7/6 7/6 12/6 8/6 8/6 10/6 9/6 1/6 2/6 10/6 3/6 6/6 8/6 2/6 4/6 8/6 2/6 5/6 9/6 SM CL SIlTY SAND; medium dense, damp, fine to medium grained, brown, with rootlets, some clay Moist, weakly cemented Increase in sand content, decrease in fines, trace fine gravel SANDY LEAN CLAY; medium stiff, moist, low plasticity, olive- green Stiff, low to medium plasticity, iron oxide staining Dark-brown staining DD = 92.6 pcf 17 20 19 12 14 12 14 3.3 6.0 6.8 21.8 22.3 25.3 24.5 Test Boring: B-2 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pacific Drilling Date:July 30, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 2/6 5/6 8/6 2/6 7/6 10/6 2/6 3/6 4/6 15/6 24/6 40/6 15/6 27/6 27/6 15/6 20/6 28/6 SP With sea shells Slight increase in moisture content, blue Medium stiff POORLY GRADED SAND; dense, moist, fine to medium grained, gray Very dense, fine sand Dense DD = 91.7 pcf LL =42 PI = 25 13 17 7 65 54 48 26.1 35.6 1.6 Test Boring: B-2 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pacific Drilling Date:July 30, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % . . . . . . MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 60 65 70 75 80 85 3/6 4/6 4/6 3/6 5/6 5/6 3/6 3/6 6/6 CL LEAN CLAY; medium stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, dark-gray Stiff, black, 2 inch sandy silt lens Bottom of boring Sand = 2.0% -#200 = 98.0% LL = 40 PI = 17 8 10 9 35.7 Test Boring: B-2 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pacific Drilling Date:July 30, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 3/6 8/6 10/6 6/6 7/6 7/6 2/6 1/6 1/6 4/6 7/6 9/6 3/6 4/6 5/6 5/6 10/6 12/6 4/6 5/6 6/6 0/6 2/6 3/6 5/6 14/6 14/6 FIll CL SM SANDY LEAN CLAY; very stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, dark- brown, with rootlets, trace fine gravel, weak to moderate cementation Stiff, brown to black SANDY LEAN CLAY; Soft, moist, low plasticity, black, organics Gray to black, iron oxide stains Tan-brown, iron oxide stains Stiff, bluish-gray to black, with seams of black Bluish-gray Medium stiff, dark-brown SILTY SAND with Clay; very stiff, moist, fine to medium grained, dark- gray DD = 87.8 pcf DD = 96.6 pcf DD = 92.5 pcf Gravel= 11.0% Sand = 76.9% -#200 = 12.1% c = 380 psf ø = 36° 18 14 2 16 9 22 11 5 28 6.5 9.1 60.5 34.6 23 35.7 20.4 46.0 20.3 Test Boring: B-3 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 22, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 4/6 6/6 12/6 11/6 33/6 50/5 7/6 7/6 11/6 SM CL SILTY SAND; medium dense, moist, fine sand, dark- gray, 2 inch clay lens Very dense, trace clay, trace gravel SANDY LEAN CLAY; very stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, dark- gray Bottom of boring Sand = 82.9% -#200 =17.1% DD = 107.4 pcf 18 >83 18 10.5 24.4 Test Boring: B-3 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 22, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 7/6 9/6 11/6 4/6 4/6 4/6 9/6 11/6 14/6 3/6 4/6 5/6 8/6 12/6 16/6 5/6 8/6 10/6 CL SP CL SANDY LEAN CLAY; very stiff, moist, low plasticity, dark-brown, weak to moderate cementation Soft, with rootlets, iron oxide staining Very stiff, low to medium plasticity, gray to black Stiff, bluish-gray, iron oxide stains POORLY GRADED SANDS; medium dense, moist, fine sand, bluish-gray LEAN CLAY; very stiff, very moist, low plasticity, dark-gray DD = 102.0 pcf 20 8 25 9 28 18 6.4 18.8 21.0 27.2 10.5 24.7 Test Boring: B-4 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 22, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:30 feet Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 9/6 17/6 23/6 SP POORLY GRADED SAND; dense, wet, fine to medium grained, dark- gray Bottom of boring 40 21.4 Test Boring: B-4 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 22, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:30 feet Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. I DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 3/6 4/6 3/6 2/6 2/6 4/6 4/6 4/6 4/6 4/6 4/6 5/6 4/6 6/6 10/6 5/6 11/6 14/6 FILL CL SM SP SANDY LEAN CLAY; medium stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, brown to black Soft, black, with rootlets, organics SANDY LEAN CLAY: medium stiff, low plasticity, olive green Stiff, brown to blue SILTY SAND; loose, moist, fine to medium grained, dark gray POORLY GRADED SAND; medium dense, moist, fine to medium grained, dark-gray, trace coarse gravel, 2 inch clay lens DD = 69.0 pcf LOI=14.1% DD = 95.2 pcf Sand = 72.7% -#200 = 27.3% c = 350 psf ø = 30° LL = NV PI = NP 7 6 8 9 16 25 43.4 21.1 Test Boring: B-5 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 22, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 8/6 15/6 36/6 9/6 13/6 7/6 2/6 6/6 4/6 CL Dense, 2 inch clay lens Medium dense SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, dark-gray, 2 inch sandy silt lens Bottom of boring DD = 112.5 pcf 51 20 10 9.1 2.9 35.8 Test Boring: B-5 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 22, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % ....... t ..... "[J MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C . -··········· I DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 4/6 4/6 4/6 3/6 5/6 8/6 4/6 5/6 6/6 7/6 14/6 18/6 4/6 6/6 8/6 3/6 5/6 7/6 2/6 3/6 4/6 CL SANDY LEAN CLAY; medium stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, dark- brown, weakly cemented, with rootlets Stiff, trace gravel, increase in sand content, Stiff, trace fine to coarse gravel, 1 inch poorly graded sand lens Very stiff, brown, iron oxide stains Stiff, light-brown to brown, iron oxide staining Bluish-brown Medium stiff, blue, interbedded mica DD = 95.6 pcf 8 13 11 32 14 12 7 25.9 Test Boring: B-6 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 23, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 2/6 2/6 2/6 Soft, dark-gray Bottom of boring 4 Test Boring: B-6 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 23, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. >-~ >- >- >- >- >- DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 2/6 2/6 4/6 3/6 5/6 5/6 4/6 6/6 9/6 2/6 5/6 6/6 11/6 22/6 35/6 10/6 15/6 16/6 2/6 2/6 4/6 CL SM SP CL LEAN CLAY; medium stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, olive-brown, iron oxide staining Stiff, low plasticity, bluish- grown, iron oxide stains Low plasticity, gray to dark-gray Low to medium plasticity, blue, iron oxide staining SILTY SAND; dense, moist, fine to medium grained, olive- brown, trace clay POORLY GRADED SAND; dense, moist, fine to medium, brown SANDY LEAN CLAY; medium stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, blue, iron oxide staining DD = 86.8pcf LL = 47 PI = 23 DD =105.6 pcf Sand = 81.3% -#200 = 18.7% 6 10 15 11 57 31 6 25.5 7.8 Test Boring: B-7 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pacific Drilling Date:July 29, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 3/6 6/6 5/6 1/6 2/6 3/6 4/6 6/6 6/6 5/6 6/6 8/6 3/6 5/6 6/6 ML CL Stiff, very moist, 3 inches of interbedded muscovite Medium stiff, low to medium plasticity, dark-gray Stiff, 2 inches of interbedded sandy silt SANDY SILT; stiff, moist, non- plastic, dark-gray SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low plasticity, dark-gray, with organics Bottom of boring 11 5 12 14 11 Test Boring: B-7 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pacific Drilling Date:July 29, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 4/6 4/6 4/6 4/6 7/6 7/6 4/6 8/6 7/6 2/6 3/6 5/6 5/6 11/6 13/6 3/6 5/6 8/6 CL SP CL SANDY LEAN CLAY; medium stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, dark- brown Stiff Red-brown, trace fine gravel POORLY GRADED SAND; loose, moist, fine to coarse grained, red- brown SANDY LEAN CLAY; very stiff, moist, low plasticity, olive brown, iron oxide staining Stiff, low to medium plasticity, brown, iron oxide staining, seams of sand Bottom of boring DD = 109.2 pcf DD = 94.2 pcf 8 14 15 8 24 13 11.8 28.8 Test Boring: B-8 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pacific Drilling Date:July 29, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % . . . . . . MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 3/6 4/6 7/6 2/6 5/6 5/6 3/6 5/6 7/6 6/6 9/6 12/6 6/6 10/6 13/6 3/6 9/6 17/6 2/6 3/6 2/6 SM ML SM SP CL SILTY SAND; medium dense, moist, fine to medium dense, brown Trace gravel, 2 inch thick clay lens in sample Sandy Silt; stiff, moist, slight plasticity, red-brown, iron oxide staining SILTY SAND; medium dense, moist, fine to medium grained, red-brown POORLY GRADED SAND; moist, medium dense, fine to medium 2 feet of heave at 18 feet Wet, bluish-gray SANDY LEAN CLAY; medium stiff, wet, low plasticity, grayish- blue, with weathered interbedded muscovite Sand = 49.6% -#200 = 50.4% DD = 96.7 pcf Sand = 96.8% -#200 = 3.2% LL = NV PI = NP 11 10 12 21 23 26 5 4.2 Test Boring: B-9 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pacific Drilling Date:July 29, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:18 feet Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 3/6 4/6 4/6 3/6 4/6 5/6 1/6 3/6 5/6 6/6 11/6 17/6 13/6 23/6 25/6 ML SP Low to medium plasticity, dark-gray SANDY SILT; stiff, moist, low plasticity, dark-gray, organic odor, some clay Medium stiff, low plasticity, increase in clay content POORLY GRADED SAND; medium dense, wet, fine to medium grained, dark gray, trace organics Dense Bottom of boring 8 9 8 28 48 Test Boring: B-9 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pacific Drilling Date:July 29, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:18 feet Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. I\ >-~ ~ >-~ -............ ~ >-~ >--............ . . .. :~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . >-:~ . . .. >- DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 8/6 10/6 12/6 11/6 14/6 17/6 13/6 20/6 29/6 3/6 9/6 12/6 4/6 8/6 8/6 4/6 8/6 12/6 AC SP CL 2.0 inches of Asphaltic CONCRETE over 6.5 inches of AGGREGATE BASE POORLY GRADED SAND; medium dense, moist, fine to coarse grained, light-brown Dense LEAN CLAY; hard, moist, low plasticity, brown Very stiff, low to medium plasticity, bluish-brown, moderately cemented, iron oxide staining Bottom of boring DD = 108.0 pcf 22 31 49 21 16 20 2.4 Test Boring: B-10 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 16, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 8/6 9/6 10/6 4/6 4/6 8/6 9/6 9/6 9/6 7/6 9/6 9/6 7/6 11/6 15/6 6/6 5/6 6/6 AC FILL FILL FILL SM SP CL 2.0 inches of ASPHALTIC CONCRETE over 6 inches of AGGREGATE BASE CLAYEY SAND; medium dense, moist, fine to medium grained, brown SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, red-brown to black Very stiff SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low plasticity, bluish-gray, iron oxide staining SILTY SAND; medium dense, moist, fine to medium grained, brown, trace clay POORLY GRADED SAND; medium dense, wet, fine to coarse, bluish- gray SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, wet, low to medium plasticity, blue, sea shells DD =104.5 pcf Sand = 95.5% -#200 = 4.5% LL = NV PI = NP 19 12 18 18 26 11 20.6 Test Boring: B-11 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 16, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:20 Feet Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 3/6 4/6 4/6 4/6 6/6 8/6 20/6 24/6 22/6 6/6 12/6 29/6 CL CL ML LEAN CLAY; medium stiff, wet, low to medium plasticity, bluish-gray, 1 inch poorly graded sand lens SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, bluish-gray (3 feet of heave during drilling) Seam of poorly graded sand SANDY LEAN CLAY; hard, moist, low to medium plasticity, bluish-gray SANDY SILT; hard, moist, non plastic, gray, 1" clay lens Bottom of boring 8 14 46 41 Test Boring: B-11 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 16, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:20 Feet Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 8/6 6/6 12/6 10/6 12/6 11/6 10/6 15/6 15/6 AC SC CL 2.5 inches of ASPHALTIC CONCRETE over 6.0 inches of AGGREGATE BASE CLAYEY SAND; medium dense, moist, fine to medium grained, red- brown to brown, weakly cemented SANDY LEAN CLAY; very stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, brown, moderate cementation With 1" clayey sand lens Bottom of boring 20 23 30 Test Boring: B-12 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 15, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. ~ -............ -0.~·-··· ·······················-· I .:·.0 -......................... % Sfh t- I t- t- t- t- DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 5/6 5/6 6/6 6/6 12/6 18/6 4/6 6/6 6/6 6/6 9/6 9/6 4/6 9/6 13/6 AC CH CL ML SP 2.3 inches of ASPHALTIC CONCRETE over 6.0 inches of AGGREGATE BASE FAT CLAY; stiff, moist, medium to high plasticity, light-brown LEAN CLAY; very stiff, moist, low plasticity, light-brown Stiff, decrease in plasticity, olive SILT; very stiff, moist, non plastic, red-brown POORLY GRADED SAND; medium dense, moist, fine to medium grained, trace coarse sand, brown, iron oxide staining Bottom of boring 11 30 12 18 22 Test Boring: B-13 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 15, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 5/6 5/6 5/6 7/6 8/6 11/6 3/6 4/6 6/6 5/6 16/6 21/6 4/6 6/6 8/6 AC SC SP CL CL 2.1 inches of ASPHALTIC CONCRETE over 7.5 inches of AGGREGATE BASE CLAYEY SAND; loose, moist, fine to medium grained, dark brown to red- brown, gravel noted in cuttings Medium dense, slight increase in fines content POORLY GRADED SAND; loose, moist, fine to coarse, tan brown, trace clay fragments SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, dark-brown, 1 inch clayey sand lens LEAN CLAY; Very stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, dark-brown to red- brown, trace sand Stiff, gray to brown Bottom of boring DD = 124.3 pcf 10 19 10 37 14 11.0 Test Boring: B-14 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 15, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 3/6 4/6 5/6 5/6 6/6 7/6 6/6 13/6 26/6 5/6 6/6 7/6 2/6 2/6 3/6 2/6 2/6 4/6 AC SC CL CH 2.8 inches of ASPHALTIC CONCRETE over 5.0 inches of AGGREGATE BASE CLAYEY SAND; loose, moist, fine to medium grained, dark- brown to black SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low plasticity, dark-brown Very stiff, increase in sand content, 2" clayey sand lens Very stiff, low plasticity, dark-brown Low to medium plasticity Medium stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, light-gray to light-green FAT CLAY; stiff, moist, medium to high plasticity, bluish-green, interbedded tan, sea shells DD = 112.0 pcf 9 13 39 13 5 6 11.6 Test Boring: B-15 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 15, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation: Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 4/6 6/6 8/6 10/6 17/6 21/6 5/6 7/6 9/6 5/6 7/6 9/6 CL SP ML SP SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, dark-blue POORLY GRADED SAND; dense, moist, fine sand, gray SANDY SILT; very stiff, moist, non- plastic, dark-gray POORLY GRADED SAND; medium dense, moist, fine, gray Bottom of boring DD = 84.5 pcf 14 38 16 16 33.2 Test Boring: B-15 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 15, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation: Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. -············ ~ DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 2/6 4/6 4/6 6/6 8/6 10/6 3/6 4/6 5/6 2/6 1/6 2/6 2/6 6/6 8/6 7/6 11/6 13/6 3/6 4/6 5/6 CL CL ML CL SANDY LEAN CLAY; medium stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, black, with rootlets, weak to moderate cementation Stiff Increase in sand content Soft, decrease in plasticity SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low plasticity, black, organics SANDY SILT; very stiff, moist, non- plastic, brown SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, bluish-gray DD = 83.2 pcf c = 230 psf ø = 30° 8 18 9 3 14 24 9 13.8 29.5 28.7 60.2 37.7 7.9 20.0 Test Boring: B-16 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 23, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 0/6 2/6 2/6 2/6 4/6 4/6 4/6 6/6 8/6 5/6 6/6 7/6 SM Soft, trace gravel Medium stiff, bluish-gray SILTY SAND; medium dense, moist, fine to medium grained, bluish-gray, with trace clay Bottom of boring 4 8 14 13 29.0 20.5 15.8 9.7 Test Boring: B-16 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Allen B. Date:July 23, 2019 Drill Type:CME 75 Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes: Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 SM CL SM SP SILTY SAND; moist, fine to medium grained, brown Dark-brown SANDY LEAN CLAY; moist, low plasticity, dark-brown Increase in sand content Grayish-blue, low to medium plasticity Greenish-blue, slight increase in moisture SILTY SAND; moist, fine to medium grained, red-brown POORLY GRADED SAND; moist, fine to medium grained, red-brown Test Boring: B-17 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 24, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes:Groundwater not encountered during drilling on February 24, 2020. Groundwater was measured at 26 feet BSG on February 25, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 CL LEAN CLAY; moist, low plasticity, grayish-blue Slight increase in moisture, Bottom of boring B-17 at 35 feet BSG Test Boring: B-17 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 24, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes:Groundwater not encountered during drilling on February 24, 2020. Groundwater was measured at 26 feet BSG on February 25, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. I\ >-•. : : -~ : : ••••• ■ ••••• ■ -............ >- ~ ~ >- >- >- >- DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 3/6 4/6 5/6 6/6 4/6 3/6 4/6 4/6 5/6 7/6 8/6 10/6 4/6 6/6 8/6 3/6 3/6 3/6 SP-SM CL SP-SM CL SP-SM CL POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT; loose, moist, fine to coarse grained, brown LEAN CLAY; medium stiff, moist, low plasticity, brown POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT; loose, moist, fine to coarse grained, brown, some fine subangular gravel SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, grayish-blue POORLY GRADED SAND with Silt; medium dense, moist, fine to medium grained, brown LEAN CLAY; stiff, very moist, low to medium plasticity, grayish-blue, iron oxide staining Medium stiff, with shells Sand=92.2% -#200=7.8% DD=88.1 pcf 9 7 9 18 14 6 34.8 Test Boring: B-18 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 24, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:35 Feet Notes:Groundwater encountered at about 35 feet BSG during drilling on February 24, 2020. Groundwater was measured at 18 feet BSG on February 25, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 7/6 8/6 8/6 6/6 11/6 11/6 12/6 16/6 10/6 3/6 4/6 4/6 3/6 4/6 7/6 ML CL Stiff SANDY SILT; very stiff, very moist, non-plastic, dark-gray LEAN CLAY; medium stiff, wet, medium plasticity, dark-gray Stiff Bottom of boring B-18 at 51.5 feet BSG DD=75.5 pcf 16 22 26 8 11 37.7 Test Boring: B-18 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 24, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:35 Feet Notes:Groundwater encountered at about 35 feet BSG during drilling on February 24, 2020. Groundwater was measured at 18 feet BSG on February 25, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 7/6 8/6 8/6 6/6/ 5/6 5/6 11/6 15/6 17/6 4/6 7/6 9/6 6/6 13/6 17/6 5/6 8/6 11/6 SM SP-SM CL FILL - SILTY SAND; moist, fine to medium grained, brown to red brown, moderate resistance to hand auger, plastic debris POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT; medium dense, moist, fine to coarse grained, brown to red- brown SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low plasticity, brown, iron oxide staining Very stiff, low to medium plasticity, green-brown Dark greenish-brown, decrease in sand content LEAN CLAY; very stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, greenish-brown DD=103.9 pcf DD=96.9 pcf 16 10 32 16 30 19 5.0 20.7 21.1 24.2 23.5 Test Boring: B-19 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 24, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:38.5 Feet Notes:Groundwater encountered at 38.50 feet BSG during drilling on February 24, 2020. Groundwater was measured at 29 feet BSG on February 25, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 9/6 12/6 15/6 5/6 6/6 9/6 4/6 3/6 2/6 3/6 3/6 3/6 6/6 8/6 13/6 6/6 8/6 12/6 Bluish-gray to greenish-brown Stiff, dark-gray Medium stiff, wet Very stiff, grayish-blue Bottom of boring B-19 at 56.5 feet BSG DD=97.6 pcf LL=49 PI=31 DD=81.0 pcf ø=19° C=320 psf DD=89.9 pcf 27 15 5 6 21 20 25.1 29.7 34.9 32.6 30.6 24.2 Test Boring: B-19 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 24, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:38.5 Feet Notes:Groundwater encountered at 38.50 feet BSG during drilling on February 24, 2020. Groundwater was measured at 29 feet BSG on February 25, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 10/6 6/6 5/6 3/6 5/6 6/6 5/6 6/6 8/6 10/6 12/6 16/6 5/6 7/6 10/6 4/6 4/6 4/6 SP CL POORLY GRADED SAND; medium dense, moist, fine to coarse grained, brown SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low plasticity, brown Low to medium plasticity, decrease in sand content Very stiff, iron oxide staining Medium stiff, grayish-blue, interbedded shells DD=94.6 pcf 11 11 14 28 17 8 26.3 Test Boring: B-20 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 25, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:42.5 Feet Notes:Groundwater encountered at 42.5 feet BSG during drilling on February 25, 2020. Groundwater was measured at 37 feet BSG on February 26, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 8/6 9/6 10/6 8/6 7/6 5/6 19/6 35/6 50/5.5 13/6 20/6 26/6 18/6 26/6 28/6 20/6 24/6 30/6 CH SP-SM FAT CLAY; Stiff, moist, high plasticity, gray blue POORLY GRADED SAND with Silt; medium dense, wet, fine-grained, light-gray to brown, 1 inch layer of clay Very dense, dry, light-gray Dense Very dense DD=83.5 pcf ø=18° C=700 psf LL=69 PI=47 Sand=7.0% -#200=93.0% Sand=90.6% -#200=9.4% LL=NV PI=NP 19 12 >85 46 54 54 32.4 2.7 Test Boring: B-20 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 25, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:42.5 Feet Notes:Groundwater encountered at 42.5 feet BSG during drilling on February 25, 2020. Groundwater was measured at 37 feet BSG on February 26, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. I\ >- /j ~ -··· ~ >-1/ -··· :'I ';': r:: :~ ·H,f H ·,1 : 1: r r. l :1 :1: 1: i 1 ....... ,1 ;1; 1: l' I :1 ·.1: r. r \ ...... • .I' .1•. t. 1; l >-·.1: 1: , L l =1=1=1:1 f~ ....... . 1 ;1; 1: L' I :·1 ·:1: r: f \ ....sz_ • r ., •. r. ,: t -·.1: 1: , L l ...... :1. :1: r ., .t .1 :1; 1: L' I >-:'1':1: i: j 't ~ • r .,·. r. ,: t :-1 :.1: ~ f \ ; L 'J: ' J.t ., :1: 1: i· / ...... :1 :1: 1: l t • t :r. r. t 'L :-1 :.1: ~ f \ >- :; ::. : l;~~ ·,I : 1: ~ f, j :1 :1: 1: l t 'i :1·. j. '1.' I ...... :1 ·,1: t, J' \ :~~:f ~-1 ·,I : I: r t, j >-:1 :1: 1: l t ·i :1•,j. '1.'f~ ...... :1 ·.1: r. r \ :~·~:f ~-i ·,1 : 1: r r. l :1 :1: 1: i 1 ....... ,1 ;1; 1: l' I :1 ·.l\r. r \ DR A F T 60 65 70 75 80 85 13/6 35/6 13/6 5/6 7/6 7/6 Dense, wet Medium dense, 1 inch layer of clay in sample shoe Bottom of boring B-20 at 66.5 feet BSG 48 14 Test Boring: B-20 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 25, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:42.5 Feet Notes:Groundwater encountered at 42.5 feet BSG during drilling on February 25, 2020. Groundwater was measured at 37 feet BSG on February 26, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. I\ ~ :1 ·.1: ~ r \ :~~:f~-i~ 'l "I• I• r 1 ...... :1 :1: 1: l t 'J/i:'t.'1 :1 ·.1: r. r \ :r :1:_~1:[ ',I : 1: t l l ~ : I, :1: ~ ,i) ~ ,1 ;1: 1: l' I :1 ·.1: r. ( \ ~ ~ ~ ~ DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 10/6 5/6 4/6 16/6 20/6 14/6 4/6 3/6 7/6 14/6 50/6 5/6 7/6 9/6 5/6 6/6 8/6 ML CL SANDY SILT; medium stiff, moist, non-plastic, red-brown Very stiff SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, brown Hard Very stiff, low plasticity, blueish- green, decrease in sand content Stiff Bottom of boring B-21 at 21.5 feet BSG DD=122.0 pcf 9 34 10 >50 16 14 6.4 5.7 15.8 Test Boring: B-21 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Amanda T. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 27, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes:Groundwater was not encountered during drilling on February 27, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 5/6 2/6 2/6 3/6 3/6 5/6 3/6 5/6 7/6 6/6 7/6 8/6 4/6 5/6 6/6 5/6 8/6 9/6 ML CL SANDY SILT; soft, moist, non plastic, dark-brown LEAN CLAY; medium stiff, moist, low plasticity, brown Olive-gray Olive-brown, with shells Stiff, bluish-green Very stiff DD=96.7 pcf 4 8 12 15 11 17 21.8 Test Boring: B-22 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Amanda T. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 28, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes:Groundwater was not encountered during drilling on February 28, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 5/6 6/6 6/6 5/6 8/6 29/6 17/6 22/6 23/6 16/6 23/6 22/6 0/6 5/6 6/6 8/6 9/6 10/6 SM CL Stiff, gray, with shell SILTY SAND; dense, moist, fine to medium grained, gray LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, dark-brown Very stiff, gray DD=100.5 Sand=72.6% -#200=27.4% LL=48 PI=19 ø=24° C=340 psf 12 37 45 45 11 19 14.3 Test Boring: B-22 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Amanda T. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 28, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes:Groundwater was not encountered during drilling on February 28, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 60 65 70 75 80 85 2/6 4/6 3/6 8/6 10/6 8/6 3/6 10/6 27/6 15/6 33/6 35/6 SC SP SP Medium stiff Stiff CLAYEY SAND; dense, moist, fine grained, dark-brown POORLY GRADED SAND; dense, moist, fine to medium grained, gray Very dense, fine to coarse gravel Bottom of boring B-22 at 76.5 feet BSG 7 18 37 68 Test Boring: B-22 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Amanda T. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 28, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes:Groundwater was not encountered during drilling on February 28, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 4/6 2/6 2/6 1/6 1/6 1/6 0/6 0/6 1/6 0/6 4/6 5/6 6/6 6/6 8/6 20/6 23/6 21/6 CL SC LEAN CLAY; soft, moist, low plasticity, dark-brown Very soft Olive to dark-brown Stiff, low to medium plasticity, gray CLAYEY SAND; stiff, moist, fine to medium grained, light- brown Medium dense 4 2 1 9 14 44 Test Boring: B-23 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Amanda T. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 27, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes:Groundwater was not encountered during drilling on February 27, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 4/6 6/6 8/6 7/6 13/6 28/6 CL SC LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, gray CLAYEY SAND; dense, moist, fine to medium grained, gray Bottom of boring B-23 at 36.5 feet BSG 14 41 Test Boring: B-23 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Amanda T. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 27, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes:Groundwater was not encountered during drilling on February 27, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. I\ >-... . . -............ ~~ >-~ -............ %~::::::~ ... 0 >- >- >- >- DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 10/6 3/6 6/6 9/6 9/6 8/6 15/6 13/6 10/6 9/6 12/6 14/6 4/6 5/6 8/6 5/6 8/6 10/6 CL SC CL SM CL SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low plasticity, brown Very stiff, weakly cemented, trace fine gravel CLAYEY SAND; medium dense, moist, fine to medium grained, brown, trace fine gravel SANDY LEAN CLAY; very stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, brown to blue SILTY SAND; medium dense, moist, fine to medium grained, dark red- brown SANDY LEAN CLAY; stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, blue, iron oxide staining, some organics Stiff, no organics DD=102.3 pcf DD=96.8 pcf 9 17 23 26 13 18 16.8 26.9 Test Boring: B-24 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 26, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:30 Feet Notes:Groundwater was encountered at 30.00 feet BSG during drilling on February 26, 2020. Groundwater was measured at 24 feet BSG on February 27, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 5/6 5/6 5/6 2/6 3/6 3/6 11/6 50/6 SP Wet, dark-gray Medium stiff Hard POORLY GRADED SAND; very dense, moist, fine to medium grained, light-gray Bottom of boring B-24 at 39.5 feet BSG 10 6 >50 Test Boring: B-24 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 26, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:30 Feet Notes:Groundwater was encountered at 30.00 feet BSG during drilling on February 26, 2020. Groundwater was measured at 24 feet BSG on February 27, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 3/6 2/6 4/6 2/6 2/6 2/6 0/6 0/6 2/6 3/6 4/6 6/6 2/6 2/6 5/6 8/6 7/6 17/6 7/6 6/6 CL SC LEAN CLAY; medium stiff, moist, low plasticity, brown Soft, dark-brown Low to medium plasticity Medium stiff Medium stiff, gray, with sand CLAYEY SAND; medium dense, moist, fine to medium grained, gray 6 4 2 10 7 24 20 Test Boring: B-25 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Amanda T. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 26, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes:Groundwater was not encountered during drilling on February 26, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 30 35 40 45 50 55 14/6 Bottom of boring B-25 at 30 feet BSG Test Boring: B-25 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Amanda T. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 26, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes:Groundwater was not encountered during drilling on February 26, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. >-~ >- >- >- >- >- DR A F T 0 5 10 15 20 25 2/6 3/6 3/6 3/6 6/6 6/6 2/6 2/6 2/6 1/6 2/6 2/6 7/6 9/6 11/6 5/6 4/6 7/6 CL SANDY LEAN CLAY; medium stiff, moist, low plasticity, dark brown, with rootlets Medium stiff Soft, low to medium plasticity, black Stiff, moist, low to medium plasticity, bluish-gray Stiff, black to gray Bottom of boring B-26 at 25 feet BSG DD=103.5 pcf LL=31 PI=18 DD=106.1 pcf 6 12 4 4 20 11 13.0 22.6 18.8 18.7 Test Boring: B-26 Project:Proposed Drive Shack - Restaurant and Golf Driving Range Project Number:E40550.01 Logged By:Jovany C. Drilled By:Pac Drill Date:February 26, 2020 Drill Type:Fraste L.A.R. Elevation:N/A Auger Type:6-5/8" Hollow Stem Augers Depth to Groundwater Hammer Type:140 LB Auto Trip Hammer First Encountered During Drilling:N/E Notes:Groundwater was not encountered during drilling on February 26, 2020. Figure Number ELEVATION/ DEPTH (feet) SOIL SYMBOLS SAMPLER SYMBOLS AND FIELD TEST DATA USCS Soil Description Remarks N-Values blows/ft. Moisture Content % MOORE TWINING 'i A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. DR A F T 1. Test borings were drilled between July 15, 2019 and July 30, 2019 using a CME-75 drill rig equipped with 6-5/8" inch outside diameter hollow-stem augers and using a limited access rig (L.A.R.) equipped with 6 inch outside diameter hollow stem augers. Additional soil borings were drilled between Febraury 24, 20 and February 28, 20 using a limited acess rig equipped with 6 inch outisde diameter hollow stem augers. 2. Groundwater was encountered during drilling (see logs). 3. Boring locations were located by pace with reference to the existing site features. 4. These logs are subject to the limitations, conclusions, and recommendations in this report. 5. The "N-value" reported for the California Modified Split Barrel Sampler is the uncorrected field blow count. This value shold not be interpreted as an SPT equivalent N-value. 6. Results of tests conducted on samples recovered are reported on the logs. Abbreviations used are: AMSL = Above mean sea level O.D. = Outside diameter DD = Dry density (pcf) -#200 = Percent passing #200 sieve (%) N/A = Not applicable N/E = None encountered pcf = pounds per cubic foot psf = pounds per square foot BSG = below site grade LL = Liquid Limit PI = Plasticity Index C = Cohesion ø = Angle of Internal Friction NV = No Value NP = Non Plastic Notes: Symbol Description Strata symbols SM: Silty sand SP: Poorly graded sand CL: LEAN CLAY Symbol Description Fill ML: Silt ASPHALTIC CONCRETE SC: Clayey sand KEY TO SYMBOLS II . . . ~ DR A F T Symbol Description Strata symbols CH: FAT CLAY SP-SM: Poorly graded sand with silt Misc. Symbols Boring continues Water table during drilling Soil Samplers Standard penetration test California Modified split barrel ring sampler Undisturbed thin wall Shelby tube KEY TO SYMBOLS ....sz._ □ Project:Moore Twining Associates Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 26.13 ft, Date: 7/23/2019Newport Beach Golf Course CPT-1 Location: CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.8 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 7/26/2019, 10:04:57 AM 1 Project file: C:\CPT Project Data\MooreTwining-NewportBeach7-19\CPT Report\Plots.cpt 0 l '1 6 8 1 0 12 1-1 16 18 l O 2 22 .._, l -1 ..c. 0.26 Q.J 0 l8 30 12 1-1 16 18 -1 0 ,1.!_ ,1-1 -16 -18 50 0 Cone resistance qt j ~ ~ ··················t····················t····················t···················· .................. t·· .. ················t· .. ·················t ................... . r I r ..... . ......... t .................... t .................... t ................... . ·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.----r.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.L.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.J.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·. •• .... ·············1····················r ····················r •••••••••••••••••••• ...... ~ .................... t .................... t··'"'"'"''"'"'"''" : :r: ! r ····················t····················t····················t···················· ! ! ! ····················r····················r····················r···················· r r r 1 00 mo 100 lip resistance (tsf) '1 00 Sleeve friction 0 .--=----,---,---,---, Pore pressure u 0 --r----.----r----.-----, 2 : : : : ~ •• ········!·············t············t·············!············· 6 •......... i··· .. ········t············t· ............ ! ............ . l 1 1 : ::::::::::::::::r:::::::::::::: .... ::::::::::::r::::::::::::: --:--1--r-r-- ........... t·········· .. t· .. ··· .. ··· .. i···· ........ . 8 1 0 1 2 1 -1 :: --r····r--r- 1 "1 ................ t .............. t···· .. ··· .. ··· .. t· .............. .. ........... r··········--r-·········--r-··········--i--··········· 15 l 8 : : ···············+-····· ·····-+·············-+··············· . ·······--·1···········-+·········-+··········+··········· ............ .. ........ t ............ t ............. ! ............ . rrrr ............. ! ............. t' ........... t ............. ! ............ . 2.0 ,-._ 2 l 4:: .._, 2 -1 ..c. 0.25 Q.J 0 28 10 12 1-1 2 ;: ···············+·····. ····+·············-+··············· ~ l "1 ................ t .............. t ................ t ............... .. i;; ·············r·············•1··············r············· J-1 ................ t ................ t ................ t ............... .. rrrr 36 18 -1 0 :: r r r ·············r··········-+·········-+··········--i--··········· '12 -1-1 : : ···············+············-+·············-+··············· rrrr -15 -18 50 :: ·············r·············1·············r············· 50 ___ .,... __ .,... ____ _ 0 2 3 1 5 • 2.c, -10 0 1 0 2.0 Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) 0 2 -1 6 8 1 0 1 2 1 '1 16 1 ~ 2.0 2 22 .._, 2 -1 ..c. 0. 26 Q.J 0 28 10 12 1-1 36 1~ -1 0 -1 2 '1-1 '16 -1 8 50 0 Friction ratio ~~-i--~· .... · ....... · ....... · ...... . ·····;·······;·······i······· ·······i·······t·······i······· l :; r::: ;::; !:: .. ..... !........ ..(·· .. ·r·· .... i ....... t' ...... ! ....... ::::::r:::::r:::::r····~·····1:::::r:::r:::: ·.·.·.·.·.J.·.·.·.·.·.·t······· ·······~·········-.-r·········J···········-.-r············· ·······1···· ·······t·······i·······t·······i······· 1 1 rri++ ·······1·······t·······i·······t·······i·······t·······i······· !l !l!r! ·····+···-+····+···-+····+···-+····+····· rrrrrrr 21-1 5678 Rf(%) 3 ~ 3 , j !, J IT ,, - 1 :! 11 ·1 5 1,1 : Soil Behaviour Type ~ .. ! ... -g;.~t~~~Jp l lt I· ····t·········r·········t······••·1•······••·1•··· ·····i·········1·········· .... ?···· .. ···?· .. ··· .. ·? ........ , .... •·! ... · .. ····?· ........ !•,O•,O I I I Cl~ I I I ····r·········1·········1·········1: ••••••••• t ......... 1 •••••••• --r--...... . ··········t--······ t·· ·~:: t ::t ~t ········-i---······· 1:;;;;;::;;;;:::: ·········t·········t···· ~:h ·:i~&:;t"ilt•·1·········· .... ? ... · .. ···?· .... ····? ......... ! .. · .. ·····!·· ........ .;. ......... ! ......... . ' L.······t·······-f ·· .~:t ·~·~1 ~~,~ .; •••••••• .!... ...... . ......... l ......... l ..... G!~ .. ~.~.I J .. ~?!~ . .;. ......... : ........ . .. ~ ......... L. ..... .l.J:t J -I. _t--....... ._.1= .. J ........ 1 .. 1 :t .m i<l ..-nd}~iltJ ........ . : ' s.iid (l ,iltr """' i •········ •••••••••. •••••••••. ········+·· .S oj,d ~.,;it, .... n./--········!· •••••••• i i i lli l • ·······?·········t·········t·········t·········1··········!··········t·········1·········· ··r:···r···r···1. i. !. 1.····· ..... i i i : ·:~···:·::···:::r::::::::r::::::::r:::::::r::::::r:::::::r:::::::r::::::: ·········I········:r ·····•····:::· :::··::·1·· ···· 1 ········t···· ··r······ ,:: :'. '1 ::, ;; LV l 2 l-1 S BT (Roberts o n , 2010) Project:Moore Twining Associates Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 29.14 ft, Date: 7/23/2019Newport Beach Golf Course CPT-2 Location: CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.8 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 7/26/2019, 10:05:39 AM 1 Project file: C:\CPT Project Data\MooreTwining-NewportBeach7-19\CPT Report\Plots.cpt Cone resistance qt 0 --r-,...-----c----,-----,-----, 2 i i i -1 ••••• ·············t····················t····················t···················· 6 .•..•.•........... t·· .. ················t· .. ·················t ................... . :: •··•••••··••••••••••1••••••••••••••••1••••••••••••••••1•••••••••••• 1 -1 ................. t·· .. ····· ........... t .................... t ................... . : : ••••••.. ·········-+·················-+··················+-·················· 2 : : ··················1····················r ····················r •••••••••••••••••••• 7 2"1 .................. ? .................... t .................... t ................... . I:: ····························1·····················r···················· 30 i i i ····················t····················t····················t···················· :: r ! ! : : ····················r····················r····················r···················· :: ····················i················r···················1············ 50 -f--.....------------- 0 1 00 mo 300 lip resistance (tsf) -1 00 Sleeve friction 0 .......,c--,---,---,---,----, 2 I I I : ·········t---:::::::::r:::::::::r::::::::::: :: r r 1-1 ··-r···········t·········· :: ·······1··········-+··········+··········· 2 : : r··········--r-·········--r-··········+··········· 7 2-1 !··· .. ········t············t· .. ••• .. ••• .. 1············· 1 ii ············r :: : I :; : l-1 ·············1·············t············t·············1············· :: ············r·······1··········r··········1··········· : : ·············r··········-+·········-+··········--i--··········· : : ············r·······1··········r··········1··········· 50 ----------,--0 2 3 1 5 Friction (tsf) Pore pressure u 0 --r----.----..-----.-----, 2 I I : :::::::::::::::J::::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::r::::::::::::::: :: ··············1···············;················r··············· l --1 ················t········· ·····t················t················· : : ···············+-······· .. ···-+·············-+··············· 2 :: ···············+············ r-············+··············· ~ l --1 ................ t............... . ............... t ............... .. i;; ·············r·············.,·•········r············· J-1 ················t················t················t················· :: r r r : : ···············+············-+·············-+··············· :: ·············r·············1·············r············· 50 ___ .,... __ .,... ____ _ -2c, -10 0 1 0 20 Pressure (psi) 0 2 -1 ,f, 8 1 0 L! 1 -1 16 1 ~ 2 0 2 22 '-"" 2 -1 ..c. 0.. 25 a) 0 28 10 12 :H 16 1~ -1 0 -1 2 -1-1 -16 -18 50 0 Friction ratio 21-156 78 Rf(%) 2 2 '-"" ~ 1 ..c. fil-2.5 0 J. .E 3C ~~ -, :: _.; : II ·1 -,~ 1 1 ·1 5 1e c Soil Behaviour Type : . : : . : '" •... a ... c 1,l,.1;.,;1.Ld.~.s L ' ; Cl,f .S ,ii~ d•r • ! ... r ........ .; ····Sil ~,,-•r•ti &.,,..,ndlf "ilt : •••••••• . Cl")' -5 ,ily d •r • , ..,... __ -c:·=····.·.·.·.·.r.-.·.·.··.·.J. ·.·~~l"i~ti~·1~;.·~i;;· .. i.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·. j j Cl~ h ly d•r , \ , ·······-y--······ T ci ~ '.f,i"1f "~r 0 •• j •· +······-+······· f-···el '. ••• i ···· ·+·······+········ j j Cl,[r -5 ,ily d•r . \ ·······••❖••·····••❖••··•····l··········l········••❖••··•····I·········· ; ; Cl~ Ht,, do r ' ! ··••❖••·······r········r···c i t ·········1··········r········1·········· I• !''"""'!'"'"'"'t'' •=· ••• ·~•Ill•• 11•:-.. ,.•,.•;•--• .. •••• ·i·········i·········i····· ••·!•·········!··········f·········!·········· : : : c 1+ : j j I• r t .. , t ·· r .! Ill•• I ~ ........ : ......... . -. .; ......... .; ......... .; ......... j .......... j .......... .; ......... j ......... . • ' Cl'if .S ,ii} d or i ; -i,..--... • .. ·.'.:,,,,,,,,,··=.·.·.·.'.:.:.:·.·.·.J.·.·.·:,,,,,,,.···················r,,,,,,,,,,,,· •t ::i·;~::i t :~~i ~:n-:·········· S or ~ "lV .~·t .Cl!!)":',,. ,l_:ii).t,,:,,,· .• ll~t "_;',, ... ·.·.· .. ·.··i,,,,,,,,,.·········· • ·······i·········t·········t·········t·········1··········1··········t·········1·········· • ·······-=-.·· T••• r•••T•••!. J. !. J.::·:::···: i i i • ·······i·········t·········t·········t·········i··········1··········t·········i·········· · ·-: ~· .... 1 .. ···--··1 ......... r ........ r-.. --· .. -r··· .... -.1 ......... r ....... .. • ········l········:r ····t·······->····· •• i ········ 1 ········t······-r······· ,: :'. -1 t. ;; ll' l 2 l-1 1 5 1 3" S BT (Roberts o n , 2010) Project:Moore Twining Associates Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 47.58 ft, Date: 7/23/2019Newport Beach Golf Course CPT-3 Location: CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.8 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 7/26/2019, 10:06:02 AM 1 Project file: C:\CPT Project Data\MooreTwining-NewportBeach7-19\CPT Report\Plots.cpt 0 l '1 6 8 1 0 12 1-1 1 6 1 8 2.0 2 22 .._, 2 -1 ..c. 0.26 Q.J 0 2.8 30 12 1-1 16 18 -1 0 ,1.!_ ,1-1 -16 -18 50 0 Cone resistance qt j ~ ~ ···t····················t····················t···················· .......... t·· .. ················t· .. ·················t ................... . i r r ......... t·· .. ····· ........... t .................... t ................... . ......... ·.·········•----r•········································L·································J········································· •.•.•.•.• .. ·.····················T·······································r-·································J········································· .................. t .................... t .................... t··'"'"'"''"'"'"''" r r r ••• ···············t····················t····················t···················· ! ! ! • ·················r····················r····················r···················· ...•..•.•..•.... j ..•.•..•..•.•..•.•..• j ••••••••••••••••••••• !····················· 1 00 mo 100 lip resistance (tsf) '100 Sleeve friction 0 --rr--,---,---,---,----, 2. ~ ~ ~ ~ • ············t············t·············!············· 6 • .. •••• ! ............. t············t· ............ i············· 8 1 0 1 2. 1 -1 1 5 l 8 2.0 ,-.. 2 2 4:: .._, 2 -1 ..c. 0.25 Q.J 0 2.8 10 12 1-1 36 18 -10 '12. -1-1 -15 -18 50 0 T f f f ............ t ............. 1········· ... . 1·············1··········--r-············r············ ·············1···········-+·········-+··········+··········· ............. 1·· ········t············t· ............ ! ............ . : 1 J : r :r: ••••• ······1·············t············t·············1············· rrrr •• ·······+-·········-+·········+··········+··········· r ; ; r 2 3 -1 5 Friction (tsf) Pore pressure u 0 -r----.-----o-a---.-----, 0 l ················-··············· ················-················· 2 --1 ................ t ............................... t ............... .. ,f. ................ t ............... : ................ t ............... .. -1 6 :: --r-·---r-8 1 0 L! 1'1 ················t············ ···············-r··············· 1 '1 : : ················1············ .... :················1················· 16 1 ~ 2 ;: ···············+········. ·+·············-+··············· ~ l --1 ................ t .............. t .. ············ .. t· .. ··· ......... .. ! ;; : r : r : r : J--1 ................ t .............. t ................ t ............... .. 2.0 22. 2 .._, 2 -1 ..c. 0. 2.6 Q.J 0 28 10 12 1-1 :: ·············r·.··········1·············r············· 36 1~ -10 : : ···············+···. ·······-+·············+··············· -12 '1-1 :: ·············r·············.i··············r············· 50 ___ .,... __ .,... ____ _ '16 -18 50 • 2.c, -10 0 1 0 2.0 0 Pressure (psi) Friction ratio i i j ~ ~ ~ ····t·······1·······t·······1······· ····t·······1·······t·······1······· "!""'----=··~rr! ! .. ..... !.... . .... t' ...... ! ....... ·······r····· . :::::~::::::::::::::: ·.·.·.·.·.J.·.·.·.·.J.·.. 1·.·.·.·.·.J.·.·.·.·.·.-.-r.·.·.·.·.·.·. ·······1·······t·· 1·······t·······1······· fl , j:j f ....... !... i ....... ! ....... t' ...... ! ....... •••••• !!f ! ::::: ····--i:::::::i:::::::r::J::::::: ....... . ·····1····· .. t······· i i i i i i i 21-15678 Rf(%) Soil Behaviour Type : 1 1 • \ •• t ·-s.~ ·~·,;i~ ·;.;.t··· I ····~·········->····t il ~··;·;,·n,1 !.s··;;,;;~·•il f ·i·········· ····t········ t ···-S il ~ ~•w.t !&.,.,n,fy,,ilt ·\ ••••••••• Sond sS ,i{t "'"d' , ·········•······ ... .;. ........ .;, .................... ; ........ . • So r 8 oi \t "'"<I j .. : .......... : -· . .:.. : So~ <S ,;\V ><i n ~ I sif••nd !~ ,..~y.,;"i-i" r ········-y-·······-y-···d ~··.f~"ft··<i ;;t ·········j ••••••••• ' • .C l ' ' ' ......... t' ........ ~ ... Cir · ...... 1···· .. ··••❖••··· .. ··1--··· ... .. 111111 ~ 11 00 • ~.. -r ... ·!•Ill-"'t"" .... I ......... . ......... r ........ !···· .. ···1········ .. !· .. ·····••f' ........ ! ........ . -t Ill ·! Ill•• 11,;.,.,., ,.)., • .,.,.,. :::::::::r:::::::;:::::~t~:i1:e~~:;::::::::r::::::· :::::::::i:::::::::i:::::::::i::::::::::i::::::::::t·• ... l ........ ·········i··········i···· ~i.lr -~~"!r ?..~.~.f t •il ~.t ......... t' ........ t' ........ ! ......... l ......... t' ....... l ....... .. ......... r .. ··· .. ·t·········1•··· ...... ! .......... .;. ........ l •..•••..• ········t-······· t· c1~ ~·;;;r~· <l •:i ;. • • • :·········· ...... r-····· t -! ·! ··-· r-·· ··Y-······· :::::::::r::::::::r·····r·····-r··:::··r:::::::1:::::::::: ... l ......... l ..... ~i !►..?.~.~i ~ .. ~~+.~.il ~ .. l ......... . Sil t, ,ond !.S ,.n.i;_, ,ilt I s~~. ~.,mr. ~~~. :'. '1 J; l{) l 2. L-1 I 6 1 3" S BT (Robertson , 2010) Project:Moore Twining Associates Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 34.40 ft, Date: 7/23/2019Newport Beach Golf Course CPT-4 Location: CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.8 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 7/26/2019, 10:06:28 AM 1 Project file: C:\CPT Project Data\MooreTwining-NewportBeach7-19\CPT Report\Plots.cpt 0 l '1 6 8 1 0 12 1-1 16 18 l O 2 22 .._, 2 -1 ..c. 0.26 Q.J 0 l8 30 32 1-1 16 38 -1 0 ,1.!_ ,1-1 -16 -18 50 0 Cone resistance qt ... . ........... :·····················!········ .. ···········r······ .. ············ ··············+····················t····················t···················· ::==~---r-:··••❖ .................. .. : : i r r .................... t .................... t ................... . ................. + ................... ! ................... + ................ .. ....... ·.··················T··················.-.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.L.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.J.-.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·. ................. t .................... t .................... t··'"'"'"''"'"'"''" r r ........................................... . .............................. . ····················t··················· r ! ! .................... 1 ..................... 1 ..................... I ................... .. r r r 1 00 mo 100 lip resistance (tsf) '1 00 Sleeve friction 0 2 ~ ~ ~ -1 .. . ...... -:,, ............. !············· ......... i············· 8 1 0 1 2 ... r 1 -1 ............. i············· 15 l 8 ... : ............. ! ........... .. 2.0 ,-.. 2 2 4:: .._, 2 -1 ..c. 0. 26 Q.J ... r ............. ! ............ . -+, ............ 1············· =----i.. .. !············· 0 28 30 ..................... 32 1-1 i i i rrrr 36 38 -1 0 ............. l ............. l ............ 1 ............. 1 ............ . '12 -1-1 rrrr -15 -18 50 0 2 3 -1 5 Friction (tsf) Pore pressure u 0 --r----.----.------.-----, 0 l I I 2 : ::::::::::::::::r::::::::::::. ,::::::::::::::::r::::::::::::: -1 ,f, :: ··r···r: 8 1 0 1 2 l "1 ................ t .. ·· ......... t···· .. ········ .. t· .............. .. 1 '1 : : ................ 1 ............... r ................ 1 .............. .. 16 1 ~ 2 :: ................ r ............... l ................ r .............. .. ~ l "1 ................ t ......... ·····t ................ t ............... .. 1 ;; : I : ; : I : 3-1 ................ t"' ............................ t" ............ .. 2.0 22 2 .._, 2 -1 ..c. 0. 26 Q.J 0 28 30 32 l-1 :: r r r 16 3~ -1 0 : : ................ l ................ l ................ l .............. .. -1 2 '1-1 :: ·············r·············1·············r············· 50 ___ .,... __ .,... ____ _ '16 -18 50 • 2.c, -10 0 1 0 2.0 0 Pressure (psi) Friction ratio ....... ·-······ ........ . ·······\·······+······· : ······1······· ·······t·······1·······t·······1······· ·····r r ··· ........ · ........• :···;· ·······1······· • ·····••❖••·····1······· ....... ! ....... t... . .. ":' ...... i ....... ! ...... . ....... !...... . ...... : .. ·· ... ! ....... ! ....... ! ..... .. ·······1·· ••i••·····t·······1·······t·······1······· ······:· ... ; ••.•.•.• •! :1•·•·•·•·•1·•· !······r ······1·······t·······1·······t·······1······· !l !l!r! ....... l ....... l ....... 1 ....... 1 ....... 1 ....... l ....... l ....... rrrrrrr 23-156 78 Rf(%) Soil Behaviour Type Cl.iy .S ,i ly d ar : •{;1,;y. . -.;, Cls{, .S ,i i~ d ar . .................... .; ... t l:tr . .S .eily .d o .. .; ......... ! ........ Clar . , ......... .; ... s.~ . .:1 .,,;it, . .,.,ni ...... l ........ . : : i :I t ,and i~ """"i' ,ilt l .......... : ......... : .... 'cit :s ·;;lt,',ri.i ................ . \ \ Sit t ••nd iol "'ndi ,ilt . ........ T' ....... T 1:t· .:i ;,r~ a.,-~· ..... T ''S oiid ·.s ·!llft; .. s.iti~ .......... i ......... . 0 . Cl3/ .:l ,i i~; d•r • j •❖••·····••❖••··(Hr«······••-1 .. ······••❖••·······I·········· • Cl~ ,l ,i ltf d •r ' \ .. ....... t ....... .; .... ~:±"~ ;.rv <l~r ·r .. -· .. l ........ . 11111• ! .II ... .;, .... T ... r -· •t .... • .. ·-r·· ..... .. ·········f·········+···· .. ···! .......... i .. ······t·········i······" ~ . Cl.iy h ly d•r ! II Ill'!° Ill--• ':'•• ·i ·, ••• •t ........ ,: ........ .. ......... .;. ......... .;. ......... j .......... j .......... .;. ......... j ......... . • Cl,i, , ' ' ,\::!!i)' .. ~.;,i.1k .~~l .i-....... j ........ . Sil ) ~•nd •,l "'nGp ilt i Cll!'l' .S ,i i+.. d o • • t iif,·•itl :t· .. ~a;,, ,flt ;. .,S•!>I ;5 .,i\~· ..,,n,t :C -,.....,...,....,...., _ _,.-,.-,......,..-,-.,...,....,......,,,...,-,.-,.-4 .! '1 6 ;; U:., 1 2 l-1 1 5 1 3' S BT (Robertson , 2010) Project Name: Drive Shack Driving Range and Restaurant Project No.: E40550.01 Location: 3100 Irvine Avenue, Newport Beach, CA Boring Location Well Depth, Feet BSG Date Measured Depth to Water, Feet BSG Estimated Surface Elevation* (Feet AMSL) Approximate Groundwater Elevation (Feet AMSL) B-17 35 2/28/2020 28 34 6 B-18 50 2/28/2020 18 33 15 B-19 55 2/28/2020 24 36 12 B-22 55 2/28/2020 Dry 30 N/A B-23 35 2/28/2020 Dry 20 N/A B-24 40 2/28/2020 24 28 4 B-17 35 4/17/2020 27.7 34 6.3 B-18 50 4/17/2020 19 33 14.0 B-19 55 4/17/2020 22.2 36 13.8 B-22 55 4/17/2020 Dry 30 N/A B-23 35 4/17/2020 Dry 20 N/A B-24 40 4/17/2020 18.4 28 9.6 *Surface elevations estimated from topographic survey provided by Kimley-Horn Temporary Piezometers Groundwater Depth APPLICATION FOR WELL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT ORANGE COUNTY HEAL TH CARE AGENCV 1241 E. OVER ROAD , SUITE 120 (714) '433-8000 ENVlRONMENTAl HEAL TH DIVISION SANTA ANA. CA 92705-56,i FAX: (714)-433-6481 CITY Newport Beach DATE 1/31/20 WELL LOCATION (ADDRESS IF AVAILABLE) 3100 Irvine Avenue , Newport Beach, CA NAME OF WELL OWNER Brett Feuerstein ADDRESS 8294 Mira Mesa Blvd CITT nP TELEPHONE San Diego, CA 92126 858) 271-4682 NAME OF CONSUL TING FIRM Moore Twinin & Associates, Inc BUSINESS ADDRESS 2527 Fresno Street CITY Fresno NAME OF DRIWNG CO. Pacific Drilling Co. c,rv 8 0 . an 1ego ZIP 93721 TELEPHONE 559-268-7021 C-57 LICENSE NO . 681380 ZIP TELEPHONE 9211 0 619-294-3682 DIAGRAM OF WELL SITE (Use additional sheets an d/or attachments) See attached E PlAN ATTACHED FOR ACCOUNTING USE ONLY: HSONO. yoiqg{o DATE O'lf 01.D I 2 0 !NTL ---=S..::.l ____ _ APPROVAL BY OTHER AGENCIES: CHECK NO. botoo; o1'oqlic; AMOUNT -.t ~1,..L-1:1 ..... s"--'.--=o --=o __ JURISDICTION _________________ _ REMARKS ___________________ _ TYPE OF WELL (CHECK) PROBE SURVEY PRIVATE DOMESTIC □ MONITORING PUBLIC DOMESTIC □ SOIL BORING IRRIGATION □ OTHE.R CATHODIC □ TOTAL NUMBER 6 A. WELLS -SUBMIT A WELL CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAM (INCLUDE DIM ENS IONS) B. SOIL BORINGS AND PROBES - TOTAL DEPTH depths range from 30' to 55' SEALING MATERIAL Bentonite & Concrete • □ IX! □ C. PROPOSED START DATE ~2/==2~4'-------- l hereby agree to comply in every respect wit/, all requirements of the Health Care Agency a11d wilh all ordinances and laws of the County of Orange and of the State of California pertaining I.a well construction. reconstruction a11d destruction, including the require• m.enls to maintain the integrity of all significant confining ... k ,J., APPLICANT"S SIGNATURE DATE' Zubair Anwar PRINT NAME 559-268-7021 x258 PHONENUMBER FAX NUMBER DISPOSITION OF PERMIT (00 NOT FILL IN): ~ APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOL.LOWING CONDmONS: A. NOTIFY THIS AGENCY AT LEAST 48 HOURS ~ PRIOR TO START. ~~3 ~ aW-\ ~"-~- □ PRIOR TO SEAL IN G THE ANNULAR ~ACE OR FILLING OF THE CONDUCTOR CAS IN G . B. 0 SUBMIT TO THE AGENCY WITH IN 30 DAYS AFTER COMPLETION OF WORK, A WELL COMPLETION REPORT ANO/OR DR ILLING LOGS. PLEASE REFERENCE PERMIT NO. C. pd. SECURE ALL MONITORING WELLS TO PREVENT TAMPERING. ~ m r r "O m ;:o s:: :::j z C s:: cc m ::0 0 . ~ OTHER ~~~~I.C.Sl.j\.\l~qs.:l~~m:ll~~a!:ll~~Dt.j □ AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE DATE WHEN SIGNED BY ORANGE COUNTY HEAL TH CARE AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE, THIS APPLICATION IS A PERMIT. @.F272-09 .0803 (R11/01 ) GROU NDWATE R MON ITORING WEL L ~--Flush-Mount Well Box J ~--Lawn Backfi ll Material: Co ncrete J L3.0'} ., . ~-. : .. - --------Back.fill Mater ial : Co ncrete J --------Bentonite Seal J 2 .0' I ~- I 2.0' 23 ' to 48' L'l5') GRO UN DWATE R MON ITO RING WEL L DIAGR AM 3100 IR VINE AV ENU E NEWP ORT BEACH, CALI FORN IA .,. --:::,-1~ --------Casin g : 1-inch , Schedule 40 Pvc J ·:.--._ .... -~--_-_.:•: . -·•""' --~--.... ·-:. -. ' -:,.:. ·:· -. •;: -_ ~-~ -: .. ~.: -_ ··: .. -·•••· ... t: _-•.--------Well Scree n: 1-lnch , Schedule 40 PVC : 0 .02" Slot :_._,_ .. : _-·;..-. ..... _-:.~ ... -.. •. -.-----=~ .. FILE NO . 40550-01-0 1 DRAWN BY : RM PRO JECT NO. E40550 .01 DATE DRAWN : 1131 120 APPROVED BY : DRAWlNG NO . 2 NOT T O SCA LE MOORE TWINING ASSOC/A TES, INC + PIEZOMETER WELL LOCATION PROPOSED TEST BORING LOCATION MAP NEC OF MESA DRIVE AND IRVINE AVENUE NEWPORT BEACH , CALIFORINA FILE NO. 40550-01-01 DRAWN BY: RM PROJECT NO. E40550 .01 DATE DRAWN: 11 /18/19 APPROVED BY: DRAWING NO. 1 0 I ~ ~ 150 I APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET MOORE TWINING ASSOC/A TES, INC. . ' . ' 1345{/1 I ORANGE COUNTY HEALTH CARE AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION HEALTH SERVICE ORDER ¼/«lf s 4 o 2 9 s 6 Date 2 le lzo Initials_%_\ ___ _ Cl ient NJ; f>!e\i f~\Aef~:\e\Q Address ~lqy M\Yg Mel Q swd SJU\ P\e90 I Cl\ q112(() Ph# ____ _ Paid By ~aore Tuiioiog assac\CAJe~ , me Address 15 I3 fre~no s-n:w £©no . Ct\ 4~12\ Ph#------,-..,.....,....--- Please circle the respective service code(s) 01 CEQ/HSF (Acct/Bat#_____ $ ___ _ 02 CEQ Plan Check/Foods (PC#____ $ ___ _ 03 CEO Plan Check/Pools (PC#____ $ ___ _ 04 Food Vehicles Cat ________ $ ___ _ Decal No(s) ________ _ 05 CEO/Court Restitution /Judgment $ ___ _ Name __________ _ Case# __________ _ 06 Hotels/Motels (AccVBat#_____ $ ___ _ 07 Massage Parlor (Acct/Bat#_____ $ ___ _ 08 Noise $ ___ _ 09 Liquid Waste Hauler $ ___ _ 10 Farm Labor Camp Registration $ ___ _ 11 Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act $ ___ _ 12 Hazardous Waste (Acct/Bat#____ $ ___ _ 13 Hazardous Waste Anes______ $ ___ _ 14 Hazardous Waste Restitution/Judgment $. ___ _ Name __________ _ Case# __________ _ 15 Hazardous Waste Clean-up _____ $. ___ _ 16 Medical Waste/Body Art ______ ) $. ___ _ 17 UST/HSF(Acct/Bat# ______ ) $ ___ _ 18 USTPlanCheck(PC# ______ ) $ ___ _ 19 UST State Surcharge $ ___ _ 20 UST Restitution/Judgment $ ___ _ Name __________ _ 0.-i Case#_~---------0 Wells(Const:XRecon_Destr __ ) $ \1\JS.00 Water_ Cath_ lnit. Monit. ___ ) Add. Monit._ #Wells ___ _ Driller _________ _ Consultant ________ _ 22 Backflow/Cross Connection ____ _ Client(s) _________ _ 23 Small Water Systems 24 CUPA -Base Fee 25 CUPA -CalArp 26 FOG-OC Sanitation District 27 Tierred Permitting OTHER __________ _ OTHER __________ _ OTHER __________ _ OTHER _____ ---.--..-.---=----- PAID BY CHECK NO: \o\) \a O 5 d(lted, 02/ o4 I 2o $ ___ _ $ ___ _ $ ___ _ $, ___ _ $. ___ _ $ ___ _ $ ___ _ $ ___ _ $ ___ _ $ ___ _ 1 ) •· . I , ., • c P ◄ ) • • • • __:_-----~--:--··------ I i .• Prop. Two Story Office Bldg. 3 0 . Test Borings -Approx . I"= 30' PLAN BACA ASSOCIATES Project: A-0675-F Plate: B 11111 • • • • • • • • • • LOG OF BORING NI I DATE DRILLED 8/5/89 J DRILLING EQUIPMEHT Hollow-Stem Flight Auger DRIVING WEIGHT 140 lbs. -30" drop I SURFACE ELEVATION 5- 12~ I 2E 10- SAND, fine to medium, variable clayey to sl. clayey, scat. gravels bn:,,,.n rroist rrod. ccrrp. c1arp·- to dry 1-----------1-•-----------CLAY, very silty,. gray very £inn .nurerous veins and and. • rmist l.enses of fine • gray sand and silty sand it~ 109 104 85 SH£Afl ftESISTANC£ @ ANTICIPAT£0 PRESSURE .. KIPS Pt:R SQUARE: FOOT 4 i z 3 4 s MOISTURE CONTENT• •;. DRY WEIIHT • I I I I , 10 20 30 40 !ID I • I I I 11 11 I 11 15,...,•=i=t2-='==9========l=~=~==i==93=l-+H-++-H+.+-H-+.+++t+-+-+++++-:--1JI I I Fnd@ 15.0 ft. Notes: . . . . ( 1) . No ground water , I 11 I 11 Acacia Plaza II I PROJECT No. A-0675-F Santa Ana Heights, California PLATE C BACA ASSOCIATES c ~s y~TINO FOU _!!O~Tl ~H ENGINEERS t ~NQ_!!EERIH9 8E_0LOGISTS vlLY uT I ewporc tjeacin . . . . . ···• • . LOG OF BORING N12 DATE DRILLED 8/5/89 I DRILLING EQUIPMENT ~~•-Stem Flight Auger DRIVING WEIGHT 140 lbs. -30" drop ] SURFACE ELEVATION • -0 C SHEAR RESISTANCE @ ANTICIPATED • <'o-t-<i' PRESSURE -KIPS PER SQUAM'. ,ooT ~-0 ~ -SOILS "o< o{r~ ~,,.r • ~ "+, • I I I ca. i 4 I 2 CLASSIFICATION °-t "-,~ ,.~ ~'9,. ~ I 3 ◄ , -E +c,-~JR-~,~~ ~~ • MOISTURE CONT£NT • •;. DRY WE18HT ~ • t 'I' • ;,, • 10 I 3b I -i 0 ai 20 ~ l:10 • ~-~, fine to meditm, light dJ:y loose variable clayey to brown --------- • t3€ s1. clayey, scat . s1. ,rod. ll8 gravels lrroist carp. 1,..... ___ bro\<.n ' . • 5-. '. 3~ 1.10 0 I I ----I • fine to irediun; carp. I -silty to slight silty BE ll8 0 I 10-I . ' •• '. I I .. I ---------I CIAY, silty, n~..rous gray very fi.l:rn I I veins and lenses with lm:>ist to I 11 of sand and silty red stiff •· • •5= sand · brc:Mn 97 I .lit I 15-stairu • II : I I . ' • I I I 2: 102 :. I I I I 2: ·. I I I Fnd@ 20.0 ft. : I 11 N:>tes: (1) N:J ·ground _water I I I 1 2: I ) Acacia Plaza III PROJECT No. A-0675-F Santa Ana Heights, California PLATE D BACA ASSOCIATES glt(.SU~TING FOUf D~{l (tN ENGINEERS t J NQJN~ERING QE~OGISTS . LOG OF BORING N• 3 DATE DRILLED 3/5/89 I DRILLING EQUIPMENT Hollc,.,.r-Stan Flight J\ug,:r. DRIVING WEIGHT 140 lbs. -30" drop I SURFACE ELEVATION ) -- • ~~O..s, /':1-SHEAR RESISTANC! @ ANTICIPATED • 0 PRESSURE• KIPS PE" SOUAIIIE FOOT •• 0 ... . -SOILS "o< 0<r~ .r✓.r~ • _,,;+.,~ r I ' c: 10 ... A i 2 3 4 ~ -e 1 CLASSIFICATION o~ "'~~ ~+'°'>-'9 ~ ... ◊, I:! 0 • MOCSTURE CONTENT· •;. DRY W£18HT a.1"1 .. /t',tq">- D " ,. • 10 2·0 I ~ • • 30 so C iii _, Sk"ID, fine to rrediun, brown rroist catp. silty, sl. clayey, ··H scat. gravels 116 fine to coarse, r---- mxl. sl. clay binder, CXJJ\1• • variable scat. to to ' 5-• i2E mxierate gravels carp. l.16 " t"---- sl. .. nnist • . •~c 109 0 10-I I • I I I I • •r2e 108 10 I 15- ------------fine to rrediun, tan roist dense . clean, occasional with clay/silt veins pale gray : • veins .15i 103 • I 29- I I ; .. 11 . . • I .. 111 , ~E 2~ I ,101 • I t • End@ 25.0 ft. Notes: ( 1} No ground water Acacia Plaza III PROJECT No. A-0675-F santa Ana Heights, Califomia PLATE E BACA ASSOCIATES • CONSULTING FOUNDATION ENGINEERS C ENQINEERINQ 8EOLOGISTS 'It otNew art Beach .P .. . LOG OF BORING N•4 DATE DRILLED U/5/89 I DRILLING EQUIPMENT Hollow-SteTJ Flight Auger DRIVING WEIGHT 140 lbs. -30" drop I SURFACE EL£VATION -0 0. SHEAR RESISTANCE @I ANTICIPATED • "a < -,, PRESSURE• KIPS PER SQUAltE FOOT .:. 0 ,ft. --SOILS <'o{ 0~~ ;s,.r.,.r 't Al/+✓ ~ .. 4 i 2 I I I .5 a. 1 CLASSIFICATION °.f l/19~ "'e; ~.,,. J .. s E f'c-, Qe·~I. r. ~ • "'t G',s," MOISTURE CONTENT• •,i. DflY W[llffT ~ • • a • 10 20 I f , 0 m 30 40 ~o SAND, fine to rrediun, b:rov.n dry loose I Silty, variable ..._ ___ ---- 11'2( clayey to sl. clayey, sl. mxl. 109 '0 scat. gravels rroist carp . .,_.;._~----- ) m::iist catp. I s-•trn ll5 .. I --------nediun to coarse, red sl. • . variable sl. clay brown rroist ·$~ binder to clean, ill • . heavy gravels I I 10-I I --------• vez:y fine to fine, pale troist I • 3! sl. silty, with gray 101 • I minor silt veins • brcMn . • 15 End@ 15.0 ft. Notes: ( 1) ho ground water . t . • : 2.G I I I I .. . ., • .. I 2! I • Acacia Plaza III PROJECT No. A-0675-F santa Ana Heights, California PLATE F BACA ASSOCIATES • CONSULTING FOUNDATION ENGINEERS C ENQINEERINQ 8EOLOOISTS City .of .e each PWAS_20230915 APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTS SMITH-EMERY LABO RA TORIES An lndependenc Conw ,erd al Testing Laboracocy, E scablished 1 904 781 East Wa shi11g1011 Boulevard, Los Angeles, California 90021 ♦ Phone (213) 749-3411 ♦ Fax (213) 746-0744 July 2, 2024 SEL File No.: 49262-1 SEL Report No.: G-24-2978 Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 Attention: Mr. Carl Kim SUBJECT: Soil Testing RE: Wave Garden Cove PW AS_20240507 ST AND ARD: ASTM Standard Test Method and California Test Method. SAMPLE LOCATION: Wave Garden Cove DATE SAMPLED: 5/28/2024 DATE RECEIVED : 6/ 6 /2024 REPORT OF TESTS In compliance with the request of your authorized representative, we have conducted the subject test as per project requirements for the above-referenced project. Bulk soil and drive ring samples were delivered to our laboratory by Mr. Andy Hillstrand, where samples were processed and tested in accordance to ASTM standard test method reque sted . Test results are as follows: ASTM D3080 Direct Shear of Soil Under Consolidated Drain Condition (intact ) : See Plate No.: A-1 CKG-HAl , Sam ple No. R-1, Depth at 5.5 ft .. Plate A-1 Dry Density Moisture Content (%) Normal Stress at Strength Friction Sample Classification (pct) Stress Peak lntercept Angle Initial Final (ksf) (ksf) (ksf) C (0) 121.0 12 .3 15.3 1.0 0.960 Very Dark Gray Elastic Silt 121.4 12 .1 15 .0 4.0 2436 0.311 29.5 ° 120.9 12.3 15.6 8.0 4.908 -------------------Page 1 SMITH-EMERY LABORATORIES An Indep enden t Commerdal T escing Labora cor;, Escablish ed 1 904 78 1 East Washington B oulevard, Lo s Angeles, Ca lifornia 90021 ♦ Ph one (21 3 ) 74 9-3411 ♦ Fax (2 13 ) 746-074 4 Li quid Limit, Plastic Limit and Plasticitv Index ASTM D4318: Plate No.; B-lA and B-B Sample I.D . Li Quid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity Index USCS Group S ymbol CKG-HAl/B-1 @ 0 -5ft 20 14 6 CL/ML CKG-HA2/B-1@ 0-4 ft 47 20 27 CL Expansion Index ASTM D4829: see Plate No.: C-lA, C-1B and C-lC BH/ Depth Soil Classification (Visual) Dry Density Moisture Content (%) Potential Expansion Sample No. (ft) (pct) Initial Final Expansion Index CKG-CPT-2, 0 to 5 Black OLia 79 .6 19.9 40.3 MEDIUM 60 B-1 CKG-CPT-3, 0 to 5 Brown Silty Sand 113 .0 8 .8 16.9 VERY 10 B-1 LOW CKG-CPT-6 , 0 to 5 Brown Silty Sand 120 .7 7 .5 12 .4 VERY 0 B-1 LOW ASTM D1557-21 Laboratory Com paction Characteristics of Soil: see Plate No.: D-lA to D-lD BHNo. Sampl e Depth (ft.) Soil Classification (Vi sual) Max. Dry Density Optimum Moisture No. (pct) Content % CKG-CPT-2 B-1 0 to 5 Black Lean CLAY 94.8 22.7 CKG-CPT-3 B-1 0 to 5 Brown Silty Sa nd 124.S 9.4 CKG-CPT-6 B-1 0 to 5 Brown Silty Sa nd 133.7 7 .9 CKG-HA-2 B-1 0 to 4 Cl ayey Silt 116.1 13.4 CONSOLIDATION TEST AND TIME RATE: See Plates E-lA and E-1B Consolidation test was conducted on soil sample, CKG CPT-3 , B-1, depth Oto 5 feet in accordance with ASTM D2435/D2435M. The result of testing for consolidation is shown in Plate E-lA and the time rate is shown in Plate E-lB. CORROSION TESTS: F-lA to F-lD Corrosion BH/ Depth Soil Type Min. Resistivity Soluble Soluble Sample No . (ft) Chloride Sulfate Ohm-cm mg/kg mg/kg CKG-B-1 0 to 5 Sand y Silt 9580 781 21 IO Attached are the following plates ; Plate No.: A-1 Direct Shear Te st ASTM D3080 . Plate No.: B-lA & B-lB ASTM 0431 8 Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit and Plasticity Index of Soil s. Plate No .: C-IA to C-lC ASTM 4829 Expansion Index of Soils ----------Page 2 pH 7.6 SMITH-EMERY LABORATORIES An Independenc Commeraal Testing Laboratory, Established 1904 781 East Washington Boulevard, Los Angeles, Califo rnia 90021 Plate No.: D-IA to D-ID ASTM SD1557-21 Modified Proctor of Soil. Plate No.: E-IA ASTM D2435 Consolidation test inundated@ 1.6k. Plate No.: E-lB ASTM D2435 Consolidation test Time Rate at 3.2k. ♦ Phone (213) 749-3411 ♦ Fax (213) 746-0744 Plates No .: F-lA to F-ID Corrosion Tests (Ph, Sulfate, Chloride and Min. Resistivity). Should you have any further questions regarding the contents of this report, please feel free to contact us. Respectfully submitted, SMITH-EMERY Laboratories ~~-?~ Elpidio Saucedo Geotechnical Laboratory Manager AC/ac cc: 2-Addressee ---------------------Page 3 Ild~urreccion Geotechnical Laboratories SMITH-EMERY Laboratories 791/781 East Washington Boulevard, Los Angeles 90021 Tel. No. (213) 745-5333: Fax No.: (213) 741-8621 JIRECT SHEAR TEST (ASTM D308( Client: Carl Kime Geotechnical, Inc. Project: Wave Garden Cove, PWAS 20240507 Location: NA Remark: Intact rin g sample of modified California ring. Other: Max Dry Den OMC% Lab. Ref. No.: 273 ----- SEG Report No.: G-24-2981 SEG File No.: 449262-1 Date Sampled: 5/28/24 Date Received: 5/28/24 Date Test: 6/6/24 Boring/Pit No.: CKG-HA-1 Sample No.: _R_-1 __ _ Depth(ft): _5_.5_ft __ _ Test/Sam ple TD: 1 2 3 Initial thickness, in 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial water content, % 12.3 12.l 12.3 Initial dry density, pcf 121.0 121.4 120.9 Initial degree of saturation, % 89.05 88.89 88.88 Final water content,% 15.3 15.0 16.6 Normal stress, ks f 1.000 4.000 8.000 Peak shear stress, ks f 0.960 2.436 4.908 Ultimate shear stress, ks f 0.624 2.232 4.644 6000 Shear Stress Vs Lateral Deflection Graph -8.1)(1 5000 4000 Q "' 8 "' 3000 "' ~ ,;/) 2000 ... "' 0) ..c: ,;/) 1000 0.05 0.1 0.15 0 .2 0.25 0.3 Shear Deflection (in) Shear Stress Vs Normal Stress Graph 4.000 t--i-"--ir---t-~--i+-+--''-+-:-.---ir-'--tt-'7"'"="-'F-:-'-t-----,--i Q ~.000 • Peak Ultimate -._, 1 0.000 +--~t-----+----+---+--~-~~-~--t---+---'-l 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 Normal Stress (ksf) Shear Box Dia. , in. 2.419 S oecimen Tvoe/Soil structure Intact ring sample modified California ring. Soil descri ption: Very Dark Gray Elastic SILT Shearing Rate (in/min): 0.0075 Soaked w/ Water: _Y_e_s ___ _ Shear Stren h Parameters* Cohesion Friction sf An le, de Peak 311.4 29.5 Ultimate 4.7 29.9 * Labs interpretation only Lab Note SMITH-EMERY Laboratories 791/781 East Washington Boulevard, Los Angeles 90021 Tel. No. (213) 745-5333 : Fax No.: (213) 741-8621 •IRECT SHEAR TEST (ASTM D308( Client: Carl Kime Geotechnical, Inc. Project: Wave Garden Cove, PWAS 20240507 Location: NA Remark: Remolded Sample to 90% ofMDD Other: Max Dry Den OMC% Lab. Ref. No.: 272 ----- SEG Report No.: G-24-2978 SEG File No.: 49262-1 Date Sampled: 5/28/24 Date Received: 5/28/24 Date Test: 6/19/24 Boring/Pit No.: CKG-HA-1 Sample No.: _B_-_1 __ _ Depth(ft): 0-4 ft Test/Sample ID: 1 2 3 Initial thickness, in 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial water content, % 13.4 13.4 13.0 Initial dry density, pcf 103 .8 104.1 104.8 Initial degree of saturation, % 59.87 60 .55 59 .84 Final water content,% 29.9 25.0 23.7 Normal stress, ks f 1.000 4.000 8.000 Peak shear stress , ks f 0.684 2 .304 4 .176 IBtimate shear stress, ks f 0.612 2 .148 4.152 4500 Shear Stress Vs Lateral Deflection Graph Q "' 5 "' Vl .., .):j Cl.l la .., .cl Cl.l 4 .000 3.500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 Shear Deflection (in) Shear Stress Vs Normal Stress Graph 0.3 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 Normal Stress (ksf) I I Shear Box Dia., in. 2.419 Snecimen T vn e/Soil structure Intact ring sample modified California ring. Soil description : Very Dark Gray Elastic SILT Shearing Rate (in/min): 0 .0075 ----- Soaked w/ Water : Yes Sh St i!t h P ear ren t * arame ers Cohesion Friction psf Angle, de g . Peak 233 .5 26.4 Ultimate 113 .7 26 .8 * Labs interpretation only Lab Note PLATE No.: A-1B Client: Project: Location: SMITH-EMERY Laboratories Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index ASTM D4318-17 Lab. Ref. No.: 271 -----Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. SEG Report No.: G-24-2978 ___ __,;, ___ ---''----------------- Wave Graden Cove/ Proj ectPWAS 20240507 SEG File No.: 49262-1 NA Date Sampled: 5/28/24 Soil Description: Brown Sil ty Clay/Clayey Silt (CUML) Date Received: 5/28/24 Liquid Limit App.: I-4645 Grooving Tool:_#_l_l ___ _ Date Tested: 6/20/24 Sampled by: A. Hillstand Balance: TS2408009 Oven: _S_E....:Q:.....-2 ___ _ Bore Hole No .: Wet Oven Dried 100 90 80 70 --t ._, 60 ~ ra:.:i ~ z -;;.. 50 !:: u -E-40 00 ~ ..;i Q., HA-I ------ Liquid Limit 20 0 ORGANIC when Sample No.: ___ B_-_l __ Depth (ft): 0 -5 ft Plastic Limit Plasticity Index Classification 14 6 CL/ML LL Oven/LL 0.00 LL dried/LLwet <0.75 Inorganic PLASTICITY CHART / / .,, / , , , , , .,, -I/ ,, , ,, , , ,, / .,, ,, / ,,.,, CH or OH / ,, ,, _, V ., / .,, ,,· .," .L .,' V ,,,,,,,, • V '-..... / "A" LINE 30 20 V ,,et orOL /~ I , , ,./ l\ffi or OH ; , ,, 10 V ; ,, , ,,. ./ , 7 4 0 / CL-ML I 0 I V I 0 10 16 20 IPLATE NO.: B-lA ,, V ,, / ~ / MLorOL I I 30 40 50 60 LIQUID LJMIT (LL) 70 80 90 100 Fonn: Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit and Plasticity Index ASThf D4318 Rev.3 4/23/15 Client: Project: Location: SMITH-EMERY Laboratories Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index AS1M D4318-17 Lab. Ref. No.: 272 ------...;C;,_ar_l_K_i_m_G...:....:...eo.:....t_ec_hn_ic_a.,.:.l,_In_c_. _______________ SEG Report No.: G-24-2978 Wave Graden Cove/ Project PWAS 20240507 SEG File No.: 49262-1 NA Date Sampled: 5/28/24 Soil Description: _S_il~ty._C_la..._y-_C_L ___________________ _ Date Received: 5/28/24 Liquid Limit App.: _1-_4_6_4_5 ___ _ Balance: TS2408009 Bore Hole No.: HA-2 Wet Oven Dried 100 90 80 70 ---Q., _, 60 >( ~ ~ z -.... 50 I'"' -u -I'"' 40 00 -( ..::i Q., Liq uid Limit 47 0 ORGANIC when Grooving Tool: _#_l_l ____ _ Oven: SEQ-2 Sample No.: B-1 Plastic Limit Plasticity Index 20 27 LL Oven/LL 0.00 LL dried/LL wet <0.75 Depth (ft): Classification CL Inorganic Date Tested: 6/20/24 Sampled by: A Hillstand 0 • 4 ft ------ PLASTICITY CHART / / ., / ., , ., ,,. ,' ,,. / ., ., ,,. ., ,,. .," / -' r / .,'CHorOH I/ ., ,, ., ; V , / , ,,. , L ., V c~_woi ., / ,..________. / "A"LINE I 30 20 V , /,,,. I ., ., • ; V MHorOH ., , , ~ JO V ., , , , ./ 7 4 0 / U.-ML ' I / I ' 0 10 16 20 PLATE NO.: B-1 B ., ; ., / 30 / / MLorOL I I 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 LIQUID LIMIT (LL) Form: Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit an d Plasticity Index AS1M D4318 Rev.3 4/23/ l 5 SMITH-EMERY LABORATORIES 791/781 E. Washington Blvd., Los Angeles CA 90021 Tel.No.: (213) 745-5333; Fax No. (213) 741-8621 Expansion Index UBC 18-2/ASTM D4829-11 Client: Carl Kim Geotechnical Inc . Lab. Ref. No.: 265 -------------------------------------Project: Wave Garden Cove PWAS 20240507 SEL File No.: 49262-1 ----------'"'----------------------- Location: NA Date Sampled: 5/28/24 --------------------------------Material Description: Black OLia Date Received: 5/28/24 Boring No.: CGK-CPT-2 Sample No. B-1 Depth (ft.) 0-5 FT Date Tested: 6/17/24 Equipment: Used: Ring I.D.: A Oven: SE SQ-1 Chamber No.: Balance: B946769478 5 #Rammer: SE SH-I Porestone ( ): Sam led by: 'A.Hillstrand Ring Ht.(in): 1.0000 Ix] Ave. Specimen Ht: 1.0149 D 1.0055 1.0130 1.0210 1.0200 Ring Dia.(i n) 4.00 Initial Vol. ft3 0.00738 Final Degree of Saturation : Final Ht Specimen: 1.0753 Test Sample Assumed sp. gr. of soil= 2.700 Final Vol. ft 3 0.00782 Sample Condition as received: WET D DRY@ Assumed s p. gr_ of soil = 2.700 Moisture and Densitv Data Initial Final Moisture content Ori ginal/Initial After Mold Wt. of wet soil + Rin _g 687.0 741.5 wt. wet soil + tare (g_) 301.1 268.0 Wt. of dr y soil+ Rin g 634 .0 634.0 dry wt soil + tare wt. (g) 277.6 257.9 Wt. of Moisture 53.0 107 .5 tare wt. (g) 160.0 130.9 Wt. of Rin g 367.3 367 .3 Moisture content % 20.0 8.0 Wt of dry soil 266.7 266.7 Retained Sieve #4: 0 Moisture Content % 19.9 40.3 Test Sample Wt.(g): 0.0 Wet Densit y (pcf) 95.4 105.4 Retained Sieve #4(%): Dr y Densit y (pcf) 79.6 75.1 % Saturation 48 88 Date Time Time Lapsed Load (kPa)/(psi) Dial Reading 6/17/24 11:40 0 0.0000 0.0000 11 :50 6.9 kPa/ l psi 0.0058 0.0058 10 min 0.0058 0.0058 6sec Saturated 0 .0058 0.0058 15sec 0.0056 0.0002 30sec 0.0048 0 .0010 11:51 lmin 0.0033 0.0025 I I :52 2min -0.0048 0.0106 11 :54 4min -0.0144 0.0202 11:58 8min -0.0264 0.0322 I2:05 15min -0.0369 0.0427 12:20 30min -0.0424 0.0482 12:50 1hr -0 .0455 0.0513 13:50 2 hrs -0 .0478 0.0536 14:10:00 PM 3 hrs -0 .0546 0.0604 I REPORT I ll so 60 I 60 I N, ote: J.!.l re are the tests ecimen in accordance with IS. I -8.4 to ac fueve de ree o sacurat,on >0 +2 %. The de ormat,on o t 1e s eczmen 1s 50 p p p eJ, Jf p recorded for 24H or until the rate of deformation becomes less than 0.0002 in/h . whichever occur first. A minimum re cording time of 3 h is required Repon El zero (0) when result is negative(·). % Saturation: (%mcx sp.grx Dd)/(sp,grx 62.4-Dd) TABLE 18-1-B Expansion Index Potential Expansion PLATE No.: C-lA 0 -20 21 -50 51 -90 91 -130 > 130 Result ................. VERY LOW .............•... LOW ................. , MEDIUM I ................. HIGH ................. VERY HIGH Tested By: _E_._S_a_uc_e_d_o _______ _ Checked By: A. Cabanilla Form: Expansion Index ASTM D4829-11/UBC-18-2 Rev.4 Date:12-11-13 SMITH-EMERY LABORATORIES 791/781 E. Washington Blvd., Los Angeles CA 90021 Tel.No.: (213) 745-5333; Fax No. (213) 741-8621 Expansion Index UBC 18-2/ASTM D4829-11 Client: Carl Kim Geotechnical Inc. Lab. Ref. No.: 266 --------------------------------------Project: Wave Garden Cove PWAS_20240507 SEL File No.: 49262-1 -------------------------------- NA Date Sampled: 5/28/24 --------------------------------Location: Material Description: Brown Silty Sand Date Received: 5/28/24 ----~---------------------- Boring No.: CGK-CPT-3 Sample No. B-1 Depth (ft.) 0-5 FT Date Tested: 6/20/24 Equipment: Used: Ring I.D.: A Oven: SE SQ-1 Chamber No.: 1 -----Balance: B946769478 5 #Rammer: SE SH-I Porestone (g): Sam led b ': 'A.Hillstrand Ring Ht.(in): 1.0000 ti] Ave . Specimen Ht: 1.0029 D 1.0045 1.0045 1.0020 1.0005 Ring Dia.(in) 4 .00 Initial Vol. ft3 0.00729 Final Degree of Saturation: Final Ht Specimen: 1.0132 Test Sample Assumed sp. gr. of soil = 2.700 Final Vol. ft 3 0.00737 Sample Condition as received: WET D DRY@ Assumed sp . gr. of soil= 2.700 Moisture and Densitv Data Initial Final Moisture content Ori ginal/lni tial After Mold Wt. of wet soil + Rin g 774.0 804.2 wt. wet soil + tare (g) 304.4 268 .0 Wt. of dry soil+ Ring 741.0 741.0 dry wt soil + tare wt. (g) 292.7 257 .9 Wt. of Moisture 33 .0 63.2 tare wt. (g ) 160.0 130.9 Wt. ofRin !!: 366.9 366.9 Moisture content % 8 .8 8.0 Wt of dry soil 374.l 374.1 Retained Sieve #4 : 0 Moisture Content % 8.8 16.9 Test Sample Wt.(g): 0 .0 Wet Density (pct) 123 .0 130.7 Retained Sieve #4 (%): Dry Density (pct) 113.0 111.8 % Saturation 48 90 Date Time Time Lapsed Load (kPa)/(psi) Dial Reading 6/20/24 11 :30 0 0.0000 0.0000 11:40 6 .9 kPa/ 1 psi 0.0000 0.0000 lOmin 0.0040 0.0040 6sec Saturated 0.0043 0.0043 15sec 0.0045 -0 .0005 30sec 0.0046 -0.0006 11:41 lmin 0.0046 -0.0006 11:42 2min 0.0052 -0 .0012 11:44 4min 0.0052 -0 .0012 11 :48 8min 0.4100 -0.4060 11:55 15min 0.0008 0.0032 12 :10 30min -0.0025 0.0065 12 :40 1hr -0 .0041 0 .0081 13 :40 2 hrs -0 .0048 0 .0088 11/2/23 11 :4 0 24 hrs -0 .0063 0.0103 I REPORT I .!!;1 so 10 I 10 I N, Ole: El re are the tests ecimen III accordance with 8.1-.4 to achieve 'e ree o saturatwn )U ±L %. 50 p p p d g .T • he ;.1e onnation o t 1e s ecrmen is 1 ej , 1 p recorded for 24H or until the rate of defonnation becomes less than 0.0002 inlh. whicheve r occur first. A minimum recording time of 3 h is required Report EI zero (0) when result is negative(·). % Saturation: (%mcx sp.grx Dd)/(sp.grx 62.4-Dd) Ex pansion Index 0 -20 21 -50 51 -90 91 -130 > 130 Tested By: E. Saucedo TABLE 18-1-B Potential Ex pansion PLATE No .: C-lB Result ................. (VERY LOW! ................. LOW ................. MEDIUM HIGH ................. VERY HIGH Checked By: A. Cabanilla Form: Expansion Index ASTM D4829-11 /UBC-18·2 Rev.4 Date:12-11-13 SMITH-EMERY LABORATORIES 79Jn8J E. Washington Blvd ., Los Angeles CA 90021 Tel.No.: (213) 745-5333; Fax No . (213) 741-8621 Expansion Index UBC 18-2/ASTM D4829-l l Client: Carl Kim Geotechnical Inc . Lab. Ref. No.: 269 -------------------------------------Project: Wave Garden Cove PWAS 20240507 SEL File No.: 49262-1 ________ ___,;;;;._ _____________________ _ NA Date Sampled: 5/28/24 --------------------------------Location: Material Description: _B_r_o_w_n_S_il_ty.__S_an_d _____________________ Date Received: 5/28/24 Boring No.: CGK-CPT-6 Sample No. B-1 Depth (ft.) 0-5 Ff Date Tested: 6/18/24 Equipment: Used: Ring I.D.: A Oven: SE SQ-1 Chamber No.: 1 -----Balance: B946769478 5 #Rammer: SE SH-1 Porestone ( ): Sam led b y: 'A.Hillstrand Ring Ht.(in): 1.0000 @ Ave. Specimen Ht: 1.0075 D 1.0075 1.0080 1.0040 1.0105 Ring Dia .(in) 4.00 Initial Vol. ft3 0.00733 Final Degree of Saturation: Final Ht Specimen: 1.0076 Test Sample Assumed sp. gr . of soil= 2.700 Final Vol. ft3 0.00733 Sample Condition as received: WET D DRY@ Assumed sp . gr. of soil = 2.700 Moisture and Densitv Data Initial Final Moisture content Ori ginal/Initial After Mold Wt. of wet soil + Rin g 798.6 818.4 wt. wet soil + tare (g) 303.0 268.0 Wt. of dry soil+ Ring 768.5 768.5 dry wt soil + tare wt. (g) 293.0 257.9 Wt. of Moisture 30.1 49.9 tare wt. (g) 160.0 130.9 Wt. of Rin g 366.9 366 .9 Moisture content % 7.5 8.0 Wt of dry soil 401.6 401.6 Retained Sieve #4: 0 Moisture Content % 7 .5 12.4 Test Sample Wt.(g): 0.0 Wet Densit y (pct) 129.8 135.7 Retained Sieve #4(%): Dry Density (pct) 120.7 120.7 % Saturation 51 85 Date Time Time La psed Load (kPa)/(psi) Dial Readin g 6/18/24 11:30 0 0.0000 0.0000 11:40 6.9 kPa/ 1 psi 0.0000 0.0000 IO min 0 .0035 0.0035 6sec Saturated 0.0049 0.0049 15sec 0.0052 -0.0017 30sec 0.0056 -0.0021 11:41 lmin 0.0058 -0.0023 11:42 2min 0.0056 -0.0021 11:44 4min 0.0054 -0.0019 11 :48 8min 0.0051 -0.0016 11:55 15min 0.0048 -0.0013 12 :10 30min 0.0039 -0.0004 12:40 1hr 0.0035 0.0000 13:40 2 hrs 0 .0034 0.0001 11/2/23 11:40 24 hrs 0 .0034 0.0001 I REPORT I I El so 0 I 0 I Note: /:,/ re are the tests ec1men in accorrtance witll i'i.1-lf.4 to ac lueve ,1egree o saturallon )<J :t d o. Ille rlej ormatwn o t ,1 e specimen is 50 p p p Jj recorded for 24H or until the rate of deformation becomes less than 0.0002 inlh. whicheve r occur first. A minimum recording time of 3 h is required Report El zero (0) when result is negative(-). % Saturation: (%mc.x sp.grx Dd)/(sp.grx 62.4-Dd) Expansion Index 0 -20 21 -50 51 -90 91 -130 > 130 Tested By: E. Saucedo TABLE 18-1-B Potential Expansion PLATE No.: C-IC Result ................. ,VERY LOWI ................. LOW ................. MEDlUM ................. HIGH ................. VERY HIGH Checked By: A. Cabanilla Form: Expansion Index ASTM D4829-11 /U BC-18-2 Rev.4 Date:12-11-13 Smith-Emery Laboratories 791/781 East Washington Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90021; Tel (213) 745-5333; Fax (213) 749-8621 LABORATORY COMPACTION CHARACTERISTICS ASTM Dl557-21 Client: Carl Kim Geotechnical Inc. Lab. RefNo.: 265 ----Project: Wave Garden Cove PWAS 20240507 SEL File No.: 49262-1 Location: NA -------------------------------Soil Class: Black Lean Clay Source: Date Sampled: 5/28/24 Date Received: 5/28/24 Date Tested: 6/6-12/24 Remarks: ---------------~:if 5-25%ret,rock correction reqr'd 0 Burner: D Microwave D Jfethod A li](+)#4S25% Equipment: Scale: B90416085/B846769478 Rammer: Mechnical IO lbs 0 Pie D Round Ix] Drying: Oven Manual IO lbs Sampled by: A. Hillstrand Calibrated Mold Vol. cc: Rock Correcti on: OD Gs .: #DlV/0! ZA V Ass um ed Gs.: 2.60 % Pass #4 ---- Soil Gs ass : 2.60 Boring No.: CGK-CPT-2 ---- Test no. 1 wt . of mold+ wet soil (g) 3614 .0 wt. of mold (g) 1985.5 wt. of wet soil (g) 1628 .5 wet densi ty of soil (glee ) 1.732 wt . wet soil + tare ( g ) 511.4 wt.di'}' soil + tare {g) 460.3 Wt of tare (g) 177.2 moisture content % 18.1 Densi ty of soil (pcf) 91.6 corrected moisture content% #DIV/0! Density of soil ( oc flcorrect ed #DIV /0! Dry Density @ ZA V 86 I 00 % Sat uration @ ZA V 29.5 □ PREPARATION: Method 8 0(+) 3/8":S25% S.S lbs 0 [Kl Wet O Dry Meth od C 0(+) 3/4"~30 % l\!C%: #DIV /0! % Ret'd #4 0.0 ---- 100 .0 Wa1er densi1y:_62_.4_2_8 __ Calibrated Mold Vol. cc : Sample No.: __ B_-_1 __ 2 3 3684 .0 3737 .0 1985 .5 19 85.5 1698.5 1751.5 1.807 1.863 Depth (ft): _o_.S_ti_t __ Water Density: 4 3748 .0 1985 .5 1762.5 1.875 5 3720 .0 198 5.5 1734 .5 1.845 ' sieve si ze 3/4' 3/8' #4 Total 4" dia. 940 940 62.23 re t'd (g) 0.0 9914.0 520 .l 522 .0 462.2 458.0 520.9 452.5 560 .1 478.8 pass #4 %Moist co ntent wet pass #4 (g) 177 .2 176.3 177.4 20.3 22.7 24.9 93.8 94.8 93.7 #DIV/0! #DIV /0! #DIV/0! #DIV /0! #DIV /0! #DIV/0! 91 96 101 27.2 25 .0 23.0 177.3 dry pas s #4 (g) ~STMDl27 27 .0 . 90 .7 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! wt OD(g) wtSSD 0.0 0.0 wt in water (g) _o ___ _ OD Gs #DIV/0! #DI V/0! Max Dr~· Density (pc() : _9_4_.8 ___ OWC % 22.7 moist% % Saturati on: 83.5 ---- Max Dry Density (pcf) corrected : OW C%Corr % Saluration: Moisture-Density Relationship tOI 100 99 98 97 96 'fi' 95 a -- .t-94 -~ ,::j 93 g 92 91 90 89 88 87 86 + I ----- _LJ_ ·-' ~------f - - r_ -r 1 - +~-;~ ·.--·.;, ·-:at:: ·-\ . .=..--- 1:r- ------I T ~ 1-. ,... ----r,- -, I - ' p 1 SI n -:1 -+ , I I -~ , . -±, j I' I l -----H---rr -1-, r l I+-I 1 -------:r -- 7 _;J, :,,, I v ·J.• / r I iaru +-H +- 1: ~T -=l - I I ,... h:. I -- -r ++ I I + -r \ ' f j T 1 t \ I ; -I - --~ Lj _.._J__ I I -I ~ I -- rl+1 \ 1 ~ZAV (u Gs 2.60 I t-1 I ' ~ 11-1' I • It _Y'J 1 Tl _J!u I I ---·\ H ~ ,j_,!'l I "I'-... I I I 1: • ~t \L + . I ! CI. --~ ): N . 'rr -J ,, I J I --I l \.~ -11 .:.J_ ' ~ T ., I -p _, i l " \.T ± +:r ~ i I --1 ~ +:1: ~ ~--T ~~ Il -' I I -I --- I '1 I I I \'., J_ ,_J l I I - f I T ' ➔ _[ -~ --± -+ 1 ,-r t-lt ~-j ,---\.t ~'-! 'j _, 1 I -J2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 1 23 24 2!1 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 I Waler Content(%) PLATE No.: D-lA Tested by: E. Saucedo Checked by : A. Cabanilla 6" dia 2124 %ret'd 0 .0 7 .0 10608 .0 9914 .0 Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort ASTM D1557 Smith-Emery Laboratories 791/781 Easl Washington Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90021; Tel (213) 745-5333; Fax (213) 749-8621 LABORATORY COMPACTION CHARACTERISTICS ASTM D1557-21 Client: Carl Kim Geotechnical Inc. Lab. Ref No.: 266 ----Project: Wave Garden Cove PWAS 20240507 SEL File No.: 49262-1 Location: NA Soil Class: Brown Silty Sand Source: Remarks: _________________ :if 5-25%ret,rock correction reqr'd Date Sampled: 5/28/24 Date Received: 5/28/24 Date Tested: 6/6-12/24 Sampled by: A Hillstrand Calibrated Mold Vol. cc: Equipment: Scale: B90416085/B846769478 Rammer: Mechnical 10 lbs 0 Pie D Round [ii Drying: Oven Manual 10 lbs 5.5 lbs 5J Burner: D Microwave O Method A li](+)#4;::25% □ PREPARATION: Method B 0(+) 3/8";::25% 0 ~ Wet O Dry Method C 0(+)3/4":S30% 4" dia. 940 Ro ck Correcti on: OD Gs.: #DIV/0! MC%: #DIV/0! % Ret'd #4 0.0 ----- ZAV As sumed Gs.: 2.60 % Pass #4 100.0 -----Water density: 62.428 Calibrated Mold Vol. cc: _9_4_0 __ _ Soil Gs ass : 2.60 Boring No.: CGK-CPT-3 Sample No.: B-1 Depth (ft); 0.5 ft Wate r Density: 62 .2 3 Test no. 1 2 3 4 wt. of mold + wet soil (g) 3941.0 4034.0 4037.0 3957.0 wt. of mold (g) 1985.5 1985.5 1985.5 1985 .5 wt. of wet soil (g) 1955 .5 2048 .5 2051 .5 1971.5 wet density of soil (glee) 2.080 2 .179 2 .182 2 .097 wt. wet soil + tare (g) 631.4 663 .6 643 .3 569.8 wt.dr y soil + tare (g) 598.2 618.0 590.0 515.9 Wt of tare (g) 127.2 127 .9 126.7 127 .2 moisture content % 7.0 9.3 11.5 13.9 Density of soil (pcf) 121.3 124 .5 122.2 115 .0 corrected moisture content % Density of soil (pcf)corrected Dry Density @ ZA V 113 125 130 135 I 00 % Saturation @ ZA V 15.2 11.5 9.7 9.4 Max Dry Density (pcf) : 124.S OWC % 9.4 C 130 129 128 127 126 125 124 _e, 123 --€ 122 = ~ 121 i::' 120 Q 119 11 8 11 7 11 6 11 5 114 113 ----- Max Dry Density (pct) corrected : owe % CoTT Moisture-Density Relationship ~ ~~ -~ I'\. '\. ' I'\. I ZA V @ Gs 2.60 I / ---------~ ' / --/ ' "' \ " I / I "-\.. I V I '\ \. I ~ \. I I \. \ I I \ \. I ~ '\. I I '\ \. I '\. '\. I -'\. I I , \.. 10 II 12 13 14 15 Water Content(%) sieve size 3/4" 3/8" #4 Total ----- ret'd (g) 0.0 9914.0 pass #4 %Moi st content wet pass #4 (g) dry pas s #4 (g) ASTM D127 wtOD (g) wtSSD 0.0 0 .0 WI in water (g) _0 ___ _ OD Gs #DIV/0! moi st % % Saturation: 81.6 #DIV/0! ----- % Saturatio n: t 16 17 18 19 20 PLATE No.: D -lB Tested by : E. Saucedo Checked by: A. Cabanilla 6" dia 2124 % ret'd 0.0 7.0 10608.0 9914.0 Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort ASTM D1557 Smith-Emery Laboratories 79Jn81 East Was hin gton Blv d., Lo s Angeles, CA 90021; Tel (213) 745-5333; Fax (213) 749-8621 LABORATORY COMPACTION CHARACTERISTICS ASTM D1557-21 Client: Carl Kim Geotechnical Inc. Lab. Ref No.: 269 -----Project: Wave Garden Cove PW AS 20240507 SEL File No.: 49262-1 Location: NA Soil Class : Brown Silty Sand Source: Remarks : _________________ :if 5-25%ret,rock correction reqr'd Date Sampled: 5/28/24 Date Received: 5/28/24 Date Tested: 6/7-11/24 Sampled by: A. Hillstrand Calibrated Mold Vol. cc: Equipment: Scale: B90416085/B846769478 Rammer: Mechnical IO lbs 0 Pie D Round [x] Drying: Oven Manual 10 lbs 5.5 lbs Rock Correction : OD Gs .: #DIV/0! 0 Burner : D Microwave O Method A li](+)#4S25% D PREPARATION: Method B 0<+) 3/8"$!5% 4" dia. 0 1K) Wet O Dry MethodC 0 <+)3/4"~30% 940 MC %: #DIV/0! % Ret'd #4 0 .0 ----- ZAV As sumed Gs .: 2 .60 % Pas s #4 100 .0 Warerdensity:_6_2_.4_28 ___ Calibrated Mold Vol. cc: _9_40 ___ _ ----- Soil Gs ass : 2.60 Boring No.: CGK-CPT-Sample No .: B-1 Depth (ft): 0-5.0ft Water Density: 62 .23 ---------- Test no. 1 2 3 wt. of mold + wet soil (g) 3960.0 4052.0 4161.0 wt. of mold (g) 1985 .5 1985.5 1985 .5 wt. of wet soil (g) 1974.5 2066.5 2175 .5 wet density of soil (g/cc) 2.101 2 .198 2.314 wt. wet soil + tare (g) 720.0 690 .0 674.4 wt.dry soil + tare (g) 700 .0 661.6 637.0 Wt of tare (g ) 177.8 179.3 174.8 moisture content % 3.8 5.9 8.1 Density of soil (pcf) 126.3 129.6 133.7 corrected moisture content % Density of soil (pcf)corrected Dry Density @ ZA V 122 127 132 JOO % Saturation@ ZAV 12.0 10.6 9 .2 Max Dry Density (pd) : 133. 7 OWC % ----- OWC %Corr 4 4091.0 1985.5 2105.5 2.240 666.6 621 .5 176.9 10. l 127 .0 137 7 .9 7.9 5 sieve size 3/4' 3/8 ' #4 Total ----- ret'd (g) 0.0 7079.6 pass #4 %Moi st content wet pass #4 (g) dry pass #4 (g) ASTMD127 wtOD(g) wtSSD 0.0 0.0 wt in water (g) _o ___ _ OD Gs #DIV/0! moist% % Saturation : 97 .7 #DIV/0! % Saturation: Max Dry Density (pcl) corrected : ____ _ ---------- 137 136 135 134 133 132 i 13 1 c 130 ·;e ~ 129 .... Q 128 127 126 125 124 123 12 2 ---~-- 0 I ------ - / 4 / 2 3 4 Tested by: E. Saucedo ---- I I } / 5 6 7 Moisture-Density Relationship \ ·p \ -7 1 ,, I I \ \ I ZA V @ Gs 2.60 I I ,\ / I \V ,~ \\ "\ ., ' \ \ ' 9 JO II 12 IJ 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Water Content(%) PLATE No.: D-lC Checked by: A. Cabanilla 6" dia 2124 %ret'd 0 .0 8.1 7653.0 7079.6 Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort ASTM D1557 Smith-Emery Laboratories 791n8 I Eas t Washington Blvd., Lo s Angeles, C A 900 21; Tel (213) 745 -5333 ; Fax (213) 749-862 1 LABORATORY COMPACTION CHARACTERISTICS ASTM D1557-21 Client: Carl Kim Geotechnical Inc. Lab . Ref No .: 272 ----Project: Wave Garden Cove PWAS 20240507 SEL File No.: 49262-1 Location: NA Soil Class: Brown Clayey Silt Source: Remarks : -----------------~:if 5-25 %ret,ro ck co rrection reqr'd 0 Burner: 0 Mi crowave D Meth od A li](+)#4:S25 % Date Sampled: 5/28/24 Date Received: 5/28/24 Date Tested : 6/7-12/24 Sampled by: A. H ill strand Calibrated Mold Vo l. cc : Equipment: Sc ale : B90416085/B 846769478 Rammer: Mechnical IO lbs 0 Pi e O Round @ Drying: Oven Manual IO lbs 5.5 lbs 0 PRE PARATION: Method B 0<+) 3/8":',25 % 0 1K] Wet O Dry Meth od C □<+) 3/4":<::3 0 % 4" dia. 6" dia 940 2 124 Rock Co rrection: OD Gs .: #DIV/0! MC %: #DIV/01 % Re l'd #4 0.0 ----- ZA V Assumed Gs.: 2 .60 % Pass #4 -----100.0 Water de ns i1y:_6_2 ._4_28 ___ Calibrated Mold Vol. cc: _9_40 ___ _ Soil Gs ass: 2 .60 -----Boring No .: CKG-HA2 Sample No.: __ B_-_1 __ Test no. 1 2 wt. of mold + wet soil (g) 3884.0 3960 .0 wt . of mold (g) 1985 .5 1985.5 wt. of wet soil (.g) 1898.5 1974.5 we t density of soil (g/cc) 2.020 2.101 wt. wet soil + tare (g) 667.5 670.0 wt .dry soil + tare (g) 620 .0 614 .0 Wt of tare (g) 180.0 178.4 moisture content % 10.8 12 .9 Density of soil (pc t) 113 .8 116 .2 corrected moisture content % Densit y of soil (pct)corrected Dry Density @ ZA V 105 112 100 % Saturation @ ZA V 20 .6 17.4 Max Dry Density (pct) : i 16.1 Max Dry Density (pcO corrected : 3 3978.0 1985.5 1992 .5 2.120 684.2 617.1 177.0 15 .2 114 .8 120 13.6 OWC% owe %Corr De pth (ft): 0-4.0 ft Water Den sit y: _6_2._2_3 __ _ 4 3939.0 19 85.5 1953 .5 2.078 670.8 597.1 174.1 17.4 l l0 .5 124 8.5 13.4 5 ' sieve size 3/4' 3/8' #4 Total ret'd (g) 0 .0 9813,1 pass #4 %M ois t content wel pa ss #4 (g) dry pass #4 (g) ASTM D127 wtOD(g) wtSSD wt in water (g) ____ _ OD Gs moist % % Satura ti on: 88.S % Saturation: Moisture-Density Relationship 120 119 11 8 117 11 6 I 15 1114 -0 113 'iii ~ 112 ;., Q Ill 110 109 107 106 105 . ----------- - ' -----_ .... ~ V I ~ I / I I .. I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I ' I : \ ' \ ZAV @ Gs 2.60 I "' ' !/ "\ V r\' \ \ '\ • \ \ ~ ' \ ~ \ 4 9 IO II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 'l7 28 29 30 Water Content (%) PLATE No.: D-lD Tested by : E . Saucedo Checked by : A. Ca banill a % ret'd 0 .0 8.1 1060 8.0 9 8 13.1 Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort ASTM D1557 SMITH-EMERY LABORATORIES 791 E. Washington Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90021 Te l. No. (213) 745-5333 ; Fax no .. (213) 741 -8 621 ASTM D2435-11 SEL File No.: 49262-1 SEL Report No.: G-24-2978 Date: 6/17/24 One-Dimensional Consolidation Properties of Soils Using Incremental Loading BH No.: CKG-CPT-3 Depth: 0-5.0ft Sample No.: _B_l ____ _ Client: Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. Moisture Content: 9.6 _;;;._ __ ...;.... ____ -'-------------------------- Project: wave Garden Cove Saturation: 50.3 ------ Location: NA Voids Ratio 0.51 ------Description: Brown Silty Sand Dry Density: _l_l _l _.2 ___ _ Consolidation Test Results -1.0 I 0.0 I I 1.0 2.0 ---~ C: 0 :;::; ftl 3.0 :!:! 0 0 C: 0 () 4.0 ·r-----" I', ~ I'..... ...,~ ~"' I WATER ADDED l ~ ~ i...,--- " ~ "'\ ~ ~ "' \. " \ '-I"-\ "'~ ~~ ' I\ " ~ ~ ' f'--... 1\ r-,..._ r--..,...._ I\ 5.0 t-~ 6.0 7.0 0.1 10 Normal Stress (ksf) I PLATE NO.: E-lA Client: Project: Location : Remarks: BORING NO .: SMITH-EMERY LABORATORIES 791 E. Was hington Boule vard, Los Angeles , CA 90021 Tel. No. (213 ) 745-5333; Direct Tel No.: (213) 699-7807 SEL File No.: 49262-1 SEL Report No.: G-24-2978 Date Sampled : 5/28/24 Date Received: 5/28/24 Date Tested : 6/17 /24 _C_ar_l_K_im_G_e_o_te_c_h_ni_c_al_I_n_c_. ______________ Dry Density (pct):_l_l_l_.0 __ _ _ F_ro_n_t_P_o_rc_h_D_e_ve_l_o.._pm_en_t_P_i_,lgr"--im_T_o_w_e_r _A_..p_ar_tm_e_n_t ______ Moisture content%: _9_.6 ___ _ 1207 S. Vermont Ave., Los Angeles , CA Degree of Sat: _5_0_. l __ _ Remolded to 90% Relative Density of 124 .5 pcf at 9 .6 % OMC CKG-CPT-3 SAMPLE NO.: B-1 DEPTH (FT.): 0-5.0ft SOIL Classification (Visual): Yellowi sh Brown Lean CLAY w/ Sand I Li quid Limit Plastic Limit I Plasticity Index uses (Visual) I I NA NA I NA CL I CONSOL NO. I Loadin° Ki s 3.2k Time-Deformation Curve 0.90 ------·-·-- 1.00 ~ r-.... I'- ""- I.I O I...__ ""' "--.... ~~ '2 ;:::, ~~ = .s ~ l.20 § "-... I'--. .. ' '8 II) 0 .......... I ~ r--... 1.30 ~ 1.50 0.1 100 1000 10000 Log of Time (min .) PLATE NO.: E-lB S M I TH- E M E RY LABORATORIES 1195 N. Tustin, Anaheim, CA 92807 Tel. (714) 238-6133 Fax (714) 238-6144 Lab Ref. No.: A24-142 Client: Smith Emery Los Angeles Report Date: 07/02/24 Project: Wave Garden Cove/PWAS 20240507 Tested By: CL DateTested 07/01/24 Project #: 49262-1 Checked By: CL Date Prepped 07/01/24 Depth: 0-5' Date Received 06/19/24 Boring No.:. CKGCPT-2 Sample #:BS-1 Sampled By: - Description: OL/A Date: 05/02/08 Test Specimen ID: A B C D Initial Moisture: Prepared weight (g) 1100 1100 1100 Mass of Wet Soil + Can, g = 0.0 Compaction Foot Pressure (psi) 300 350 350 Mass of Can,g = 0.0 Initial Moisture, % N/A N/A N/A Oven-dry Soil +Can,g = 0.0 Soak Water (ml) 75 75 75 Moisture Content,% = N/A Water Added for Saturation (g) 75 45 30 Moisture at Compaction, % #VALUE! #VALUE! #VALUE! Exudation Load (Lb.) Exudation Pressure (psi)000 Pavement/Traffic Data Height of Specimen, (in.)0.00 0.00 2.53 Surface Wt. of Specimen & Mold (g) 0 0 2972 Base Wt. of Mold (g) 2068 2067 2067 Subbase Wt. of Specimen (g) -2068 -2067 905 Dry Density (pcf) Gravel Equivalent Factor (Gf) Gf = 1.00 Expansion Dial Reading, In. 0 0 0 Traffic Index, TI= 5.0 Expansion Pressure (psi) 0.000 0.000 0.000 Stabilometer PH @ 2000lb (160psi) 0 0 0 Unit Mass of Cover Mat. =130 Turns Displacement, d 0 0 0 (pcf) R-Value By Stabilometer R-Value By Stab. (corrected) psi/in Thickness by Stabilometer, in Thickness by Exp. Pressure, in 0.0 0.0 0.0 Equilibrium Thickness, in = 0 (from right chart below) R-VALUE RESULT Remarks BY EXPANSION PRESSURE: Less than 5 BY EXCUDATION PRESSURE (from left chart): 0 R-VALUE (CT 301/ ASTM D2844) Spring Constant for deflection Bar 303 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 100 200 300 400 R- V A L U E EXUDATION PRESSURE (PSI) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 CO V E R T H I C K N E S S B Y S T A B I L O M E T E R ( i n ) COVER THICKNESSS BY EXPANSION PRESSURE (in) 7 R-VALUE, AT EQUILIBRIUM: 0 S M I TH- E M E RY LABORATORIES 1195 N. Tustin, Anaheim, CA 92807 Tel. (714) 238-6133 Fax (714) 238-6144 Lab Ref. No.: A24-142 Client: Smith Emery Los Angeles Report Date: 06/26/24 Project: Wave Garden Cove/PWAS 20240507 Tested By: CL DateTested 06/25/24 Project #: 49262-1 Checked By: CL Date Prepped 06/24/24 Depth: 0-5' Date Received 06/19/24 Boring No.:. CKGCPT-6 Sample #:BS2 Sampled By: - Description: CL/ML Date: 05/02/08 Test Specimen ID: A B C D Initial Moisture: Prepared weight (g) 1100 1100 1100 Mass of Wet Soil + Can, g = 101.0 Compaction Foot Pressure (psi) 250 300 350 Mass of Can,g = 0.0 Initial Moisture, % 1.8 1.8 1.8 Oven-dry Soil +Can,g = 99.2 Soak Water (ml) 40 40 40 Moisture Content,% = 1.8 Water Added for Saturation (g) 49 35 25 Moisture at Compaction, % 10.1 8.8 7.8 Exudation Load (Lb.) Exudation Pressure (psi)228 460 516 Pavement/Traffic Data Height of Specimen, (in.)2.67 2.57 2.53 Surface Wt. of Specimen & Mold (g) 3230 3199 3183 Base Wt. of Mold (g) 2069 2066 2070 Subbase Wt. of Specimen (g) 1161 1133 1113 Dry Density (pcf) 119.8 122.9 123.7 Gravel Equivalent Factor (Gf) Gf = 1.00 Expansion Dial Reading, In. 0.0005 0.0008 0.001 Traffic Index, TI= 5.0 Expansion Pressure (psi) 0.152 0.242 0.303 Stabilometer PH @ 2000lb (160psi) 130 104 59 Unit Mass of Cover Mat. =130 Turns Displacement, d 3.8 3.87 3.5 (pcf) R-Value By Stabilometer 13 26 55 R-Value By Stab. (corrected) 14 26 55 psi/in Thickness by Stabilometer, in 16.4 14.2 8.6 Thickness by Exp. Pressure, in 2.0 3.2 4.0 Equilibrium Thickness, in = 0 (from right chart below) R-VALUE RESULT Remarks BY EXPANSION PRESSURE: BY EXCUDATION PRESSURE (from left chart): 17 R-VALUE (CT 301/ ASTM D2844) Spring Constant for deflection Bar 303 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 R- V A L U E EXUDATION PRESSURE (PSI) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 CO V E R T H I C K N E S S B Y S T A B I L O M E T E R ( i n ) COVER THICKNESSS BY EXPANSION PRESSURE (in) ... R-VALUE, AT EQUILIBRIUM: 17 HPOSITIVE LAB SERVICE 781 East Washington Blvd ., Los Angeles, CA 90021 (213) 745-5312 FAX (213) 745-6372 June 18, 2024 Angelito Cabanilla Smith Emery Laboratories 791 East Washington Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90021 Report No.: 2406041 Project Name: Carl Kim Geotechnical Inc. / 49262-1, Wavegarden Cove (PWAS 20240507). Dear Angelita Cabanilla, This report contains the analytical results for the sample(s) received under chain of custody(s) by Positive Lab Service on June 06, 2024. The test results in this report are performed in compliance with ELAP accreditation requirements for the certified parameters. The laboratory report may not be produced, except in full, without the written approval of the laboratory. The issuance of the final Certificate of Analysis takes precedence over any previous Preliminary Report. Preliminary data should not be used for regulatory purposes. Authorized signature(s) is provided on final report only. If you have any questions in reference to this report, please contact your Positive Lab Service coordinator. FILE NO .: 49262-1 PLATE NO.: F-1A Page 1 of 3 rJ POS ·:T· VE i-' LAB SERVICE 781 East Washington Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90021 (213) 745-5312 FAX {213) 745-6372 Certificate of Analysis Smith Emery Laboratories 791 East Washington Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90021 Attn: Angelito Cabanilla Phone: (213) 745-5333 FAX:(213) 746-0744 Project: Carl Kim Geotechnical Inc./ 49262-1, Wavegarden Cove (PWAS 20240507) !Sample IO: 8-1 ML Sandy Slit Soil (2406041..01} Sampled: 05/2:8/24 00:00 Received: 06/06/24 Analyte Results Rag D.F. Units PQL Prep/Test Method Resistivity, Minimum 9580 1 ohm-an 1.00 CTM 643 Analyte Results Flag D.F. Units PQL Prep/Test Method SOiubie Chloride 781 1 mg/kg 5.00 EPA300.0M Soluble Sulfate 2110 1 mg/kg 5.00 EPA300.0M Analyte Results Flag D.F. Units PQL Prep{rest Method pH 7.6 pH Units 0.1 EPA 9045C Quality Control Data Spike Source Analyte Result PQL UnltS Level Result %REC 18a1dl 8F41802 •• Blank Prepared:06/12/24 Analyzed:06/18/24 Soluble Chloride ND 5.00 m_g/k~ ---·-· -- Soluble Sulfate ND 5.00 lll!l/kg LCS Prepared: 06/12/24 Analyzed: 06/18/24 Soluble Chloride 53.7 5.00 m~g 50 .00 107 ··-···· ---•· -•·· SOiubie Sulfate 56.7 5.00 mg/kg 50.00 113 Duplicate Source: 2406041-01 Prepared : 06/12/24 Analyzed: 06/18/24 Soluble O,loride 714 5.00 _mg/kg __ 781 Soluble Sulfate 1390 5.00 mg/kg 2110 -------~~ MabixSpike Souroe: 2406041-01 Prepared:06/12/24 Analyzed:06/18/24 SOiubie O\lorlde 1020 5.00 mg/kg 50.00 781 474 ........................ SOiubie Sulfate 2210 5.00 m!l_fk~ __ 50.00 2110 200 - Matrix Spike Dup Source: 2406041-01 Prepared: 06/12/24 Analyzed: 06/18/24 Soluble Chloride 876 5.00 mg/kg 50.00 781 191 Soluble Sulfate 2000 5.00 mg/kg __ 50.00 2110 NR --·-----.-•-------· 1Batdl SH121, •• Duplicate Source: 2406071-01 Prepared &Analyzed: 06/12/24 pH 7.4 0.1 pH Units 7.2 Page 2 of 3 File #:73419 Report Date: 06/18/24 Submitted: 06/06/24 PLS Report No.: 2406041 Prepared 06/07/24 Prepared 06/12/24 06/12/24 Prepared 06/12/24 %REC limits 70-130 70-130 70-130 70-130 70-130 70-130 Analyzed By Batch 06/07/24 ja BF40716 Analyzed By Batch 06/18/24 jks BF41802 06/18/24 Jks BF41802 Analyzed By Batch 06/12/24 ss BF41213 RPD RPO Umtt Qualifier 8.99 30 40.9 30 85.0 30 NR 30 1.78 5 FILE NO.: 49262-1 PLATE NO.: F-1B V-2 V-3 V-3 V-3 V-3 ~a PO SITIVE ~ 1LABSERv1·cE 781 East Washington Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90021 (213) 745-5312 FAX (213) 745-6372 Smith Emery Laboratories 791 East Washington Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90021 Attn: Angelito Cabanilla Certificate of Analysis Phone: (213) 745-5333 FAX:(213) 746-0744 Project: Carl Kim Geotechnical Inc./ 49262-1, Wavegarden Cove (PWAS 20240507) Notes and Definitions V· 3 Amount spiked was less than 1/4 of concentration in the sample. V-2 Out-of-Range recovery was due to sample Heterogeneity. NA Not Applicable ND NR MDL PQL Analyte NOT DETECTl:D at or above the reported lim lt(s) Not Reported Method Detection Umit Practical QuantJtation Umit Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program Certificate No. 1131, Mobile Lab No. 2534, LACSD No. 10138 Page 3 of 3 File #:73419 Report Date: 06/18/24 Submitted: 06/06/24 PLS Report No.: 2406041 Authorized Signature(s) FILE NO.: 49262-1 PLATE NO .: F-1C 791/781 East Washington Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90021 Tel. No. (213) 74S-SJll;Fax No. (213) 741-8621 Chain of Custody ..- I N c.o 0 .... I Client: Carl Kim Geotechnical Inc. Project Name: Wave garden Cove (PWAS 20240507 } Location: CKG CPT-3 Source: Boring 8-1 (0-5') Sample Boring No./ Description Date Number Depth in Ft. Sampled B-1 8-1/ 0-5' ML 5/28/24 SANl,Jv ~ I l, -/f'~LfO{polf/ Date: 6/4/2024 Page_1_ of --1 Project No.: 49262-1 Sampled By: A. Hillstrand Time Container No. Type Test Requested and Standard />C4-{'i'" /C f 1 Min. Resistivity, pH value, Sol. Sulfate & ~( Sol. Chlorides N LI.. 0) ""'" ci ci z z w LU f- _J ::5 u:::: a.. Turna~ound Time: A' Same Day 24hr 5 day Other: __ fl_o_r:_m_ot_l _____ _ CHAIN OF CUSTODY: Results Attn: ,t An'fr l,"-lv Cabni//4 (A £6 'TKC-(_ Title _) cmp U. 1-U u.;v;.,1 Title • 3. ----------- Signature Title Phone/ Fax#: _______ ____,/ _____ _ Inclusive Dates u lu I ,;i.q 10 : ?.2-ci inclusive Dates Inclusive Dates t-h l.24-f! 11:6"' OBSBRV. TEMP: ~°C CORRl!C. TBMP:.::.iL.°C • THERMOID:.iLBY: £ f V6/l-lF1efv ,11--, ! 1U/lo1z-1· /teJl(L-T! fell E-lPotJfO V/A PlrVf.lc; C-1 E40550.01 APPENDIX C RESULTS OF LABORATORY TESTS This appendix contains the individual results of the following tests. The results of the moisture content and dry density tests are included on the test boring logs in Appendix B. These data, along with the field observations, were used to prepare the final test boring logs in Appendix B. These Included:To Determine: Moisture Content (ASTM D2216) Moisture contents representative of field conditions at the time the sample was taken. Density Determination (ASTM D2216) Dry unit weight of sample representative of in-situ or in-place undisturbed condition. Grain-Size Distribution (ASTM D422) Size and distribution of soil particles, i.e., sand, gravel and fines (silt and clay). Atterberg Limits (ASTM D4318) Determines the moisture content where the soil behaves as a viscous material (liquid limit) and the moisture content at which the soil reaches a plastic state Expansion Index (ASTM D4829) Swell potential of soil with increases in moisture content. Consolidation (ASTM 2435) The amount and rate at which a soil sample compresses when loaded, and the influence of saturation on its behavior. Direct Shear (ASTM D3080) Soil shearing strength under varying loads and/or moisture conditions. R-Value (CTM 301) The capacity of a subgrade or subbase to support a pavement section designed to carry a specified traffic load. Moisture-Density Relationship (ASTM D1557) The optimum (best) moisture content for compacting soil and the maximum dry unit weight (density) for a given compactive effort. Sulfate Content (ASTM D4327) Percentage of water-soluble sulfate as (SO4) in soil samples. Used as an indication of the relative degree of sulfate attack on concrete and for selecting the cement type. Chloride Content (ASTM D4327) Percentage of soluble chloride in soil. Used to evaluate the potential attack on encased reinforcing steel. Resistivity (ASTM D1125) The potential of the soil to corrode metal. pH (ASTM D4972) The acidity or alkalinity of subgrade material. Particle Size Distribution Report 100 : '° -i I • I ; ''l I 10-· +·· e:::: W 60 -· ,, z ti: I-' ' z 50--- UJ u e:::: UJ 40 __ , · 0... ' i % COBBLES 0.0 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER #8 100.0 #16 100.0 #30 99.9 #50 99,5 #100 98.8 #200 98.0 %GRAVEL 0.0 SPEC.* PERCENT PASS? (X=NO) * (no ~pccification pro vided) Sample No.: H-2 Location: Source of Sample: ¾SA_NO ___ ---+-__ o/._oS __ IL-'--T _ __J %CLAY 2.0 Lean clay PL= 23 D35-= D30= Cu= USCS= CL 98 .0 Material Description Atterberg Limits LL= 40 Pl= 17 Coefficients D50= 050= D15= D10-= Cc= Classification AASHTO= Remarks Date: 7/29/19 Elev./Depth: 60-61.5' E. .. :J -... -·--···· ... ... :1··· T . . A . t I Client: e wmm ssoc,a es, nc. . . . . g ProJect: Proposed Dnvc Shack Restaurant & Go!fDnvmg Range Fresno, CA . Pro·ect No: £40550.01 __ Figure_ .. % COBBLES 0.0 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER J -l/2 in . l00.0 I in . 94.3 3/4 in . 94.3 1/2 in . 92.8 3/8 in. 91.6 /1-4 89.0 #8 83 .9 1/.16 78.7 1130 67 .3 ff-50 42.3 11100 20.S 11-200 12.1 Particle Size Distribution Report ¾ GRAVEL 11.0 SPEC.* PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) %SAND 76 .9 Sil(y sand PL= Da5= 2.73 D30= 0.213 Cu = %SILT 12.1 Material Description Atterberg Limits LL = Pl= Coefficients D50= 0.477 D50= D15= 0.105 D10= Cc= Classlfication USCS= SM AASHTO = Remarks %CLAY " (no specification provided) Sample No.: B-3 Location: Source of Sample: Date : 7/22/19 Elev./Depth: 25-26 .5' • M T • • A • t I j Client: • oore wmmg ssoc1a es nc. . . . . ' ProJect: Proposed Dnve Shack Restaurant & GolfDrivmg Range Fresno, CA Pro·ect No: R40 550 .0l Figure J Particle Size Distribution Report .. 6 -~ .E ,I:= ~ ~ ~ .... c.... 'C""" [I) 500 100 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 % COBBLES 0.0 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER #4 100.0 #8 95.9 #16 94.7 #30 90.4 #50 75.5 #100 43J #200 17. l % GRAVEL 0.0 SPEC.* PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) GRAIN SIZE -mm ¾SAND 82.9 Silty sand PL= 035= 0.420 D30= 0.109 Cu= USCS=' SM * (no spedlication provided) Sample No.: B-3 Location: Source of Sample: Client: %SILT %CLAY 17 .1 Material Description Atterberg Limits LL= Pt= Coefficients 0 60 = 0.212 0 50 = 0.173 D15= 010"' Cc== Classification AASHTO= Remarks Date: 7 /22/19 Elev./Depth: 30-31.5' Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Project: Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range Fresno, CA --~roject No: E405 5 o .o I Figure 0::: w z u:: f-z w u 0:: w Q_, Particle Size Distribution Report 100 90 80 70 ---··-... 60 50 40 • 30 • 20 + 10 0 500 100 %COBBLES 0.0 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER #4 100.0 #8 96.0 #16 91.6 #30 80.9 #50 62.9 #100 44.2 #200 27.3 % GRAVEL 0.0 SPEC.* PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 1 GRAIN SIZE-mm %SAND 72.7 Silty sand Pl= NP 0 85 = o.737 D30== 0.0840 Cu== USCS= SM * (no specifaalion provided) Sample No.: B-5 Location: Source of Sample: 0 a .;; 0.1 %SILT 0.01 0.001 % CLAY 27.3 Material Description Atterberg Limits LL= NV Coefficients D50= 0.270 D15== Cc= Classification AASHTO== Remarks Pl= NP Date: 7/22/19 Elev./Depth: 18.5-20.0' iMoore Twining Associates, Inc. Project: Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range Client: -==1 L_ Fresno, CA Pro·ect N_o; E40550.0l f::!_g_ure _ I 70 _, __ · 500 100 Particle Size Distribution Report 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE -mm 1---"/,'-o _::_CO.::....:B,c..Bc._L_ES'------1---~%-'G_R_AV_E_L __ .--___ __:_%_S __ A_ND ____ -+---•'----Yo_Sl~L T_~ _ ___,__'¾_o C_L_A_Y-1 0.0 0.0 81.3 18.7 SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? Material Description SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) Silty sand #4 100.0 #8 99.8 #16 99.3 #30 92.9 #50 51.0 #100 26.5 PL= Atterberg Limits LL= Pl= #200 18.7 Coefficients D50= 0.354 050= 0.294 D15= D10= Cc= Classification USCS= SM AASHTO= Remarks ~ (no specifa;ation provided) Sample No.: I3-7 Location: Source of Sample: Date: 7/29/19 Elev./Depth: 15-16.5' E ,.;ining Associates, Inc. I Fresno, CA ...... ~ ----l Client: ~ Project: Pmpo,ed Ddve Shack Restau=I & GolfDriving Range Project No: E40550.0l _ Figure __ _ 80 I---+---+----, 0::: W 60 z U::: ~ 50 t-+-----t----1 • : ?2 i t I w Cl. 40 -·: 3 -· :- % COBBLES 0.0 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER #4 100.0 #8 94.8 #16 92.4 #30 88.1 #50 76.8 #100 61.5 #200 50.4 Particle Size Distribution Report ' I ~ l!i ,i!:: i i:I: ; -: _,_ . --: -ttr·-. : --l [ ' I i ~ i;' • ',• ~: : : ,· ] I ; • : : !" i Ii ! ' ' l ' +t-. - I •-• : : •••---'."~-o-r:-,---• -+ : -. : -: 1--• '. '. ··• • . ..•• ill-..• ! I 1.I \ _(:1;-,r+-j--,- % GRAVEL 0.0 SPEC.* PERCENT • ' ' ' ' < : I : I : : I • I I I : -: : : : : :' PASS? (X=NO} ' ' ' : : : ; !.·. 1 GRAIN SIZE -mm %SAND 49,6 Sandy silt PL= USCS= ML %SILT 50A Material Description Atterberg Limits LL= Pl= Coefficients 0 60 = 0.139 Dso= D15= □10= Cc= Classification AASHTO= Remarks _ _J __ _ % CLAY * (no specificatrnn prov1dcd) Source of Sample: Date: 7/29/19 Sample No.: B-9 Elev./Depth: 5-6.5' !N'o~~:~~ining Associates, lnj ~:~::,, Prnpnse<l D,ivo Simek R,st,,rnnt &-GnlfD<iving R~~ [_ Fresno, CA _.,_ Pro·ect l'J5>_:__ E4055 0.01 Fig_u.!E! ___j Particle Size Distribution Report 100 I ' ! i 10 500 100 10 1 0.01 0.001 % COBBLES 0.0 % GRAVEL 0.0 GRAIN S\ZE-mm % SAND 96.8 % SILT % CLAY 3.2 SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? Material Description Poorly graded sand SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) #4 100.0 f/.8 99.9 1116 99.6 /t30 96.0 1150 73.5 #100 IO.I PL= NP Atterberg Limits LL= NV Pl"' NP f/200 3.2 Coefficients 0 60 = o.2s1 0 50 = 0.232 D15= 0.161 D10= 0.149 Cc= 0.96 Class ifi cation USCS= SP AASHTO= Remarks ~ (no specification provi<l~d) Sample No.: B-9 Location: Source of Sample: Date: 7/29/19 Elev ./Depth: 15-16 .5' Ee Twining Ass~ciates, Inc. Fresno, CA Client: ••• -· ]- Project: Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range Pro·ect N_1?: _ E40550.0l Figure _ O'.'. w z Li: I-z w 0 0:: w Cl.. Particle Size Distribution Report 100 ; ! 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 500 1 0.1 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm % COBBLES % GRAVEL % SAND % SILT % CLAY 1-----------+----------+------------t------···~'----'----o.o 0.0 95 .5 4.5 SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.* SIZE FINER PERCENT 114 100.0 118 99 .l 1/16 94 .3 1/30 68.9 #50 2 0.5 #100 7.8 #200 4.5 PASS? (X=NO) Material Description Poorly graded sand PL= 085= 0.829 030= 0.353 Cu= 2 .52 USCS= SP Atterberg Limits LL= Pl= Coefficients D50= 0.527 050= 0.462 D15= 0.262 010= 0.209 Cc= 1.13 Classification AASHTO::c Remarks (no specification providt:d) Sample No.: B-11 Location: Source of Sample: Date: 7/l 5/19 Elev./Depth: 20-21.5' Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Fresno, CA Client: Project l'roposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range P_roject No: E40550 .0I Figure J LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT 60r-----------------------........ -.-----.---..----.......... .---...... >< w 0 ~ 50 --- 40 ~ 30 - 0 i= 5 0... 20 --- 10 - 7 --- Dashed line indicates the approximate upper limit boundary for natural soils 10 \ / ? I ,/ .. ---. /' / • i i Ml qr OL 30 I I 50 LIQUID LIMIT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL PL • Sandy lean clay 42 17 - Project No. E40550.0l Client: Project: Proposi;d Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range 70 Pl 25 •Source: Sample No.: B-2 Elev./Depth: 35-36 .5' Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Fresno, CA -----·-···-· i IVIH < • 0 . 90 %<#40 %<#200 Remarks: • Fi ure 110 uses CL LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT 60 Dashed line indicates the approximate :_/ upper limit boundary for natural soils I 50 - , l 40 .. L. ~ 0 ~ ~ 30 ---./ ... () ~ ~ a.. / 20 -/ / ' / / ; / 10 --·-l i 7 , I ML qr L 4 I ; I 10 30 50 70 LIQUID LIMIT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL PL Pl • Lean clay 40 23 17 -- Project No. t:40550.01 Client: Project: Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range •Source: Sample No.: H-2 Elev .fDe pth: 60-61. 5' Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Fresno, CA / ' ! -j-------. . ·-----··· - I +-- L l Ml I o r ... H I 90 %<#40 99.7 Remarks: • %<#200 98.0 Fi ure 110 uses CL LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT 60r----------------------,------.------,----,----~..----, X w 0 z 50 40 ~ 30 () i== (J) ~ D... 20 · 10 Dashed line indicates the approximate upper limit boundary for natural soils /I / • ····-. - i / ' . / . . .. q r O J 10 30 50 LlQUID LIMIT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL PL • Silty sand NV NP Project No. E40550.01 Client: Project: Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range 70 Pl NP • Source: Sample No.: B-5 Elev./Depth: 18.5-20.0' Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Fresno, CA I I I MH or --►d I I ; I I .-i-. I 90 %<#40 72.5 Remarks: • %<#200 27.3 Fi ure 110 uses SM LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT 60.---------------------,------,--,----,-------""T"""::I.---, >< w 0 z 50 --· 40 ~ 30 --- 0 i= (J) :5 [l_ 20 · 10- 7 4 Dashed line indicates the approximate upper limit boundary for natural soils -· 1 qr OL 10 30 50 / LIQUID LIMIT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL PL • Lean clay 47 24 Project No. E40550.0l Client: Project: Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range / ; lo.-· {, l---- I . ··----+---·· 1- I ···---+-·· I ! ··----+--·- I MH or OH I ) 70 90 110 Pl 23 %<#40 %<#200 uses ---t------11--------i Remarks: • CL • Source: Sample No.: B-7 Elev./Depth: 5-6.5' Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Fresno, CA Fi ure LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT 60--------------------...------,-----,---...----........ .----. ril Cl z 50 ·-· 40- ~ 30 (..) f'.= (/) 5 a.. 20 -- 10 7 Dashed line indicates the approximate upper limit boundary for natural soils / l / I i , i ,' • / ML or OL 10 30 50 LIQU ID LIMIT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL PL • Poorly graded sand NV NP .. Project No. E40550.0l Client Project: Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range 70 Pl NP •Source: Sample No.: 13-9 Elev./Depth: 15 -16.5' Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Fresno, CA __ J_ ! I ' •• ···---------··· I i ---+-----· MH or OH 90 %<#40 90.6 Remarks: • %<#200 3.2 Fi ure 110 uses ~---~--- SP LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT 60-------------------------------..--------.---, >< LlJ 0 z 50 40- ~ 30 ''' u i== (/) ~ 0.. 20 10 7 ' 4 • Dashed line indicates the approximate upper limit boundary for natural soils ' ' -y' ' ' - ./I . . I / / / / --r--·-- i / ___ , ; i --1 ' ·• i M ot" OL I 10 30 50 LIQUID LIMIT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL PL Silty sand NV NP I ··--i ._I I I i --·-1 . I I +-I MH Of 0 70 90 Pl %<#40 %<#200 NP Project No. E40550.01 Client: Remarks: • Project: Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range • Source: Sample No.: B-11 Elev./Depth: 15-16.5' Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Fresno, CA Fi ure 110 uses SM MTA PROJECT NAME: MTA PROJECT NO.: SAMPLE I.D.: SAMPLED BY: SAMPLE DATE: MATERIALS DESCRIPTION : % PASSING# 4 SIEVE Initial Moisture Determination: Pan+ Wet Soil Wt., gm Pan+ Dry Soil Wt., gm Pan Wt., gm Initial % Moisture Content Initial Expansion Data: Ring+ Sample Wt., lbs Ring Wt., lbs Remolded Wt., lbs Remolded Wet Density, pcf Remolded Dry Density, pcf Expansion Data: Initial Gage Reading , in: Fina l Gage Reading, in: Expansion, in: Expansion Index MOORE TWINING / EXPANSION INDEX TEST, ASTM D4829 Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant REPORT DATE: and Golf Driving Range TEST DATE: 8/19/2019 7/12/2019 E40550.01 B-2@0-5' JC 7/29/2019 TESTED BY: MA Silty sand 100 250.0 231.8 0.0 7.9 0.9250 0.0000 0.9250 127.2 117.9 0.0500 0.0496 -0.0004 0 ---- Final Moisture Determination: Wet Soil Wt., lbs Dry Soil Wt., lbs Final% Moisture Content Final Expansion Data: Ring+ Sample Wt., lbs Ring Wt., lbs Remolded Wt., lbs Remolded Wet Density, pcf Remolded Dry Density, pcf Initial Volume 0.00727222 Final Volume 0.007269 0.9714 0.8577 13.3 0.9714 0.0000 0.9714 133.6 118.0 Comments: Very Low Expansion Potential Classification of Expansive Soils. (Table No. f From ASTM D4829) Expansion Index 0-20 21-50 51-90 91-130 >130 Potential Expansion Very Low Low Med ium Hlgh Very High MTA PROJECT NAME: MTA PROJECT NO.: SAMPLE I.D.: SAMPLED BY: SAMPLE DATE: MATERIALS DESCRIPTION : % PASSING# 4 SIEVE Initial Moisture Determination: Pan+ Wet Soil Wt., gm Pan+ Dry Soil Wt., gm Pan Wt., gm Initial % Moisture Content Initial Expansion Data: Ring+ Sample Wt, lbs Ring Wt, lbs Remolded Wt., lbs Remolded Wet Density, pcf Remolded Dry Density, pcf Expansion Data: Initial Gage Reading , in: Final Gage Reading, in: Expansion, in: Expansion Index MOORE TWINING EXPANSION INDEX TEST, ASTM D4829 Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant REPORT DATE: and Golf Driving Range TEST DATE: 8/19/2019 7/12/2019 E40550.01 JC 7/22/2019 TESTED BY: MA Sandy lean clay 100 250.0 205.8 0.0 21.5 0.7024 0.0000 0.7024 96.6 79.5 0.0500 0.0692 0.0192 19 ---- Final Moisture Determination: Wet Soil Wt., lbs Dry Soil Wt., lbs Final% Moisture Content Final Expansion Data: Ring+ Sample Wt., lbs Ring Wt., lbs Remolded Wt., lbs Remolded Wet Density, pcf Remolded Dry Density, pcf Initial Volume 0.00727222 Final Volume 0.007412 0.8018 0.5782 38.7 0.8018 0.0000 0.8018 108.2 78.0 Comments: Very Low Expansion Potential Classification of Expansive Soils. (Table No.1 From ASTM D4829) Expansion Index 0-20 21-50 51-90 91-130 >130 Potential Expansion Very Low Low Medium High Very High C: ·co ,_ u3 c Q) () ,_ (I) 0.. CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT -1.25 ~.......--, _,.......I. -.-----.--~~,.......,......~___,.......,,.......,.....,---,---.....-----r---,--,-~1.......--I .....,....' -r-1 .-----.--I...,........,..!.,......! ,----i ---,--,---,1; I,-,-, I ': I I , I I I I I l ! I I I ! ; I I I ' , • 0 001 \~ ! i i '. ' I : I I _j-1. ' : illT 1.25 '--1---+--f\~I +----+i--+----+--i--1--+---+-l--1----+-f----+---+--,'-··-•-+---+-I-+---+---+-: -+--1 ··-•-----'--;-i -,-+-----'---j-; ! I I ! l ! : .. ~ :, ~ ; ! ! i I i i --· - : 1\1'\! ' ~ ' i • ·, i I I I 2.50 ' ~ '"~U ' -Jl~t..++-t1\---+-----+-I-: :, ;......;:-I ---'-----+i---'---i +-+--i -+---'-; "---+----+----Ii -,:1_.' ,___, .............. i~..........___ ; \ J~ WATER A-ODED ~I\····-+-+-'---: ...;......_...;.........i____,__ __ ,_ ··-+----+------'--+----l-'lTF . 'T \ i: i 3.75 : ' : ' 5.00 I ' i 1 l 6.25 --· ·------+-+-t--,1 ---+' ---+-+-'ld--.-+l_if--+-_:~' __,_ II i I 1" ~,~ i I i 1 1 I ii:! ' ' I!''. Ii I [ :, : 7.501---............. ,--+--+--+-------,-+--,--+----+-+----+-•-L I ,. "i-.. • !1 • • , ~r ' I : I r , ' , : , · "r•'f',l' : ~ \ _ i l ,--'---+--· --+----+--,--+---'--l----+---1--1---1--l---l·-• • ;'~{-~:-~f '~, I i i 11 0.00 --:,--11'··-. -,. I ·1 i ' ' ! i ,~~ •• : ITTTTT 8.75 ' ; , ; I .. i ' ! 11.25 .1 I i I ] i I i i i .2 .5 Natural Dry Dens. LL Pl Sp. Sat. Moist. (pcf) Gr. ! ! i i I i i i ! ; ·, I ! I I 2 Applied Pressure -ksf Overburden (ksf) Pc (ksf) 5 Cc Cs 10 20 Swell Press. Swell eo (ksf) % ----l-----l-----1---------+----+------+-----+---1----+-- 84.3 % 14.7 % 113, 1 2.65 2,64 0.13 0.03 2.26 1.3 0.462 MA TE RIAL DESCRIPTION uses AASHTO Sandy lean clay CL Project No. E40550.0l Client: Remarks: Project: Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range Source: Sample No.: 13-4 Elev./Depth: 8.5-10' Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Fresno, CA Figure CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT -1 ,--..--,.........,..--.-..----,---.-~..----r-.----.-----,-.......--,---,----r--...,..-,--,------.--,---,--..---,----------,----,,---.-----r---r-,----r---..--.-, 0 I __ J+I~---if----------'--; ----;------ji 1---1------+li ! __ I+----;.!--!---! 1-------1--:-+-;I -.! I : ! I . ; ;_ ' . I : ! I --...!-.-----: ..J.--+l_! ..;,._;_Ir' -i-.-r"'\-. WATER ADDED : I ! ' i i , · ... · i ,_ .... __ -i __ '~·~ • !,· I -r-: I Ii i : ,__-'--,____,_____,_ __ -f--+--~--+-.;---'---' -l--!--'--1--~-...l--l-+--+---'--',;__.,r-+-+-l--+--I-+--+--. --+-+---+-+---+1-.J._. __ .t__.L 1 I . i ' i ! i : :~N\i . I ! 2 -,'-: -+-+' -+--' --+--,1---+i -+,-,1-i -I ' • 'NI~--+-,-+-·, -+--i--r---.--i -ii- i i ~ ' I \, 3 1--1--J--.. --<-+----'----l--l--+-+-+---·•·-l--+-11-+--.:----'--I--I--I------+--+-.,,,, -+--I---+--!---+-+ ; i: : : r-~ I ' C -~ u5 ' I ; ! c 41-.;--1---+-1-;---+-~-+,--;--+-1-;.--+~- ~~, , Li-, i i I n ~·+1 '. :;ii <0 ~ Q) Cl. 1 \~ 1 -: i: I i i 5 1---11-------'--1-l---+--+--1---+-+-!-, --1---1---• ....1,--+----+---+-...;......+-+---1--+-----!I - ' ' l : \ i I I 6 ····-+--+-+-+---, --+----+--+--· -~+!----+--'-, ----+-+-+-+--+--!-! -+.-+--+--I---+--'--',---'--'--+-½-\-:~, -f---j----'----1-! -+-! ·--: -1-~ 1 i [ r--.-............. 1 • • I N • 7 ,____.______,___,_i_i:f---+---i -1-+-++-+--+-1i i_ +j +--,-; ----'l--+-+~-+1-----l~-----ll--= I ~ r r-... f..L_f, .,_.---.i.l~_,: --i--•l-: -+-i --+--1---';----'--I. I; I ,, : • ' 9 .1 I i .2 Natural Dry Dens. Sat. Moist. (pcf) LL I i • ___ [__[-+--+-! -+--' --+---;'-+---1--1----·-: I j_ __ J,_!-' -+-: -+1-l ; ! I I I 1 ; ! i ; ! ! I .5 Pl I Sp. Gr. I i 2 Applied Pressure -ksf Overburden (ksf) Pc (ksf) i 5 10 20 Cc Cs Swell Press. Clpse. eo (ksf) % 10.2 % 2.0 % 109.1 2.65 3.46 0.12 0.01 0.1 0.517 1----------------··----------------------1----- MATERIAL DESCRIPTION uses AASHTO --,-, Sandy lean clay CL -······ Project No. E40550.0l Client: Remarks: Project: Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range Source: Sample No.: B-8 Elev./Depth: 5-6.5' Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Fresno, CA Figure c c 0 ~ E .Q (l) 0 "iii (.) t Q) > I ' 0.02 -f-t-i--+-+-+-+1-+---,-+-+-1------· ... 1--1- . .. ... "H·-+--+---'---1 :; S:~ 2 -1-'1 ,-,_;_ __ ·:· I f-f--_.;,__ --[-... I I 0,03 ' ! I 0 0.15 0.3 0.45 0.6 Horiz. Displacement, in. I : I 3 I , ! ; ! I . --! -1-l-J-------;~--,~--:-L .. -=~~-..... ;:" i i l. ... --t-+--+-t-+-f-+- 2 . 5 l-+---l-'---+-f---+----1----1-le-- ·l~+-+-+--+-J---1-- ,_,_ I j I .. ; t-.7'"-of---1-+-+-++i +-+---1--<_j_+-+-2 ~--'-·I/'., I , ..... V) .I<: <II f-1-··-J ... I'\. ,_ -.::;,=..c.....-jf....' 3 .. ' '·-+--<-+---+-+---'---1--11 _. ~ V) I ~ u5 ~-t-+-+-t-+--1-+-fl·- 1. 5 t-+-+-,,_f-+--+-...,......+-+-t~ 1-:.--+-· - '-(I) (l) .c: Cl) ' ' 0.5 fl i_ ! ······i i ;------1-+--;---+-+-1-+-t--.... ! - 0 ->--,--I : • __ .._,l~!~+-....,-1-_~·~~+--'+_+_---1--1-1 0 0.15 0.3 0.45 Horiz. Displacement, in. Sample Type: Description: Sandy lean clay LL= 42 PL= 17 Specific Gravity= 2.65 Remarks: Figure Pl= 25 0.6 2 3 Sample No. Water Content, % Dry Density, pcf Jg Saturation, % 'i:; Void Ratio Diameter, in . Heiqht, in. Water Content, % Dry Density, pcf ti ~ Saturation, % ~ Void Ratio Diameter, in . Heioht, in. Normal Stress, ksf Peak Stress, ksf Displacement, in. Ultimate Stress, ksf Displacement, in. Strain at peak, % Client: 26.0 96.4 96.2 0.7154 2.42 1.00 24.6 99.6 98.7 0.6605 2.42 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.13 5.2 2 3 27.5 27.7 95.6 98.9 99.6 109.2 0.7311 0.6730 2.42 2.42 1.00 1.00 24.3 24.5 99.6 103.9 97.6 109.9 0.6610 0.5918 2.42 2.42 0.96 0.95 2.00 3.00 1.49 2.09 0.10 0.14 4.1 5.6 Project: Proposed Drive Shack Rcstamant & Golf Driving Range Sample Number: B-2 Depth: 35-36.5' Proj. No.: £40550.01 Date Sampled: 7/22/19 DIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Fresno CA 2 .,_ <J) ~ ui <J) ~ u5 ro ru ..c: (J) Consol. 1--+-+-t-+---,-+ -· -· ..... 0. 01 t-,--t-t--+-t-+-+---+--j-----1 ... i _____ _____,:___ i- i ! 0. 02 r+-+-'--+--+--+---,-+-;.....+--1-"""'. ·--1---i--- l-: • i -L,-+-_. ·1··-+· l-i----1 +-+--'-+--f-i -T : • "! 0.03 ~ --H ---T_J : -_ : , 0 0.15 0.3 0.45 0.6 Horiz. Displacement, in. • ~l'- ~r+-+--+--'---+-+-fF"tvr - 2 I: .. _-__ _ ,/ ~ _ _ / v c--\! ___ r·--+--··-----+--+-+--+-I-+--·--➔----- 1. 5 1 --; -1--,---+r+-+---+-,.;._.~ . I 1 -----_____!___ -/-;.....+--t-1----j-j--l_J ___ . . ;.-' ~ . ·1' -2 I l . I ---',--+--f--+--+--+-+-+ -Ir, !--J-!'-+----l---;...+~1-+---J-1--- I ' • K-. ; . L. _ _;_i - ,--l}~' -----,--.-- -;..I,: -1 .. • '1' ; ,-1 f / l-t-++-+--+--+---,1----'-J-!·-··- 0. 5 _ _J ____ -' i-+---t-t-+---t--,-t---1 : a -•• r•:-+ ---+----+--:+-~~•-=::--+--;•Ii-'--1----J---I 0 0.15 0.3 0.45 0.6 Horiz. Displacement, in. Sample Type: Description: Silty sand Specific Gravity::: 2.65 Remarks: Figure 3 6 Results ,___ --1--! --I 1 ; -~ ! -1 C, ksf 4>, deg ____ _ Tan($) 0.72 'ti 4 1-+-+-+...;.......J ~ ui -1 <J) ~ u5 ~ ro ru (L 0 2 4 Sample No. Water Content, % Dry Density, pcf ro Saturation, % :;::, ·c Void Ratio Diameter, in. Heiqht, in. Water Content, % Dry Density, pcf ti w Saturation,% 1-- ~ Void Ratio Diameter, in. Heiqht, in. Normal Stress, ksf Peak Stress, ksf Displacement, in. Ultimate Stress, ksf Displacement, in. Strain at peak, % Client: Normal Stress, ksf 1 2 18.4 12.6 99.8 97.2 74.2 47.5 0.6576 0.7016 2.42 2.42 1.00 1.00 23.3 24.0 101 .5 99.5 98.0 96.2 0.6303 0.6619 2.42 2.42 0.98 0.98 1.00 2.00 1.18 1.66 0.12 0.18 5.0 7.3 3 14.9 93.4 51.4 0.7712 2.42 1.00 26.4 96.2 97.3 0.7193 2.42 0.97 3.00 2.62 0.12 5.0 Project: Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range Sample Number: 13-3 Depth: 25---26.5' Proj. No.: E40550.0I Date Sampled: 7/22/19 DIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Fresno CA 6 -0.015 'I; I· .1. _ ' -·; I --+j- -.-!... ' j + ! . I • ·-i i -0.01 -~-r-•• ·· -t-c_ ,__,. --+-++--t--i---, .. - ; .. --i---,1--t--+--+-1 --i-' -1-··· · ···--- • -• ---+--+_-,,_>--__ ~,--+-,__-+ ... ~..;......+--t---;-+-__ _1 : -I . . i -t··-,-+-a---+-+-+-t -0. 005 ---+-+-1--+-+-'--+-+--+-: --r--t-j-- _ L_ .-. ~-· __ :_·-t--t--, -+--+-___ :=~~--+-· ~' -+--+-'t-~--·- bll ~tlon •-.. :--=--=:-~,_' -~~:·~--~' ·-I ... 1--1-t-- o ~-r --i---t----t--i,--;--,..c, _c-7, -t-t--+-'-, -+-+ 'I\[',, •• ·lfi··+--t---t--P+..,_-t-+-···-··· - con,ol. ::_~ < I/ ... I ·-'i-.. •• 1 0.005 >--, -~"-~!!:_$:j_;;J-:......~N,~' -!"'r-r-, •• :: ~ 2 'ti ~ <I) /J) ~ u5 '-Cl) Q) .c: if) r-....._ ...,.r--,.. I i , --'--~i---·_ ~,-"~ ,, ~ ;···· ' i i I', ' 0.01 t--t--,--t--+--,---.. • '.. -·i--+-+-1 --1--' 1-"d-+-+-+--, , ____ ,__ '---1 -·---,-,--+-~' +-+-1-1-, Ti ,-,--17- 0.015 '=·-.._._~· ;-'-_.,..,...i_·~· ___ .... _,..., ........ .......,.1, ......... 1--'-·-_,-..,__,- o 0.15 0.3 0.45 0.6 Horiz. Displacement, in. 1--+----+--+-;--t--+-, ... -· -t-----;-- 2~;~~.:~~r--+T·~--~···as+-+-++-'~~·+·-~~~~= / ! ~ I I' 11--rm:nW~!_j__ 3 ' ' •=--/-+--'>'. 4 .. """'--+'<---+-+-1--+I·-,. -..,: T 1 ·5 • ; --· -It-j-. ++-=f_'j_=~_t:=5"~~.;;,t".!_j~u"J-2 --ii i ' • --... ····-t-+--+-, -t---+-+-t-f-i-·- -~j-' . --e-+--+--+-+--+-~, --1 I .. '·· l-+-+-+-+-t 1 / _, ---,-- 1/!-r.,,..wm+!l, ·:t·---·w· ~1 ·---/.~ -I •••• ---.: -1: -~-f-+-: --+--· t-'-it---+-1-~--:---' • 0. 5 1-1 4--,-; -''-+-+--,--+-+--1---l--:.L 1: -1-~ :_ :::;::-1= -----.,_ -·-i I I J--c-+-+--;1-+-+-,t---• · -j-- ----_. --.. '=.:,:=.1-;=.-;::::, :=-:=+-·,-·-_,_·.+-.. -I·-_,,_ -I 0 'c-"-~.....,,....,......~-....,.........__---'-='--'--~ 0 0.15 0.3 0.45 .6 i ..... _ Horiz. Displacement, in. Sample Type: Description: Silty sand LL=NV Specific Gravity= 2.65 Remarks: Figure .......... -···~·- Pl=NP 3 't; ~ <I) /J) ~ ....., (J) ~ Cl) Q) 0... Sample No. Water Content, % Dry Density, pcf ]i Saturation, % ·2 -Void Ratio Diamet er, in . Heiciht, in . Water Content, % Dry Density, pcf t; w Saturation, % I- <( Void Ratio Diameter , in . Heiciht, in . Normal Stress, ksf Peak Stress, ksf Displacement, in. Ultimate Stress, ksf Displacement, in. Strain at peak, % Client: Normal Stress, ksf 1 2 3 35.0 32.2 31.8 83.3 88.7 89.2 94.l 98.7 98.6 0.9868 0.8658 0.8536 2.42 2.42 2.42 l.00 1.00 1.00 34.2 29.5 29.1 86 .3 92.3 93. I 99.0 98.7 99.1 0.9165 0.7929 0.7765 2.42 2.42 2.42 0.96 0.96 0.96 1.00 2.00 3.00 0.86 1.67 2.04 0.15 0.16 0.15 6.2 6.4 6.2 Project: Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range Sample Number: B-5 Depth: 18.5-20.0' Proj. No.: E40550.0 l Date Sampled: 7/22/19 DIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Fresno. CA ,!:: C: ,Q 'iii E ..... ..Q Q) 0 ~ E Q) > 'ti -¥'. (I) "' ~ in (U Q) _c (I) -0.03 . ! -i-· i +-c---+-+---i--+-+. ----- -0. 0 1 t--+--+-+-;-t-1---+--+-t-• +-+---t--11-t--+-+--I---··i -. ' ' ·--1--,-1-- 1 t-·· ··---t--- ----···. "--0.01 J_____ _ ', < -r::1-"-re-~; -+I ~,--1 2 0.02 1-_,_1 +-. +-+--I-,-++--+--I-+-+--+--~ : T ·-•--1--+--;--+---t--11-t--+-+--+-l -t-~~---- -_j r o.03 l~ 0 0.15 0.3 0.45 0.6 Horiz. Displacement. in. 3 ---, • I .! i--t- 2. 5 t--+-t--➔- ! _I -1-= 1-:1-+-+-->---+---i,--t-t--1-' --·---:,-- ··! ' I I . . _( ·-+---+-~ ' i ---'-I ··-.. j··· 1--+-+-+--+--1.-+-+-+---. -·-,.. . - I-+-'-+-+-_[ I . ; ····--·1--1--- i I 0 0.15 0.3 0.45 0.6 Horiz. Displacement, in. Sample Type: Description: Lean clay LL= 47 PL=24 Specific Gravity= 2.65 Remarks: Figure Pl=23 6 0 2 4 6 Normal Stress, ksf Sample No. Water Content, % Dry Density, pcf ]! Saturation, % ·1: Void Ratio Diameter, in. Heioht, in. Water Content, % Dry Density, pcf ti © Saturation, % I- ;;;: Void Ratio Diameter, in. Heiciht, in. Normal Stress, ksf Peak Stress, ksf Displacement, in. Ultimate Stress, ksf D isplacement, in. Strain at peak, % Client: 1 34.5 83.8 93.8 0.9750 2.42 1.00 35.1 85.2 98.9 0.9406 2.42 0.98 1.00 0.82 0.06 2.5 2 3 36.2 33.4 83.3 86.6 97.4 97.4 0.9849 0.9097 2 .42 2.42 1.00 1.00 35.4 33.4 85.0 88.6 99.2 I 02.1 0.9452 0.8680 2.42 2.42 0.98 0.98 2.00 3.00 1.28 1.86 0.07 0.08 2.7 3.1 Project: Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range Sample Number: B-7 Depth: 5-6.5' Proj. No.: E40550.0l Date Sampled: 7/22/19 DIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Fresno CA .s C: 0 ~ § .£? (I) 0 m 0 j -0.009 • I_ Horiz. Displacement, in. 3 ~J_ ~:_-1_ .. -+-,....+-+-1-___ +: . -~l_::jT --t-+-+-+-+-+-'---l. ... . . i ! . -: 2.5 :::!: . : l 1·-r .. ~- ,-c._ --!---;--' 'ti _,c ,_ -_, ! _,0-l -+-·1--1--+--+-+-I -... i I 2 .... '.. I l~~-r,.IJS,~·°"",~:-t--t-t-13 V) V) 1·· "I --11 I --t-• •• ~~ -~---~~!. :--_.--,_ 1.5 ---:·-t-t~!-;-1 _,___ +-+-;......;-+ ·-!!: u5 co ll) J:: (f) -'F ..! : -v ;.._ r-' ---i-; f--t,of.....,.,_.j,-,=L:-,~L ; I 1/", • • r--A-'T~l-+-+_1 _--+ __ :4_~:-~--+---1 2 1 -;; ; -1------F 0 L...L.-....L....J.i--L-.._._.J......LI....J.._'-'---.J...i ..;..! .....L-J_ .. _L. ____ J... _ _,_,I 0 0.15 0.3 0.45 Horiz . Displacement, in. Sample Type: Description: Silty sand Specific Gravity= 2.65 Remarks: Figure 0.6 1 Sample No. Water Content, % Dry Density, pcf "iii Saturation, % E c: Void Ratio Diameter, in. Hei ht, in. Water Content, % Dry Density, pcf U) ~ Saturation, % ~ Void Ratio Diameter, in . Hei ht, in. Normal Stress, ksf Peak Stress, ksf Displacement, in. Ultimate Stress, ksf Displacement, in . Strain at peak, % Client: Normal Stress, ksf 1 2 3 16.6 10.7 17.6 80.6 87.2 87.9 41.8 31.5 52.8 1.0524 0.8978 0.8817 2.42 2.42 2.42 1.00 1.00 1.00 37.2 31.5 30.2 81.7 88.7 89.7 96.1 96.4 95 .0 1.0259 0.8648 0.8439 2.42 2.42 2 .42 0.99 0.98 0.98 1.00 2 .00 3.00 0.73 1.30 2.09 0 .16 0.19 0.16 6.7 7.7 6.5 Project: Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range Sample Number: B-9 Depth: 10-11.5' Proj. No.: E40550.0l Date Sampled: 7/22/19 DIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Fresno CA '+-1/) ::,,:. vi <n ~ u5 ,_ rn Ql .c <J) -0.03 j-L t-+-+-+--+-+-+ ·i Ht= l-+-i--t-+-1---'-"---: ! -0.02 i I ·• ~ -· • ;-t--t-t---,-+-+-t--i--~-1 -------r-f---f--;------.. ,--_,_,____+-t--+-+-i -0 . 0 1 o--;-+-+-+->--1 - -r-t-+-l--l-+-+--.. ! l .. ·-r+-+-,--+--+~Hi_ Dil~tioP =-'._ __ j. . I r-.. ---·\--r--t-+-~~, 1-+-+--'-+-l--"···i··-i . i 1· :-'-,-- 0.03 '=-'---'--'.-'-........ '~+-_,_-+-_. ..... 1::::::-:.1-..;..., _,_·· ·__,·-_jL.i-: -'-: _.__,·· 0 0 .15 0.3 0.45 0.6 Horiz. Displacement, in. r.: -I i , -· 1.:, J l .... ·-,,, ; li --1~: -+-+-+-I--' ••• i / ~+1--·· I. 1-1--S------+-l 2 ; i ··-f--~ ··-·- ,-:.· : ·1-_/; .I:._:1_"' .. "i'-h'6cd,.;.~. L; J_ -1 ' A,__,_, +-+-<-I----. 0.5 ~-· I ·~-... !···-I ..•• -+-+--+-+;-, --i--1 ·, I ; 1--i-.a...+-+-I-+-; --j-. 0 --•• . h--+-·>--+--+-i--i' -I • 0 0.15 0.3 0.45 0.6 Horiz . Displacement, in . Sample Type: Description: Sandy lean clay Specific Gravity= 2.65 Remarks: Figure 0 Sample No. Water Content, % Dry Density, pcf ~ Saturation,% ·c Void Ratio Diameter, in. Heioht. in. Water Content, % Dry Density, pcf iii ~ Saturation, % ~ Void Ratio Diameter, in . ,__~H_e~ig.ht, in. Normal Stress, ksf Peak Stress, ksf Displacement, in. Ultimate Stress, ksf Displacement , in. Strain at peak , % Client: 2 4 Normal Stress, ksf 2 3 30.9 31.9 33.2 79.1 80.6 80.8 75.1 80.2 84,0 1.0922 1.0524 1.0482 2.42 2.42 2.42 1.00 1.00 1.00 38.6 36.8 35.3 81.5 83.2 83.9 99 .3 98.6 96 .1 1.0305 0 .9888 0.9726 2.42 2.42 2.42 0.97 0.97 0.96 1.00 2.00 3.00 0.82 1.42 1.99 0 ,14 0.20 0.20 5.8 8.1 8.1 Project: Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range Sample Number: B-16 Depth: 3.5-5' Proj. No.: E40550.01 Date Sampled: 7/22/19 DIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Fresno, CA 6 (I) ::J ro ? 0::: • R .. VALUE TEST REPORT 100 ~---~---~------.------------~-~----, 5 I -·-··--- 1 ···-+-' ---+--i --• ___ lt+-'i ;-·· ii. ·--U. __j:, 1 , i I I 80 -··-+----t----J---c----+' -··· •. · .... ---+----< 4 60 ; -------+----+--_ I i I I ·!---+----+------. ; , 40 !--+-~ -~i ___ ___,_ ____ -·-----+----__ rt-I-~il-~! --+-;---l-\ ,__ ! , I - -! ~ -r--··- 20 :=--·· i ,-,_ - i ....... ·--+---+------·r . -· - ; ---+-----·-···- ... ... I -·-· ---;'----< I I - -+-! --:---l= 1 I - >- >--- ! l . I ---+--+-----·· ·-I ... . ... ,-i ---;----+-------= -=-j i ! ! i :-:, I Q ~I 1 1 1 I~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I, 1 1 1 i I I I I I 1111 I 1111 I 1111IIUIi11 1 1 I, 1 1 1 I I I I-Q 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Exudation Pressure -psi Resistance RNalue and Expansion Pressure -ASTM D 2844 Compact Density Moist. Expansion Horizontal Sample Exud. R No. Pressure Pressure Press. psi Height Pressure psi pcf % psi @ 160 psi in. psi Value 1 50 115.1 15.7 1.00 127 2.46 603 10 2 30 110.4 17.8 0.79 139 2.57 169 6 3 30 112.6 16.7 0.91 134 2.51 291 7 Test Results Material Description R-value at 300 psi exudation pressure= 8 Sandy lean clay Exp. pressure at 300 psi exudation pressure= 0.92 psi Project No.: E40550.0I Tested by: Project:Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range Checked by: Sample Number: B-12 Remarks: Date: 9/13/2019 R-VALUE TEST REPORT ■ m X u fl) ::, tJ) ,r ::I 7J iil en (/) C ii! 'o (/) = R Value Corr. 10 6 7 Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Figure __ __. R-VALUE TEST REPORT 100 1 ' i I i ,-. I i I I J_ - ,-. I ; ; I ! ·, - ,-. i ! i - ,-. i - ~--···-·-... -·· .. - ,-I - f-L-a - f- -----i - f-- 80 ~ >---. ' ---·· -...... ---T -0.8 ! -- ' - . i ; -■ I -·--· -' I -,-' i ; -m f-- f-' i -X "O f- ' -!ll 60 ----·--·--· . -·---··-.. -.. -·· ·----·· 0.6 :J ,--(/) ,--;s· {l) t--:J :J ,_ I -] >---; ·-·--· .... -···---·· --u o:'. I-! ; -ro ,--(/) ,-' -(/) C • -i I ; -ro 40 --· ... ; ... . •·--· ' ; 0.4 I I ,-I ' : -'c ,-- ,-; ! -~ ,-- ·····-···-·· . ···-·----~ -- f-- f-- ,-- 20 ,........._ _________ ---.. ···-----····· i ······-~ 0.2 I-' - ,--; ,-- ,-! -- ~ ... . ··-----------.... ·-· --; I I I Ii I I I I I. I I I l, I I I -la." -.. ; -- I I I Ii I I I! I I I I I 1 11 ! - 0 -I I I, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1-Q 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Exudation Pressure -psi Resistance R-Value and Expansion Pressure -ASTM D 2844 Compact. Moist. Expansion Horizontal Sample Exud. R No. Pressure Density Pressure Press. psi Height Pressure R Value pcf % Value psi psi @ 160 psi in. psi Corr. I 100 99.7 25.8 0.85 130 2.52 325 10 10 2 30 96.7 28.2 0.70 139 2.61 102 6 7 3 50 97.9 27.0 0.76 135 2.57 183 8 8 Test Results Material Description R-value at 300 psi exudation pressure= 10 Lean clay Exp. pressure at 300 psi exudation pressure= 0.83 psi Project No.: E40550.0I Tested by: Project:Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range Checked by: Sample Number: Il-7 Depth: 0-5' Remarks: Date: 9/13/2019 R-VALUE TEST REPORT Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Figure ________ 't5 0. ;i, "<ii C: Cl) "'Cl i::' a 142 --~-------i I , I i -~ ____ I : I i COMPACTION TEST REPORT I -+ ·· 1 I I I I i I I -+_L __ ,_ ll__::::;-l_-.•. +. -,-+--! ~i---+--+----+1---1---+--J . I i _,1 ___ -f--+--+ ! ! 137t--+---+--+---+--lt----+---+---+--l-------l~+--------+---+-+---+--+---+----+-,__-+--+---+--l -1~---< I -i y ,1 ··-1- / ,-I\. t--+---+---·I··· 1 32 1--+---+--+---+---'t---+---+--+---+--lt--+---+---+---+-t--+---+---+---+--'l,li--+--i-----+---+------'----+---+--l I '.; t---~·--···-·-· -· .~ .. ~---+--+---.--_:-_:-+---tv--+-vr-___ -r'·-_-,t---·-~-_-_-+-:-_:_~--+-·1-"='i.._~--+-i.--!~~-~~: -__ +-! -+---1----·· j 127---------+-· -+---+--+---t ____ l_-_7.+-V ______ -+---t---------+--~---+---:-~j---+-__,i,...---i 1 ·· v--I---+--<-+---: -• --rri. - -f----'---+---+·-.. i.,_ ---I ; --t-+---+---+--I . V ' I I ·-··-+---'---+---1---+- I l 122t--+---+---+---+---+t--+---+---'---+---+---+---+--+---+---l-+---+--+---+---+-,__ ____ --i--+----+-'---'----l---'----f --,-Lr ___ !_··· • +--+---+--+--1-·--·'······ ' . i . t---+---+---i- 117:-=-~-=-~: 1 ..:-~_:_-·· ___ ·1 ·___.· l____.__.,_____._~i~ 1 ~__.__.__......______.l_·-_,_-_i__..____._,_~----'----'-____._ __ _.___..__. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Water content, % Test specification: ASTM D 1557-12 Method A Modified Elev/ Depth 0-5' Classification uses AASHTO TEST RESULTS Maximum dry density= 134.3 pcf Optimum moisture ,:=: 7 .0 % .. Project No. E40550.0l Client: Project: Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Range Nat. Moist. Sp.G. • Source: Sample No.: 13-2 Elev./Depth: 0-5' Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Fresno, CA LL Pl %> No.4 l.4 %< No.200 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Silty sand Remarks: Figure COMPACTION TEST REPORT 11s -.I .... l·-S-t---1--, ' ! ·, . .. --',---: +--+--~··1i_ : i --+-+--+---+--'---.. -+--+---,.--, : 1 i I I I-----~-,--+--l l I I ... i I I I ! -·-·-----·-··--·- 116 t-+---+1--1-: --+-----,-..-----t---t-11-.,...' --+----ii..._.,...' -----+----~--t-i----t----+-----,--1 • i I I -~.' ! I : . I -•__,··· -!f---·· ·-+--~ ----: _:1+· I -1-----t---<-~-•• _Jtn-+---+---+ --+---+--+--"J . • ,· • ·-·· -·----·-·-· · ~--+--+--1--' · · 1 ····· l--+--t--+---1---i 114 l--+---+---,..--+-l--+---+----+-----,1--+---+---+---+i -----,f--+---'-----+---+-----,t-+---+--+----'-----t-..--+---+----;.., ---l t +-:a.,,,: ~""--'-~--+-··....-_t--'--~~ .. .__~~---i ,· -1--+, --'---41~--K 1--+---+----+--l .. , ·---t--c---+--+--1 --"I--+-+--' ····--·-·- ' i I 1121--+---+----,-1--+-t--+---+----,---,--1--+--+--+-------,t-+------+-----,l--"Ort--+-----t-+------+--+ i : , . i i ,___,___.____.., -J---<--___ I_ ~'- 1 • +--+--l -·1 · 1 I .. _ [ : ___ 1.. .J--+---+--+-~ i : I ······t---t---+--~ I ! I I I i --'---+--+--+-i-+--i-··--1 •• !f---1---+--+--1··----·· I ! 11 D t--+---+---+--t-t--+--+-----.----t-1--+---+--+-------,,---+--,--+---+-----,1---+--+----'----+t-+------+--+ -f----+--~-1-----··-··--; ' . . . . i ,o.H--r··i I ·--+---+--l---+---+---l·-·. l -+---+--+---<--+-r- 1 -~-~--+ ' -+I-+--+--+--+--,-... ·-~ .. : i I i I I 9 11 13 15 Water content, % Test specificati on : ASTM D 1557-12 Method A Modified Elev/ Classification Nat. Depth uses AASHTO I----'---+---- Moist. 0-5' 17 Sp.G. LL 19 Pl %> No.4 0 .8 21 %< No.200 TEST RESULTS MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Maximum dry density= 113.7 pcf Optimum moisture= 15.2 % Project No. E40550.0l Client Project: Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant & Golf Driving Rang\: • Source: Sample No.: 8-7 Elev.!Depth: 0-5' Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Fresno, CA Lean clay Remarks: Figure ~-' Jf MOO~E TWINfty'(J California ELAP Cerlificate #1371 August 14, 2019 Zubair Anwar MTA Geotechnical Division 2527 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 RE: Proposed Drive Shack & Golf Driving Range 2527 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 (559) 268-7021 Phone (559) 268-0740 Fax Work Order#: FH07003 Enclosed are the analytical results for samples received by our laboratory on 08107/19 reference, these analyses have been assigned laboratory work order number FH07003. For your All analyses have been performed according to our laboratory's quality assurance program. All results are intended to be considered in their entirety, Moore Twining Associates, Inc. (MTA) is not responsible for use of less than complete reports. Results apply only to samples analyzed. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us at the number listed above. Sincerely, Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Susan Federico Client Services Representative Page 1 of 5 MOORE TWINING , :, ' r J i , , ,; '1' .: f "I , • ' ~ , • • • ~ I • ·-· California ELAP Carlificate # 1371 MTA Geotechnical Division 2527 Fresno Street Project: Proposed Drive Shack & Golf Driving Range Project Number: E40550.01 Fresno CA, 93721 Sample ID B4@3-5 B9@ 0-5 Project Manager: Zubair Anwar Analytical Report for the Following Samples Notes Laboratory ID FH07003-01 FH07003 -02 Matrix Soil Soil Date Sampled 08/07/19 00:00 08/07119 00:00 2527 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 (559) 268-7021 Phone (559) 268-0740 Fax Reported: 08/14/2019 Date Received 08/07/19 09:18 08/07 /19 09: 18 Moore Twining Associates, Inc. Juliane Adams, Director of Analytical Chemistry Tha rosu//s in this report epply to the samples analyzed in accordance with the ch11in of custody documont. This analytical report must be reproduced in its entirety. Page 2 of 5 ti /I MC?,ORE ~~!Nf t:f Y Califomfa ELAP Cerlificate #1371 MTA Geotechnical Division Project: Proposed Drive Shack & Golf Driving Range 2527 Fresno Street Project Number: E40550.01 Fresno CA, 93721 Project Manager: Zubair Anwar B4@3-5 FH07003-01 {Soil) Sampled: 08/07/19 00:00 Analyte Flag Result Roportlng Limit Units DIiution Batch lnorganics Chloride 42 6 .0 mg/kg 3 89H0712 Chloride 0.0042 0.00060 % by Weight 3 [CALC] Sulfate as S04 0.029 0.00060 % by Weight 3 (CALC) pH 7.8 0.10 pH Units B9H0712 Sulfate as S04 290 6.0 mg/kg 3 B9H0712 B9@0-5 FH07003-02 (Soil) Sampled: 08/07/19 00:00 Analyte Flag Result Reporting Units Dllullon Batch Limit lnorganlcs Chloride 180 12 mg/kg 6 89H0712 Chloride 0,018 0 .0012 % by Weight 6 (CALC] Sulfate as S04 0.054 0.0012 % by Weight 6 [CALC] pH 8.6 0.10 pH Units 89H0712 Sulfate as S04 540 12 mg/kg 6 B9H0712 Notes and Definitions pg/ L micrograms per liter ( parts per billion con ce ntratlon units) mg/L mi I ligrams per liter ( parts per m Ill ion concentration units) mg/kg milligrams per kilogram {parts per million concentration units) ND Analyte NOT DETECTED al or above the reporting limit RPD Relative Percent Difference Analysis of pH, filtration, and residual chlorine Is to take place immediately afte1 sampling in the field . If the test was performed in the laboratory, the hold time was exceeded. (for aqueous matrices only} Prepared 08/07/19 08/09/19 08/09/19 08/07/19 08/07/19 Prepared 08/07119 08/09/19 08/09119 08/07119 08/07/19 2527 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 (559) 268-7021 Phone (559) 268-0740 Fax Reported; 08/14/2019 Analyzed Method 08109/19 ASTM D4327-84 08/09119 ASTM D4327-84 08109/19 ASTM D4327-84 08/09/19 ASTM D4972-89 Mod 08/09/19 ASTM D4327 Analyzed Method 08109/19 ASTM D4327-84 08/09/19 ASTM D4327-84 08109/19 ASTM 04327-84 08/09/19 ASTM D4972-89 Mod 08109/19 ASTM D4327 Moore Twining Associates, Inc . Juliane Adams, Director of Analytical Chemistry The results in this reporl apply to the samples analyzed In accordance with the chain of custody document. This analytical report must be reproduced in its entirety. Page 3 of 5 CHAIN Of CUSTODY/ ANALYSIS REQUEST 252. 7 .Fll!UN0 STRUT • F~~$NO, CA 937'.:! 1 • PHONE (559) ~6a-7n;:n • FAX, (559) 260-074<1 ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY DIVISION CALlt:ORNIA ELAP CERYIFICATION # 1371 Rl!PORTTO: AmaN110N, 7.u ba: r An'51h1Q., C0MPAITT N MIS, 'l\. ADDMSS, \ '\ 0 INVOICE TO! ATTEtmom COMrA>l'f NA1,m ACD8ES$1 0 REPORT COPY TO: REPQRTJNG: "f1STANDARD FORMAT OPDF 0 EDT (SWRCB) 0 ExCEL \ 0 GEOTRACKER/COELT (LUFT) GLOBAL ID: \ 0 COUNTY ENVIRONM~NTAL HEALTH; \ □ STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD: PHONE: " PHON!t \ 0 OTHER: ~/Mt~/FAX: ' E/,OAIL/FAX, SAMPLE INFORMATION -SAMPLE Tv\>ES PROJECT INFORMATION SMIP IEC l>Y (Pl<lNT): sou9, toNTl!Aa' / P.O. NO., BS -BIOSOLID CR • CERAI\\I C SIGNATUR,: SL -SOIL/SOLID PRo'"q'P-~·~0 -y'\v-c, sht:.tde. ~<!!~~ a,_,., 0- I LI0UID; q .-,-., ·~ (2.o..,,:,; J.?. ' D PusucSVsrE:M ROUTINE DW -DRINKING WATER P1IOJE<T l'IUM!!Ell: , 0 PRIVATE W&LL 0 REPEAT GW -GROUND WATER {;. 'f O'c,-:,0. o l OL-0JL 0 0TH£R 0 REPLACEMENT SF -SURFACE WATER. PROJE<:rMA.MA.Go~: ?.. 0 !::x:t\ y--A.nsv ... ,..:,, r-ST • STORM WATER TU~N A~DUND TIME WW-WASTEWATER ~ TANDARD S-d~eS ANALYSIS REQUESTED RUSH, DUE ON: - C" Mons ON ll£CENED CONDl'TION; ~ L -" □ CUSTODY SEAt(S) BROKEN V) Ill A □ SAMPLES(S) DAMAGED 0 B <:I 0 !.. u 0 ON ICE 0 AMBIENT TEMP. 0 INCORRECT PRESERVATION z u \. 0 s ~ 1 E u CLIENT SAMPLE ID DATE TIME TYPE I p., Lr e 3 -5"" 8/, l<t N/A. S'l-"> 2 Be; e o-s-flh ,~ N/A Si-. '> -' ' ··--, .. ----...-.,.._ M---~ ... --... .._,, __ --......... ----~-.. -~-----, ....... . --..... ~- ------M, -~' ·---~ . .,__._ .. --. '•··-··-.... -~-~-•••••·• -• ·---, '" . .,. COMMENTS / AllDiTIONAL INSTRUCTIONS: . RELINQUISHED BY COMPANY DATE TIME R~c E IVED B~/ COMPANY Mk.h 10 ,I AlcClra7 WA/MAT ;·, ('j " f.1 i·· -, ·Lr 1, /_r ·-, ti'J:J·"· • ti (·i/:') ,._; //) ··, , .. .. ·r·/ I i.·· l_ u _ .. _,., 'X' / '\-_, /, . 1· , ·1_,,, , "\ I I ~~~ . .-~ J : J -, ·, .. ) ; Poymont for servkes rendered os noted here,n ore due ,n lull w1lh1n 30 dor,, from tl,e dote lnvoload. If not "' pe1ld, occount boloncas ore deemed delinquent. Delinquent bolonces are subject to monthly smvlce chorg•• ar,d interest specit.ed in MTA', current 5!ondord Te,m1 and Conditions for laborolory Services, The person signing for lhe Oient/Compony acknowledge, that they ore either the Client or on outhon,ed ogent to Jho Client, that the Client agrees fo be raspor,sible for payment for the servioas on this Chain of Custody and agrees re MTA's fetms and condi!ions for foborotory seNicos uni es, c:ontroduolly bound otherNi,e. MTA's current terms and condttion, con be obloined by canto ding our occounttng deportment a! (559) 268• 7021. FL-SC"0O0S-04 A Page 4 of 5 .E .s u 0 u ~ Cl) ~ Cl/ .., Cl) i:r: "' ~ .. .. 0 ttl .., .. --2 = ~i (0 ro 01 0 ..... c:.,, - Sample Integrity Was temperature within range? i ---- Chemistry ~6"C Micro<lO"C Yes No ~~ff$_ Temp ·c If samples were taken today, is there evidence Yef ·-~ N/A that chilling has begun? Recvd co .... ,_,.,.~ Did all bottles arrive unbroken and intact? .. .. Yes-' No N/A Do samples have a hold time <72 hours? • Ye~----rJa N/A 125ml (A) 250ml [B} lliter (C) 40ml VOA (V) / ~-·· -"._}__,, Bacti Na:i.S203 - None IP) Cr6 Buffer (P) Borate carbonate Buffer HN03 {P) H2S04 (Pl NaOH (P) NaOH+ZnAc {PJ Dissolved Oxygen 300ml (P) None (AG) ., None (CG) 500ml Na2SiO~ 250ml {Brown P) 549 Na2Sz05 (AG) Na2S203 {AG) Thio/K Citrate NH4CJ (AG) 552 HCI (AG) None(CG)SOOml H3PQ" (AG) Other: Plastic 8aii; "!! Low Level Hg/Metals Double Bag Client Own Glass Jar: 125/ 250/ 500 Soil Tube: Brass/ Steel/ Plastic s g Encore Ascorboc Acid (AG) Voa lgal!on Cubitainer fOid al! bottle labels agree with CDC? Was a sufficient amount of sample received? Were correct containers ana preservatives received for the tests requested? :!=! 15. s p II) L, s p 0 .. SP Cl) ... s p li: s p ---~ -- .... ----.. ~ ,-~, MTA Bottles: Yev or No ........ ' ~- '-Yes ,N'o N/A Were there bubbles in VOA ~• ;I --.............., -· vials? {Valatlles Only) Yes ND--N/A ,...-:-,._ No N/A f Y:Jl Was PM notified of ·,, ............. c_~ d iscrepandes? ,:--·--.... Yes No.:"·N/A--N/A No PM: ...... ~~-' By/nme: Container Preservative Date/TI me/Initials· F F F F F ,'} ,:,- . , I ~---- \ j ) L}(/~--./ /_}Cjl_t.:__"-f/ @ {971 Labeled by: labels checked by: /l_!:.,./ @ Lr I r \ F l-SC-0003-06 --'-...../ Project Name: Project Number: Subject: Material Description : Location : MOORE TWINING .f.... t..·' IJ.J i.,. Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant and Golf Driving Range E40550.01 Minimum Resistivity, ASTM G187 Clayey sand B-4@3-5' Report Date: Sample Date: Sampled By: Tested By: Test Date: Laboratory Test Results, Minimum Resistivity M ASTM G187 8/22/2019 7/22/2019 JC MA 8/20/2019 Total Water Added, mis Resistivity, Ohm-cm 50 mis ----100 mis 150 mis 200 mls 250 mis 300 mis 350 mis 400 mis 450 mis Remarks : Min . Resistivity is 66,700 57,362 40,687 30,015 13,340 8,671 6,337 2,868 2,935 2,868 Ohm -cm Project Name: Project Number: Subject: Material Description: Location: MOORE TWINING ,, Proposed Drive Shack Restaurant and Golf Driving Range E40550.01 Minimum Resistivity, ASTM G187 Clayey sand B-9@0-5' Report Date: Sample Date: Sampled By: Tested By: Test Date : Laboratory Test Resu Its, Minimum Resistivity -ASTM G187 8/23/2019 7/22/2019 JC MA 8/20/2019 Total Water Added, mis Resistivity, Ohm-cm 50 mis ----100 mis 150 mis ---- 200 mis 250 mis 300 mis 350 mis 400 mis Remarks : Min . Resistivity is 62,698 41,354 27,347 18,009 13,340 10,005 7,337 8,004 7,337 Ohm-cm ----'----- • hii!J .JfAL. LUU.SP.Et . . I •• "'-1 · • !(pt 0 !!1£ a ,►• .. • \( --3100 Irvine Ave PC/Jf3 '49G-98 ! City of Newport Beach j,...--Mdt•----...a=«=IC,,,o..• ___ h_.-.,.. __ ._ ___ _ I.. .... ~'-Ji.Z@SS-4 : s •. • cq a NorCal Engineering Soils and Geotechnical Consultants l064l ~Iwnbolt Street Los Alamitos, CA 90720 (S62) 799-9469 Fax (S62) 799-9459 • Ctcii ,D FM May 3, 1999 Project Number 7533-98 Duran Constructi'Jn Con,o,f ,y 22901 Savi Ranch Parkw:a y, Suite A Yorbs Linda, California 9.:.~87 Att11. Mr. Ray Duran Re : Foundation Excavation Observations -Proposed Leonard's Golf Shop Expansion -Located at 3100 Irvine Avenue, In the City of Newport Beach, California Dear Mr. Duran : Pursuant to your request. this firm has observed and appro"dd fo41n,.:,, .· -, .civatfons for the above referenced project. The foundation excavations f ~; . , .. ·' •• • !'iition have been excavated Into competent native soils and are conS,C''. -~ • .... :~ .: their intended use. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Keith 0. Tuck Pr. ject Engin R.~.E. 8'1 Gregory H. Bennett Project Manager City of Newport Beach ... -• .. ga GEJ!P!U I ' ~~._ .• 1 ., NorCal Engineering Soils and Geotechnical Consultants 10641 Humbolt Street Los Alamitos. CA 90720 (562) 799-9469 Fax (562) 799-9459 '<P" May 6, 1999 Project Number 7533-98 Duran Construction Comrany 22901 Savi Ranch ?~r~way, Suite A Yorba Linda, California 928fl7 Attn: Mr. Ray Oc;an RE: Observation and Testing of Rough Grading Operations -Proposed Leonard's Golf Shop Expansion -Located at 3100 Irvine Avenue, in the City of Newport Beach, California Dear Mr. Duran: Pursuant to your request, this firm has observed and tested rough grading operations at the above rt!ferenced project. Results of the compaction tests are attached and locations of these tests are shown on the accompanying Site Plan. All work was performed in a~rdance with our Geotechnical Investigation dated July 16, 1998, Project Number 7533-98 and all present day standards of the Geotechnical Engineering Industry. Site Grading All vegetation and demolition debris was stripped and removed from the fill area prior to grading operations. The existing low density soils were removed to competent native soils, the exposed subgrade scarified moisture conditioned and then recompacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction . All excavations were-observed and approved by this firm prior to placemrant of fill material. The overexcavation consisted of a minimum of five honzontal feet or to the depth of fill placed. whichever is greater beyond the outside edge of all propcised foundations With exception. City of Newport Beach May~. 1999 Page2 SC '§if.k \ZWCSC--'<F' Project Number 8078-99 • •"·' 'P' Fill so ils placed were compacted to a minimum of 90% of the laboratory standard in lifts not in excess <if eight :, ,~hes in thickness . The maximum depth of fill placed was 2 feet. A track loader was utilized for compaction control. A water hose provided moisture control. The approximate limits of compacted fill are Indicated on the attached Site Plan. Laboratory/Field Testing The relative compaction was determined by Sand Cone Method (ASTM : D1556-82) and by the Drive Toh.A Method (ASTM: D29l.,). The maximum density cf the fill soils was obtained by the laboratory standard (ASTM : D1557-91) and results are shown on Table I. Compaction tests were performed a minimum of every 500 cubic yards placed and every two feet in depth of fill placed . Results of field density tests are presented in Table II. Conclusions The geotechnical engineering aspects of the grading have been observed and are in compliance with the geotechnical engineer's recommendations . The development has been graded to the approval of this firm and is suitable for its intended use . We appreciata this opportunity to be of service to you. If you hc1·1e any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted, NORCAL ENGINEERING ~i. Keith 0. Tucker Project Engineer R.G .E. 841 City NorCal Engineering f Newport Scott D. Spensiero Project Manager each • -----------Zil'BE™=:!!II _____ O_JIP.'l.111!114DIIIIIIIUlalllJOl!l!l .... llf~ -~ .. :~~,.,.. V • • ~-.. J May6, 1999 Page3 Project Number 8078-99 TABlEi MAXIMUM DENS!!Y TESTS (ASTM: D-1 !;§l:!11 Soil Type Classification Optimum Moisture Maximum Ory Density (lbs./cu.ft.) Date of Test 4/29/99 4/29/99 4/29/99 Clayey SILT 15.5 116.5 TABLE II SUMMARY OF COMPACTION TEST RESULTS Test No. 101 102 103 Percent Unit Wt Depth Moisture lbs./cu.ft. 2.0-2.5 18.9 105.2 1.0-1.5 17.1 116.1 0.0-0.5 14.3 107.1 •Depth below finished grade "Retest of falling tests after area reworked Relative Compaction 90 90 \)2 C ·t Nore I En8i:neering B ch 1 yo e po ea •-·--. Soil T_ype • J [!] EXISTING PRO SHOP a APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF COMPACTED FILL a a LUU vz ◄n» liJF' r -. t ' --------------0 ---J1 l=n J:zol RO SHOP XPANSION " a NorCal Engineering - \ tlNCH • 10 Fl!!!f SITE PLAN SOILS AND OEOTECHNtCAL CONSULTANTS WfAN APPRO)(IMATE LOCATION OP COMPACTION 'IHTS NIIIEC1 1S33-G8 .. , ' I I'' I I I ! I I I i I ! I I I ; . \ i ! I • ---------,--·--••ra~!!lll-■-llll!!IIIIIWWW-IP!!!lllli!IIW .. 4 ... IIIJlbll!I. ll'j.il&!PPR•IIII&~~ C .S \JP! ----:~J•• -v .,. Cit Soils fnvestlgatfon Proposed Leonard's Golf Shop Expansion 3100 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, California APP~OVF.O F0" ~r:J~.••r 1<;~1 •1,rr-e SCOTT f A..d,AS & A~3o-..,.:.. res. INC. Project Number 7533--98 July 16, 1998 n~nee tq_g each .. • r .. ( ( ( )Jj!!J..¥!W-•· ADJ! =•,p NorCal Engineering SOILS At'ID GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS 10641 HUMBOLT STREET LOS ALAMITOS, CA 90720 (512)799-9469 FAX (562)799-9459 July 16, 1998 Duran Construdion Corpor&ticn 22<101 Savi Ranch Parkw='}', Suite A Yorba Linda, California 92887 Attn: Mr. Ray Duran Project Number 7Saa.98 RE: Soils Investigation • P~·.1 posed Leonard's Golf Shop Expansion • Located at 3100 Irvine Avenue, in the City of Newport Beach, Califomia Dear Mr. Duran: Pursuant to your request, this firm has performed a Soils Investigation for the above referenced project in accardance with your authorization. The purpose of this investigat1 _ • !s to evaluate the geotechnical conditions of the subject site and to provide recomn,endations for the proposed golf shop expansion. This soils engineering report presents the finding of our study along with conclusions and recommendations for development. We appreciate this opportunity to ba of service to you. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to ccntact the undersigned. Respectfully submitt NORCAL ENGINEE ~ttll l 7:i-~"""'CA// Keith D. Tucker Project Engineer R.G.E. 841 '1t-il liUlf Mark A. Burkholder Project Manager City of Newport Beach r C "_1.ti£lJii-* a a:.za V ::;:: ' . ,. y. July 16, 1998 Page2 Project Number 7533-~8 Structural Considerations This geotechnical engineering report presents the findings of our study along with engineering analysis and recommendations for the proposed development. It is proposed to construct a one story, 1,300 square feet addition to the existing golf shop facility. Other improvements may consist of asphaltic and/or concrete parking and driveway areas and landscaping. Final building plans shall be reviewed by this firm prior to submittal for city approval to determine the need for any additional study and revised recommendations pertinent to the proposed development, if necessary. Site Description The property lies within the frvine Golf Course in the city of Newport Beach. The proposed expansion area is currently covered with asphaltic concrete pavement and planter areas. field Investigation The purpose of the investigatiJn was to explore the subsurface conditions E.nd to provide preliminary geotechnical engineering design parameters for evaluation of the site with respect to the proposed development. The Investigation consisted of the placement of two subsurface exploratory borings by hand auger to a maximum depth of 12 fee, placed at accessible locations on the site. The explorations were visually classified and logged by a field engineer with locations of the subsurface explorations shown on the attached Site Plan. NorCat Engineering City of ewport each .. , . .,.,... .. ----------------ullll!l!!,A!!~tl!!.ll!A•Jll ... !l!l!l .. 111&•t"'.t.l!ll.•IIIIQ~,...---••--111110!!111!!!11.t!ll!l!.>~{9Sll!'l2-- , . . -·~..._...... "' 1 • r ( July 16, 1998 Page3 Project Number 7533-98 The exploratory explorations revealed the existing earth materials to consist of surficial fill and natural soil zones . A detailed description of the subsurface conditions is listed on the excavation logs in Appendix A These soils are described as follows: Fill: Surficial fill soils consisting of slightly clayey SAND were encountered in both borings to ;;. depth of approximately 12 inches . These soils were noted to be moist and loose. Natural : Native, undisturbed soils also classifying as slightly clayey SAND were observed beneath the upper fill soils. The native soils were observed to be dense and moist. Clayey SILT materials were then encountered beneath the $clndy soils. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 7 feet below existing grades. Laboratory Tests Relatively undisturbed samples of the subsurface soils were obtained to perform laboratory testing and analysis for direct shear, consolidation tests, and to determine in-place moisture/densities. These undisturbed samples consisted of one inch rings with iriside diameter of 2.5 inches. Bulk bag samples were obtained in the upper soifs far expansion index taots and maximum density tests. Wall taadlng9 on the order of 2,000 lbs.nin.ft. and maximum compression loads on the order of 20 kips were utilized for testing and design purposes. All test result$ are included in Appendix 8, unless otherwise noted. ( . (_ l .' (. July 16, 1998 Page4 Project Number 7533-98 A The field moisture content (ASTM:O 2216) and the dry densities of the ring samples were determined in the laboratory. This data is listed on the logs of borings. 8. C. Maximum density tests (ASTM: 0•1557•78) were performed on typical samples of the upper soils. Results of these tests are shown on Table I. Expansion index tests in accordance with the Uniform Building Code Standard No. 29·2 were performed on remoldecl samples of the upper soils to determine the expansive characteristics and to proviae any necessary recommendations far reinforcement of the slabs--on.grade and the foundations. Results of t:iese tests are provided on Table II. D. Direct shear tests (ASTM: Q..3080) were performed on undisturbed and disturbed samples of the subsurface sons. These tests were performed to determine parElmeters for the calculation of the safe bearing capacity. The test is performed undsr saturated conditions at loads of 500 lbs./sq.ft., 1,000 lbs./sq.ft., and 2,000 !bs./sq.ft. with results shown on Plate A E. Consolidation tests (ASTM: 0-2435) were performed on undisturbed samples to determine the differential and total settlement which may be anticipated based upon the proposed loads. Water was added to the samples at a surcharge of one KSF and the settlement curves are plotted on Plate e. NorCal Engineering City of Newport Beach • r ('· C ... ... ----------•w-i:::c:::,:4•".'!=•-~•·-"-'-·~&•AP.'l .. '!'!1.t _191: .. a,.,,41b•F..,., --""'ll◄♦llllll"'-=.,.,,.-,-, ,,__ ~_.., ••• ~-~ ·'~"·--¥ T July 16 , 1998 Project Number 7533·9B Pages F. The potential corrosive effects of the on-site soils to concrete are being determined in the laboratory per EPA test method 9038. The test results will be provided in an addendum to this report Conclusions and Recommendations Based upon our evaluations, the proposed development is accgptable from a geotechnical engineering standpoint. By following the recommendations and guide :ines set forth in our repoit, the structures will be safe from excessive settlements under the anticipated design loadings and conditions. The proposed development shall meet all requirements of the City Building Ordinance and will not impose any adverse effect on existing adjacent structures. It is recommended that site inspections be performed by a representative of this firm during an grading and construction of the development to verify the findings and recommendations documented in this report. Any unusual conditions which may be encountered in the course of the project develcpment may require the need fer additional study and revised recommendations. Sita Grading Recommendations Any vegetation shall be removed and hauled from proposed grading areas prior to the start of grading operations. Any removed soils may be reutilized as compacted fill once any defeterious material or oversized matenars (in excess of eight inches) are removed. All grading operations shall be performed in accordance with the attached •specifications for Compacted Fill Operations.,. NorCal Engineering h City of Newport eac ' •• ,. . C ( July 16, 1998 Pages 3 s:qs Project Number 7533-98 F. The potential corrosive effects of the on-site soils tn concrete are being determined in the laboratory per EPA test method 9038. The test results will be provided in an addendum to this report. Conclusions and Recommendations Based upon our evaluations, the proposed development is acceptable from a geotechnical engineering standpoint. By following the recommendations and guidelines set forth in our report. the structures will be safe from excessive settlements under the anticipated design loadings and conditions. The proposed development shall meet all requirements of the City Building Ordinance and will not impose any adverse effect on existing adjacent structures. It is recommended that site inspections be performed by a representative of this firm during all grading and construction of the development to verify the findings and recommendations documented in this report Any unusual conditions which mav be encauntered in the course of the project development may require the need for additional study and revised recommendations. Site Grading Recommendations Any vegetation shall be removed and hauled from proposed grading areas prior to the start of grading operations. Any removed soils may be reutilized as compacted fill once any deleterious material or oversized materials (in excess of eight inches) are removed. '\II grading operations shall be performed in accordance with the attached •specifications for Compacted Fill Operations." NorCal Engineering City of ewport Beach 1 ........ ······-·-···-_________ __. ....... __ _ I r ~ I I I r. I . ( ( l July 16, 1998 Pages Projed Number 7533-98 AJI upper disturbed soils (±12 inches) in areas to provide structural support shall be removed to competent native material, the exposed surface scarified to a depth of 12 inches, brought to the proper moisture content and compacted to a minimum of 90% of the laboratory standard (ASTM: 0-1557-78) prior to placement of any additional compacted fill soils, foundations, slabs-on-grade and pavement. Grading shall extend a minimum of five horizontal feet or to the depth of vertical overexcavation, whichever is greater, beyond the outside edge of the perimeter foundation where possible. A diligent search shall be conducted during grading operations in an effort to uncover any underground strudures, irrigation or utilitv lines. If found, these structures and lines shall be either removed or properly abandoned prior to the proposed construction. Care should be taken to provide or maintain adequate lateral support for all adjacent improvements and structures at all times during the grading operations and construction phase. Adequate drainage away from the structures. pavement and slopes should be provided at all times . Temporary Excavations Temporary unsurcharged excavations over 4 feet In height in the existing site materials may be trimr::ad at a 1 to 1(horizontal to vertical) gradient Cuts over 8 feet in height must ba assessed by this firm prior to excavation activities. In areas where soil with little or no binder is encountered, where adverse geological conditions are exposed. or Where excavadons are adjacent to existing structures, shoring, slot-cutting, or flatter excavations may be requlrGd. The temporary cut slope gradients given above do not preclude local raveling and sloughing. All excavat;ons shall be made in accordance with the requirements of CAL-OSHA and other public agencies having jurisdiction. I • ( C ( July 16, 1998 Page 7 Foundation Design Project Number 7533-98 The foundations may be designed utilizing safe being capacity of 1,500 psf for an embedded depth of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade into approved compacted fill soils or competent native soils. All continuous foundations shall be reinforced with a minimum of one #5 bar, top and bottom. A representative cf this firm shall insped all foundation excavations prior to pouring concrete. Care should be taken when excavating foundations adjacent to the existing structure so that proper lateral support is not removed from existing foundations. This may require the slot-cutting of new foundations in the area. Lateral Resistance The following values may be utilized in resisting lateral loads imposed on the structure. Requirements of the Uniform Building Code should be adhered to when the coefficient of fridion and passive pressures are combined. Coefficient of Friction -0.35 Equivalent Passive Fluid Pressure = 200 lbsJcu.ft. Maximum Passive Pressure = 2,000 lbs./cu.ft. The passive pressure recommendations are valid only for either competent native soils and/or compacted fill sons. settlement Analysis Resultant pressure curves for the consolidation tests are shown on Plate B. Computations utilizing these curves end the recommended safe bearing capacities reveal that the foundations will experience settlements on the order of 1/2 Inch and differential settlements of less than 1/4 inch. -I • r. ( .... ......... July I 6, 1998 Page a Retaining Wall Design Parameters Project Number 7533-98 Active earth pressures against retaining walls will be equal to the pressures developed by the following fluid densities. These values are for granular backfill material placed adjacent to the walls at various ground stopes above the walls . Surface Slope of Retained Materials (Horizontal to Vertical) Level Sto 1 4to 1 3to 1 2 to 1 Equivalent Fluid Density llb./cu. ft.) 30 35 38 40 45 Any applicable short-term construction surcharges and seismic forces should be added to tti9 above lateral pressure values. All walls shall be waterJ)roofed as needed and protected from hydrostatic pressure by a reliable pennanent subdrain system. Slab Recommendatfans Alf concrete slabs-on.grade shall be a minimum of four inehes in thickness and may be placed on approved compacted fill soils. A vapor barrier should be utilized in areas which would be sensitive to the infiltration of moisture. This membrane should be placed beneath a 4 inch thick sand layer and not directly beneath the concrete due to the possibility of curling of the slab. Slabs shall be reinforced with a minimum of #3 bars. placed 18 inche. on center in both directions, positioned mid-height in the slab. All concrete slab areas to receive floor coverings should be moisture tested ta meet all manufacturer requirements prior to placement. NorCal Engineerin City of Newport each (. ( ( ( L ,· .... _;;;t@--Sil .).$ :.eyss •4A •• r July 16, 1998 Paga9 Project Number 7533-sa Slab subgrade soils shall be moisture conditioned to approximately 120% of optimum moisture levels immediately prior to placement of concrete. Closure The recommendations and conclusions contained in this report are based upon the soil conditions uncovered in our test excavations. No warranty of the soil condition between our excavations is implied. NcrCal Engineering should be notified for possible further recommendations if unexpected to unfavorable conditions are encountered during construction phase. It is the responsibility of the owner to ensure that all information within this report is submitted to the Architect and appropriate Engineers for the project. This firm should have the opportunity tt) review the final plans to verify that all our recommendations are incorporated. This report and all conclusions are subject to the review of the controlling authorities for the project A preconstructfan conference should be held between the developer, ger, • al contractor, grading contractor, city inspector, architect, and soil engineer to clarify any questions relating to the grading operations and subsequent construction. Our representative should be present during the grading operations and construction phase to certify that such recommendations are complied within the field. This soils investigation has been conducted in a manner consistent with the level of care and sklll exercised by members of our profession currently practicing 1Jnder similar conditions In the Southam California area. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. NorCal Engineering City of ewport each .. ( ( C .Ai£1!¥.SE . LS-.-◄# a :.w= \"Y" July 16, 1998 Page 10 Project Number 7533-98 SPECIFICATIONS FOR PLACEMENT OF COMPACTED FILL Preparation Any existing low density soils and/or saturated soils shall be removed to competent natural soil under the inspection of the Sails Engineering Firm. After the exposed surface has been cleansed of debris and/or vegetation, it shall be scarified until it is uniform in consistency, brought to the proper moisture content and compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction (in accordance with ASTM: 0•1557•78). Material For Fill The on-site soils or approved import soils may be utilized for the compacted fill provided they are free of any deleterious materials and shall not contain any reeks, brick, asphaltic concrete, concrete or other hard materials greater than eight inehes in maximum dimensions. Any import soil must be approved by the Soils Engi'teering firm a minimum of 24 hours prior to importation of site. Placement of Compacted F111 Soils The a~proved fill soils shall be placed in layers not excess of six irrchei. in thickness. Each lift shall be uniform in thickness and thoroughly blended. The fill soils shall be brnught to Within 15% cf the optimum moisture content, unless otherwise specified by the Soils Engineering firm. Each lift shall be compacted to a minimum of 90% rerative compaction (in accordance with ASTM: D-1557-78) and approved prior to the placement of the next layer of soil. Compaction tests shall be Obtained at the discretion of the Soils Engineering firm but to a minimum of ona test for every 500 cubic yards praeed and/or for every 2 feet of compacted fift placed. NorCal Engineering City of Newport Beach ... ' ( l .. !. '<? QUlt .>\91'~ July 16. 1998 Page 11 Project Number 7533-98 The minimum relative compaction shall be obtained in accordance with accepted methods in the construction industry. The final grade of the structural areas shall be in a dense and smooth condition prior to placement of slabs-on.grade or pavement areas. No fill soils shall be placed, spread ,:,r compacted during unfavorable weather canditions. When the grading is interrupted by heavy rains, compaction operations shall not be resumed until approved by the Soils Engineering firm. Grading Observations The controlling govemmentat agencies should be notified prior to commencement of any grading operations. This finn recommends that the grading operations be conducted undE'r the observation of a Soils Engineering fl. 11 as deemed necessary. A 24 hour notice must be provided to this firm prior to the time of our initial inspection. Observation shall incJude the clearing and grubbing operations to assure that all unsuitable materials have been properly removed; approve the exposed subgrade in aregs to receive fill and in areas where excavation has resulted in the desired finished grade and designate areas of overexcavation; and perform field compaction tests to determine relative compadion achieved during fill placement In addition, all foundation excavations shall be observed by the Soils Engineering firm to confirm that appropriate bearing materials are present at the design grades and recommend any modifications to construct footings. NorCal Engineering City of Newport Beach ( ( ,,. .... - J (!] EXISTING PRO SHOP 0 • a j21f~I RO SHOP A N SI -0 N a • ... NorCal Engineering sorts AND OEOTECHNlCM. CONSULTANTS ~ ~ Bl -; t • Al'PAOXtMAT! EXPLORATION9 • r . (. ( l . l V • .AP.> p July 16, 1998 Projed Number 7533-98 APPENDICES (In order of appearance) Appendix A • Logs of Exploratory Explorations •Logs of Test Borlngs B1 and B2 Appendix B • Laboratory Analysis -Table I • Maximum Dry Density Tests -Table II • Expansion Index Tests •Prate A • Direct Shear Tests •Prate B • Consolldatfon Tests NorCal Engineering City o e Beach .. • f July 16, 1998 Project Number 7533-98 C APPENDIX A ( ( C ..... - City 1 each i . _______ . ··- ( ( ( ( MAJOR OIVISIONS rYP!CAL NAMES COARSE GRAINED SOILS (llflltl IHIIN 10" • 0, IIAIIIIU, II I.AAflll tltU ~00 811'" IIZO G~AVELS :n;il .. ,!, ,~ (Lll'~,I OA "' ,r-...i -r .. G.t .. ;(; '3l4't1r;.t. ~~,A..,f••ZAKO MIZrUAn, ... -.•-~ ~" -~ ,,.vts ,oa11., 011.,~r~ ·""~-s OIi '"-'Vt:.• l4MO Mtr'!"~ts, vr'!":.t 011 110 ,t1tts. ul'?AV~l.s NO ,111tsJ i ~,- (MO/II fltAll l01'r-------t~iB---+--------------..i 0/t t:OUII ,.t.1t:• rtOH II '-'.fllA rNAN ~ No.• lll"lt lt~IJ SANDS CLEAN SANDS • • SP • 111'1~£. dAOl4 UN/}$• <fAA'ftV $ANDI, V,rt.8 U NO '1NII. H0/11.1 MA/JtJ> UNJI o• •.umu 4Alta1. u,,u o• NO n,o . IMO/ti 1IWI to,C ,_ ____ "'"""'1,.,,.-'!"t-_...., _____________ .,. o, 40AIIII IIUIJ• rid/I II IIUUO fHAII 1NI NO.-# l16VI 11111 SANDS 1: :sM WITH FINES~~,_.,._,.-________ __,,. ,..,,ll#Ul&I AJlt ~ SC '""""' . SILT$ AND CLAYS ll.JtH/10 Ull/1 LIii tlUH IOJ ~ . 1/ldAIAN~ Al'l0 ANO tll/W '111~ 6NIJI • IIOCJt ML ,u1111.an"" ~ '"" #lla1 u fJI.A'lff IUI '11111 IIA/tr N,,Ufla/W. IIIOIIIAMlt: ~PS o, t.tnt ,0 I/Oil/II IIUltlttrr. 0.Atll'Ur A.al• 4Alillf ~, 411.11' ~ UAII ~ .... FINE GRAINED • SOILS :: OL OIIIAIIIO 111.n Altll MIAllltJ IU'r Al# 1110111 tltAIIM1' t-----------v.o~-,.._ ____________ ...,. ., 11Af"Ul4 II MH IMfJAIMlfl 411,.1$~ ,~ IJlaOIIMIM Mau.Ill nw, ,,NI IMt1I' "* IU'r nu, AA#II an. 600 IIOl ltZI SI/JS AND CLAYS ~ ~ • IIJOf/10 '"'" 110A1 rHAN 101 ~ ~ CH ~OH HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS O•~~Ntt: t::.A'!'I o, 111:11111,1 tO 11,~,, >-_,1J~1t:1~, Oit~ANlf: Ill,:'$. lfAIN~AII, eu111,1t.At10NI. nu /IOIIIIIM. tNAll~'!'t.#•J~.c, o, t"IO flOU/lt AAt dlll~Y~rto ,, ~IIIJJUtlfllll (I, llt,U, ln1J:~1 NorCal Engineering SOtl.S AND OEOTECHNtG\LCONSUL TAl'tiS IJft~tEO SOIL CUSSIFlcATIOH SYSTEM r-:::,_.,,~----i!i~~~~port Beach :L-------·-···· ····• ~--• ...... ~---···- I ' • . ,, •.. ( (_ C. 1O.s 119.7 1s.s 114.2 19.7 109.S 17.7 108.7 14.6 111.6 R/E R oescR1PnON OF SU8SUAFACE MATEAIAt.S fi_-..... -------------------~ ! -nu 1111&1W1, AHUII e., ,., "'' I.OCAflOJI o, Mt ICIIIINO ~ ,., 1.,, nw1 o. CIIIWICI, IUIIUII.U:I COllltftOHS ..,_, OlfllA &I GNU ~nCIIIS UV .,,.,. ~IOMGt &f net I.GU,TIQII lllnt fkl MSIACII a, ffltt-fMI O,lf& -.UIHflO •1 • 1ld\l,tc:AflCN ~ ~Tl&&&. c:Gtll:llftQIIS CIICtiVieTlqO. 0 :~ s-1 \ . ill -Sli~lhtlY clayey SAND, --... ~--WQWll noist,loose Native -Sligt.tly clayey SAND, reddish brown, imist, dense R • ---------------------1 af ·"-~_c_~_y_ey_s_m_~_,_~_~_1,. __ ~_-f_f_,_noist ___ ~~--1 R 10 . . . . ~\-. . . . ~-. . . . 25• . . . 30 .. . . ~ Mediun to c:carse grained, smm, reddish brot-m, dense, wet Clayey SAND, reddish brown, dense, wet • I r-----_.,___..._ __ _. 3S...__..,_ _________________ ..,__-I SNlft.CfflU ffl llocl tare Stanard Sp1tt Spoo11 lfftf SMple M1E DltUJD: 7-13-98 EQUtlfUf Usta: Hand Auger ClfUIM\tEI Lml.: 1.0' NorCal Engineerine . SOILS ANDOSOTECHM& CONSULTAfrs LOG Off aoi1ica 1 t1 • PROJml' 7533-98 , roAni1 ,.,.-; i~~" 1\1nnrt Beach . •. r (" ( (. .. 111 ~ ae,cAtPTIQN QP SUBSUAFACS: MATSAIAl,S la 12 -Ii Is g· i n11t IUIIIIUY &IN&tt -• Af lt!S UICATIOlt <I, fJn IOIIIXO 111!1 6f l'NC ftwt 0, i ¥ I . OIIIU.INQ. UIIIIJ'.IOt OQIIGlftOIII l&AI OlfJU &f Ollf.lt ~IIOII ~ '"'" ON.11101 f!I At 1'-1 \ 1C&flOII lllftl ~ IUII.GI a, ft411. fkt l:SAfA -.utNfCO IS • Slld\1.•1c,.trQM 0 41 &C~ <IIIIIOlftOllt lltCCl1iN'1UII. Fill -Slightly cl.ayey tJ.9 122.4 R brown, aoist, loose 1S.9 114. R Native -5 , 5 bxcwn, ~ist, dense Clayey SILT grey/bratm, rrr>ist, stiff -increase in sand content with depth 10 r. 25 30 as-------------------------t SNlll.£fflU ffl lad CON I!) lu1t Salple S,_.ftdafd S,1tt Spoon (ll Ja, SMple lf,rt Sdpl1 NorCal Engineering I _SOtl.SAND<J!arECHNfCALCONSULTA?JTS F!OJm1' 7533-98 GA1E OIJLWI: 7-13-98 tQUtftllf usm: Hand Auger W1!1 t!Vtl.: None encountered 1.oe a,· aoiiiN"a 1 12 • I I ,·•• I ! I I I I . !C i i ( ( (. C. ,4:,a::Jac.. cwJJ._ azys • July 16, 1998 Project Number 7533-98 APPENDIXB ______ .___ _______ , ..... . --.""Ill ; ' July 16, 1998 Projed Number 7533-98 l ! : I . . ( TABLEI MAXIMUM DENSITY TESTS (ASTM: D-1557-78) : (" Optimum Maximum Ory Sample Classification Moisture Density (lbs./cu.ft.} I 81 @0-2' slighUy clayey SANO 9.0 128.0 82@2.5-3 clayey SILT 15.5 11e.s TABLE II :c EXPANSIQ~ IND§X TE§IS I (U.B.C. STD. 29·2) I Expansfan sampre crassificatian rnctex -( 81 @0-2' slightry clayey SAND 05 82@2.5-3 ctayeySILT 74 ( NorCal Engineering City of Newpo Beach C 2soo------...... -----,r--.-.. -.-.-.-.-. -. ..,.._-_-,-.-.-.---.~.-.-.-.-.-. -. -.. -r-.-.-.-.-.---~-• t -■ ■ • • ' • • • • • • • ' ' ■ .. -•· - ~ i . r ,,, !'""~; ~ i 500 -,,. t I I r l ' i I I L ' I • I ' . l , I f I I [ .. I I . I • • • I .. I I 0 0 'I I I 11 I I J I [ I I I I I soo 1000 lSOO 2000 IIOllllll StllESS (PSF) 80RJII& DEP11I -C ORI 1111Slt111£ STJIIOl 11£J1Sffl CClfT'EIIT lltl9£R (FE£T) (DE&RWI (PSFJ (,CF) (1) I 1 2.0 35 100 119. 7 10.s 0 2 2.0 33 75 122.4 13.9 A 2 4.0 27 375 114.8 16.9 0 NOTE : TESTS PERFORMED ON SATURATED SAMPLES UNLESS SHOW 8£1.0W . (FM) FlrLO MOISTURE 2500 TESTS P!RFOIU«ED OH UNOISTUA8£D SAMPLES UNLESS SHONH BELON, (R) W49L£S AEMOUIEO AT 901 OF IIJXUUI ORY DENSJ1Y NorCal Engineerfn1f ! SOfLS AND OE'.OTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS PROJECT 7533-99 OUltCT Sff£AA TEST AESut TS Pl.ate A 3IIOO .. -.. • -2 • I i ' I I I I I I I i I I I J NOTE: WATER ADDED AT fGIIIU. I I 1 PRESSURE AT 1.0 1SF i I ' I ! I Q I I I I j I I ! -,-. -i ~ i---...._ ~ -i-~--t--, ~'"" r. 2 ~r-~ I, " ~ ..... " r-..... ' , .. r,.. • " ~ ~ 6 ( 8 10 0.1 l.'.5 1.0 5 10 20 40 IIOIIW. PRESSUIE (151) QIM DEITH DAY MOISTURE LIQUID PlASTICJn S1IIHll .... (FEET) DEIISlff CGITEII' LIIIJT If llO (ICF) CSJ (S) (SJ I 1 4.0 114.2 15.5 C. 0 1 a.o 108.7 17.7 &\ a -QINE.SSJ(II CAI) FtWI IIIDlffllE -• •m am ---IIElmm (II) SMll£ .... AT tDI OF NU!IIM OU OEJISllY NorCal Engineering son.s AND OEOTECffNICAL CONSULTANTS CONSOLJOATJOH TEST A!SUt.TS PROJECT -- V . • ,.J co ·7Skf.ZLP a. Prepared For: Duran Construction Corporation 22901 Savi Ranch Parkway, Suite A Yorba Linda, Califomia 92887 Project Number 7533-98 July 16, 1998 o a .a \$-11111111 ... . I . ...,, .. CW:--s:q a N orCal Engineering SOILS AND GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS 10641 HUMBOLT STREET LOS ALAMITOS. CA 90720 (562)799-9469 FAX (S62)799-94S9 • A .&»',# July 16, 1998 Project Number 7533·98 Durar, Construction Corporation 22901 Savi Ranch Parkway, Suite A Yorba Linda, California 92887 Attn: Mr. Ray Duran RE: Solls Investigation -Proposed Leonard's Golf Shop Expansion - Located at 3100 Irvine Avenue, in the City of Newport Beach, California Dear Mr. Duran: Pursuant to your request, this finn has performed a Soils Investigation for the above referenced project in accordance with your au1horization. The purpose of this investigation is to evaluate the geotechnical conditions of the subject site and to provide recommendations for the proposed golf sttop expansion. This soils engineering report presents the finding of our study along With conclusions and recommendations for development We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you . If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted, NORCAL ENGINEERIN ~l l<eith 0. Tucker Project Engineer R.G.E. 841 No. G41 p. 12/31/00 Or(; ,-!\(..'i'; 11,JJUUA/ Mark A. Burkholder Project Manager City of ewport Beach ------- • I I !• I ... July 16, 1998 Page2 L4§j.JE-USES.£ <? 3 Project Number 7533-98 Structural Considerations This geotechnical engineering report presents the findings of our study along with engineering analysis and recommendations for the proposed development. ft Is proposed to construct a one story, 1,300 square feet addition to the existing golf shop facility. Ottier improvements may consist of asphaltic and/or concrete parking an1 driveway areas and landscaping. Final building plans shall be reviewed by this firm prior to submittal for city approval to determine the need for any additional study and revised recommendations pertir.ent to the proposed development, if necessary. Site Description The property lies within the Irvine Golf Course in the city of Newport Beach. The proposed expansion area is currently covered with asphaltic concrete pavement and planter areas. Field Investigation The purpose of the investigation was to explore the subsurface conditions and to provide preliminary geotechnical engineering design parameters for evaluation of the site with respect to Uta proposed development. The investigation consisted of the placement of two subsurface exploratory borings by hand auger to a maximum depth of 12 feel placed at accessible locations on the site. The explorations were visually classified and logged by a field engineer with locations of the subsurface explorations shown on the attached Site Plan . NorCal Engineering City of Newport Beach ;., . July 16, 1998 Paga3 w_s . cqs . Project f'.tumbar 7533-98 The exploratory explorations revealed the existing earth materials to consist of surficial fill and natural soil zones. A detailed description of the subsurface conditions is listed on the excavation logs in Appendix A. These soils are described as follows: Fill : Surficial fill soils consisting of slightly clayey SAND were encountered in both borings to a depth of approximately 12 inches. These soils were noted to be moist and loose. Natural : Native. undisturbed soils also classifying as slightly clayey SANO were observed beneath the upper fill soils. The native sails were observed to be dense and moist. Clayey SILT materials were then encountered beneath the sandy soils. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 7 feet below existing grades. Laboratory Tests Relatively undisturbed samples of the subsurface soils were obtained to perform faboratory testing and analysis for direct shear, consolidation t9sts, and to determine in-place moisture/densities. These undisturbed samples consisted of one inch rings with inside diameter of 2.5 inches. Bulk bag samples were obtained in the upper soils for expansion index tests end maximum density tests. Wall loadings on the order of 2,000 lbs./lin.ft. and maximum compression loads on the order of 20 kips were ldilized for testing and design purposes. All test results are included in Appendix B, unless otherwise noted. NorCal Engineering City of Newport Beach ·, .. _, "(F July 16, 1998 Project Number 7533-98 Page4 A The field moisture content (ASTM:D 2216) and the dry densities of the ring samples were determined in the laboratory. This data is listed an the logs of borings. B. Maximum density tests (ASTM: 0-1557-78) were performed on typical samples of the upper soils. Results of these tests are shown on Tabte J. C. Expansion index tests in accordance with the Uniform Building Code Standard No. 29-2 were performed on remolded samples of the upper soils to determine the expansive characteristics and to provide any necessary reccmmendations for reinforcement of the slabs-on-grade and the foundations. Results of these tests are provided on Table If. D. Direct shear tests (ASTM: D-3080) were performed on undisturbed and disturbed samples of the subsurface soils. These tests were performed to determine parameters for the calculation of the safe bearing capacity. The test is performed under saturated conditions at loads of 500 lbs./sq.ft.. 1,000 lbs./sq.ft., and 2,000 lbs./sq.ft. with results shown on Plate A. E. Consolidation tests (ASTM: 0-2435) were performed on undisturbed samples to determine the differential and total settlsment which may be anticipated based upon the proposed toads. Water ,,._,~s added to the samples at a surcharge of one KSF and the settlement curves ere plotted on Plate e. NorCal Engineering July 16, 1998 Project Number 7533-98 Pages F. The potential corrosive effects of the on•site soils to concrete are being determined in the laboratory per EPA test method 9038. The test results will be provided in an addendum to this report. Conclusions and Recommendations Based upon our evaluations, the proposed development is acceptable from a geotechnical engineering standpoint. By following the recommendations and guidelines set forth in our report, the structures will be safe from excessive settlements under the anticipated design loadings and conditions. The proposed development shall meet all requirements of the City Building Ordinance and will not impose any adverse effect on existing adjacent structures. It is recommended that site inspections be performed by a representative of this firm during all grading and construction of the development to verify the findings and recommendations documented in this report. Any unusual conditions which may be encountered in 1he course of the project development may require the need for additional study and revised recommendations. Sita Grading Recommendations Any vegetation shall be removed and hauled from proposed grading areas prior to the start of grading operations. Any removed sons may be reutilized as compacted fill once any deleterious material or oversized materials (in excess of eight inches) are removed. All grading operations shall be performed in accordance with the attached •specifications for Compacted Fill Operations." NorCal Engineering City of Newport Beach .. -. July 16, 1998 Page a Project Number 7533-98 All upper disturbed soils (!12 inches) in areas to provide structural support shall be removed to competent native material, the exposed surface scarified to a depth of 12 inches, brought to the proper moisture content and compacted to a minimum of 90% of the laboratory standard (ASTM: D-1557•78) prior to placement of any additional compacted fill soils, foundations, slabs--on..grade and pavement. Grading shall extend a minimum of five horizontal feet or to the depth of vertical overexcavation, whichever is greater, beyond the outside edge of the perimeter foundation where possible. A aiiigent search shall be conducted during grading operations in an effort to uncover '.:iny underground structures. irrigation or utility lines. If found, these structures and lines shall be either removed or properly abandoned prior to the proposed construction. Care should tie taken to provide or maintain adequate lateral support for all adjacent improvements and structures at all times during the grading operations and construction phase. Adequate drainage away from the structures, pavement and sfopes should be provided at all times. Tempofilrv Excavations Temporary unsurcharged excavations over 4 feet in height in the existing site materiars may be trimmed at a 1 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) gradient Cuts over 8 feet in height must be assessed by this firm pri , • to excavation activities. rn areas where soil with little or no binder is encountered. where adverse geological conditions are exposed, or where excavations are adjacent to existing structures, shoring, slot-cutting, or flatter excavations may be required. The temporary cut srope gradients given above do not preclude focal raveling and sloughing. All excavations shall be made In accordance with the requirements of CAL-OSHA and other public agencies having iurisdiction. NorCal Engineering City of Newport Beach I ,J July 16, 1998 Page7 T Foundation Design ½§J.,j.C!4E 12 !i(P Project Number 7533--98 The foundations may be designed utilizing safe being capacity of 1,500 psf for an embedded depth of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade into approved compacted fill soils or competent native soils. All continuous foundations shall be reinforced with a minimum of one #5 bar, top and bottom. A representative of this firm shall inspect all foundation excavations prior to pouring concrete . Care should be taken when excavating foundations adjacent to the existing structure so that proper lateral support is not removed from existing foundations. This may require the slot.cuiling of new foundations in the area. Lateral Resistance The following values may be utilized in resisting lateral loads Imposed on the structure. Requirements of the Uniform Building Code should be adhered to when the coefficient of friction and passive pressures are combined. Coefficient of Friction -0.35 Equivalent Passive Fluid Pressure = 200 lbs./cu.ft. Maximum Passive Pressure= 2,000 lbs./cu.ft. The passive pressure recommendations are valid only for either competent native sous and/or compacted fill soifs. Settlement Analysis Resultant pressure curves for the consolidation tests are shown on Prate B. Computations t..1ilitting these cutves and the recommended safe bearing capacities reveal that the foundations Will experience settlements on the order of 1/2 f nch and differential settlements of less than 1/4 Inch. NorCal Engineering City of Newport Beach ( .. ,} .., I i,,, July 16, 1998 Page a Retaining Wall Design Parameters Project Number 7533-98 Active earth pressures against retaining walls will be equal to the pressures developed by the following fluid densities. These values are for granular backfill material placed adjacent to the walls at various ground slopes above lhewalls. Surface Slope of Retained Materials Equivalent Fluid (Horizontal to Vertical) Density (lb./cu.fl.) Level 30 5to1 35 4to 1 38 3to 1 40 2to 1 45 Any applicable short.term construction surcharges and seismic farces should be added to the abov? lateral pressure values. AH walls .shall be waterproofed as needed and protected from hydrostatic pressure by a reliable permanent subd,ain system. Stab Recommendations All concrete slabs-on.grade shall be a minimum of four inches in thickness and may be placed on approved compacted fill soils. A vapor barrier should be utilized in areas which woul:I be sensitive to the infiltration of moisture. This mem~rane should be ptae:KI beneath a 4 inch thick sand layer and not directly beneath 1he concrete due to the possibility of curling of the slab. Slabs shall be reinforced wm, a minimum of #3 bars, placed 18 Inches on center in both directions, positioned mid-height in the slab. All concrete slab areas to receive floor coverings should be moisture tested to meet all manufacturer requirements prior to placemen , . NorCal Engineering City of Newport Beach ...,, July 16, 1998 Page9 IQ!£~(-U.2.IE <tF V .« :a {.:Jl!· Project Number 75~98 Slab subgrade soils shall be moisture e4.inditioned to approximately 120% of optimum moisture levels immediately prior to placement of concrete. Closure The recommendations and conclusions contained in this report are based upon the soil conditions uncovered in our test excavatic.ns. No warranty of the soil condition between our excavations is implied. NorCal Engineering should be notified for possible further recommendations if un,1xpected to unfavorable conditions are encountered during construction phase. n is the responsibility of the owner to ensure that all information within this report ls submitted to the Architect and appropriate Engineers for the project. This firm should have the opportunity to review the final plans to verify that all our recommendations are incorporated. This report and all conclusions are subject to the review of the controlling authorities for the project. A preconstruction conference should be held between the developer, general contractor, grading contractor, city inspector, architect, and soil engineer to clarify ar.1 questions relating to the grading operations and subsequent construction. Our representative should be present during the grading operations and construction phase to certify that such recommendationt are complied within the field. This soils investigation has been conducted in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill exercised by members of our professian currently practicing under similar conditions in the Southam Ca1ifotnia area. No other warranty. expressed or implied, is made. NorCal Engineering City of Newport Beach •-► . i • -. • ' July 16, 1998 Page 10 ~•@SL-EW!SbW2(P Project Number 7533-98 SPECIFICATIONS FOR PLACEMENT OF COMPACTED FILL Preparation Any existing low density soils and/or saturated soils shall be removed to competent natural soil under the inspection of the Soils Engineering Firm. After the exposed surface has been cleansed of debris and/or vegetation, it shall be scarified ur1til it is uniform in consistency, brought to the proper moisture content and compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction (in accc:1rdance with ASTM: 0-1557-78). Material For FIii The on-site soils or approved import soils may be utilized for tha compacted fill provided they are free of any deleterious materials and shall not contain any rocks, brick, asphaltic concrete, concrete or other hard materials greater than eight inches in maximum dimensions. Any import soil must be approved by the Soils Engineering firm a minimum of 24 hours prior to importation of site . Placement of Compacted Fill Soils The approved fill sails shall be placed in layers not excess of six inches in thickness. Each lift shall be unifonn in thickness and thoroughly blended. The fill soils shall be brought to within 15% of the op1imum moisture content, unless otherwise specified by the Soils Engineering firm. Each lift shall be compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction (in accordance with ASTM: D-1557-78) and approved prior to the placement of the next layer of soil. Compaction tests shall be obtained at the discretion of the Soils Engineering firm but to a minimum of one test for every 500 cubic yards placed and/or for every 2 feet of compacted fill placed. NorCal Engineering City of Newport Beach ... 17.....-----------------•.fW!! .. R•■tll!A••••4111••• .. 091·*5f.P5 • I ., !,, July 16, 1998 Page 11 Project Number 7533-98 The minimum relative compaction shall be obtained in accordance with accepted methods in the construction industry. The final grade of the structural areas shall be in a dense and smooth condition prior to placement of stabs-en-grade or paveu,ent areas. No fill soils shall be placed, spread or compacted during unfavorable weather conditions. When the grading is interrupted by heavy rains, compaction operations shall not be resumed until approved by the Soils Engineering firm. Grading Observations The controlling govemmental agencies should be notified prior to commencement of any grading operations. This firm recommends that the grading operations be conducted under the observation of a Soils Engineering firm as deemed necessary. A 24 hour notice must be provided to this firm prior to the time cf our initial inspection. Observation shall include the crearing and grubbing operations to assure that all unsuitable materials have been properly removed; approve the exposed subgrade in areas to receive fill and in areas where excavation has resulted in thtt desired finished grade and designate areas of overexcavation; and perform field compaction tests to determine rerative compaction achieved during fill placement. rn addition, all foundation excavations shall be observed by the Soils Engineering firm to confirm that appropriate bearing materials ere present at the design grades and recommend any modifications to construct footings. NorCal Engineering City of Newport Beach .. ., t .. I I I I I I I I I I I I I -=r I I I t I I ' J --, I I -C".l Cl 0 □ □ □ □ a (!] EXISTING PRO SHOP Cl D a n Cl a -c-a a Q a a , □ ? <, g i\ ~ a . __ ......, ,· --Q-o·o ·-□-c . ""'~~~9t.~;u:.:,_♦"5,'1o~'ifi~~~ IJ ~ □ ' ,,, f f5 I \ n I -· --_..b... ----"""'" (fil:ifil RO SHOP XPANSION a Cl Bl o I □ I : g Id I n I I r.l I I f:l I ' ('J t g I fl □OO I I □ • I g I I □ I a I I O I : fl I I o .J _r--g-~ oeooaaoco □a □o □ooooooE9oaoaaaa NorCal Engineering SOllS AND OEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS APPAO>UMAf~ LOCATION Of: FISLO EXPLORATIONS h • • , I , I .. 1 '.J July 16, 1998 Project Number 7533-98 APPENDICES (In order of appearance) Appendix A -Logs of Exploratory Explorations *Logs of Test Borings B1 and B2 Appendix B • Laboratory Analysis -Table I -Maximum Dry Density Tests *Table II -Expansion Index Tests *Plate A -Direct Shear Tests *Plata B -Consolldatlon Tests NorCal Engineering City o Ne rt B ach ll-. ______ ...., __________ ,, __ - t -'_··-··-- 1 • • July 16, 1998 Project Number 7533-98 A~PENDIXA . J NorC~II Engineering .. City of Newport Beach ... l _______ ,,.-...-"------~----····-· . I f • V MA:JOR DIVISIONS Tr'PICAL NAME'S COARSE GRAINED SOILS IMO.fl !HAN 10 " · a, 11~11,u, d ""''" ,,w"co ltlYI IUtJ FINE ~" ~· •0 '=,Gw CLcAN ?,~.; •! .. 4A-":(; :~4't1f;.J. ,_,~_,f4 • IAl'f0 1111r(Jllff. ;.. • .•. t ~~ ·"'' 6 1,vt S GRAVEi.~• ~ ~a AUl!!'.l.S f'!J.'',!~!,~, II. GP ~o<l.t;,r O.f.aU:, f.ta•t;,.I O.t ,,.,.,,,~ • IAl/0 urr ..... .,~j ...... ,,.,. 1/!lf'IIAtl, ,.,rr4t Olf NO hNtl. (MO.ft hlAII I01'J------Jfi~~i1-~.-------------_, o, t:04AII ,A,.~• r,o,, II UAlt,t fli,IN ntt liO. 4 Slf'lt llllJ SANDS CLEAN SANDS .•.·.· /})SW ..... •,•···· .. •.·~-,·.· • SP ' . .,~,. UA~/0 UJt~I, ,11.wru, l~N,1, ,,rr1.t OIi NO '"'E#. ,oo/lll 1/UOO MNJI OIi I.C.1111.C.f' ,M/1011 &trn.l OIi NO '110, IIIOAI ffU6 to# 1-------1~----+-------------◄ o, efJUl8 1/JM• ''"" ,, $11/U,O '11AM 1111 M~.d ll~I lllll SANDS : :sM WITH FINES~~ ~~1----------1 ru,11#1.11,1 ut ~ SC o,,,,,a, • " • /d/lUNI: Ul'I' AJIIJ fllAr ,11,t 4UOI, AOU ML ,,tJU~, u.n "* t:u,n ,,111 MNI~ o.t t:um 11.n rm, 1L11J1r ,u.nlfJ,w. SILTS AND CLAYS IIIOIIIJJII: CUPS o, £0• 10 lllldlll """4/ff. UAVllU' wn, I.IIIM t:un, 11'lt ft.trl, l.lAII tUtl . lt.tlUIII t1111r l.111 tJU.H 60I . tllJ!JffjD : ; OL •1.11111111.r, uo uwnr: an t:lA~ IIIOA6 tltAII IIJM ti------------lfoi-l"i•PII--+-----------...... . uu lltOIIIA/M 111.#~Cfftll OI IJIA1tJIIMflUI ,,, ""'""' " mn ''"' ~ (Ill air HU, tun,, Ill.Pl. -..,u.t r,u,, 100 ,,,,,, ~a, SI/J'S AND CLAYS IIJ(IUJ/1 '"" I/OIi~ rHAN 611} HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS oi,u,e e:..1r1 o, ,u,11,111 :-o 111a; #'..Al~t~1:-r, Oi~6Nlt Jti.:"I, 'fAJN#Allr eu1J,,1~AtJONJ. IOU ,011111~, t:NAIA~1t.4·f~.tl ,,, fill~ IICt.JJt .,,, or,,,;.yA,tO ,, eOIIIJ.fJtUJltl o, IIOIJJ Jn1J: .. 1 NorCal Engineering son.s AND OEOTcCHNlCAL CONSUL TAt-i,S llfH' JEO SOIL tl.ASStttcATl«-f SYSTEM .. , , q = 1 I • .J f(f. 5 119. 7 15.5 114.2 \'1.7 109.S 17. 7 108. 7 14.6 111.6 OESCAIPflON OP SUSSURFACE MATEAIAI.S R/l :~ R : i\1,..N_a_t_i_ve ___ S_l_i_CJ_ht_l_y_c_l_a_yey--SAND--,-r-ed_di_sh __ ---1 5 brCMTI, nnist, dense 1,·:~ R . . JO . . . . 19}-. . . . ?JJ-. . . . 25• . . . . 30• . . \ Clayey SILT, brown, stiff, rrn1st Medium to coarse grained, SAND, reddish brown, dense, \I.let Clayey SAND, reddish brown, dense, wet ._ ____ ..._ _ _,..__.__ ... 2s-----------------------'"---' SMfl.£tt,U l ~I Cort Staftdard ~,1tt $~11 ICttt SU.,1t (!)eult ~1e @) Jat Satp1e NorCal Engineering -j _SOILS ANDOt!Ol'ECHNtCAL toNSULTAf;l'S PIOm:1' 7533-98 I OAT! Mt£ OMWD: 7-13-98 tQUJMllf USU,: ffand Auger t~Ull t!VEL: 7. o• Loa w· ttoiiika' ., . '\ .. iii:: ~;a I~ j· ii ii_ 13.9 122.4 15,9 114.S Wfl! nKS l locl COte Standard s,t It Sooon ASttO Stlp1t r .. I R R 0t?SCRIPf1ON Cf: SU8SURFAC£ MATERIALS § I ,,., &111t11AA, ~It Oll\f "' IKI UlCAflaN o, '"'' t0A1NO .,.D "' '"' n ... , o, Gfll"IIIO. MIVIIACI COKOlftOMI IUY o,.,,. "' arw1• '4C.f10MI .tllO .... eit.uia, ., "81 '"""°" 111\'II , ... '4ta.a, a• ru1a. '"' O•fA ....... ,.o ,1 a 1111,U•1CAtldN o, 4;fll.lA. COtlOlflQIII CHC0111tr1.ao. O Fill -Slightly clayey SAND, reowsn : ~ bra.-.11, iroist, loose • \ Native -Slightly Clayey ~, &, • brown, noist, dense s- clayey SILT greyjbra..m, rroist, stiff -ir-=rease in sand content with depth . . . itt- . . ~-. . . 25-. . . . 30 .. . . . . 3S MTE OAtlUO: 7-13-98 (!) lu1t Sap1e Q) Ja, Sllp1e tQUt_, t1S£0: Hand Auger awlDMttll lhtl: None encountered NorCal Engineering I ,SOILSANDOB01ECMNlc'Att'ONSULTAtm, LOG o,:· aoiitHtl' 12 . tmJm1' 7S33-98,f' IOATI , n T i,i ~u 1,nnrt RP-~r.h -I V '· . July 16, 1998 Project Number 7533-98 APPENDIXB NorCal Engineering City of Newport Beach • ◄pa]Ai us ~-!F July 16, 1998 Project Number 7533-98 TABLE I MAXIMUM DENSITY TESTS (ASTM: D•1557-78) Sample Classification Optimum Moisture 81 @ 0-2' slightly clayey SAND 9.0 15.5 82@ 2.5"3 clayey SILT Sample B1@0-2' 82@2.5-3 TABLE II EXPANSION INDEX TESTS lU.B.C. STD. 29·2) Ctassification slightly clayey SAND clayey SILT NorCal Engineering Maximum Ory Density (lbs./cu .ft.l 128.0 116.S Expansion Index OS 74 City of Newport Beach .... ..... 2500-----------............ -----------,---.---.............. • I • • • ' • • • • • ' •••• ' • • • • •••• I • • • • •• ' ! I ·-t-1-.... -. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... -...... ·-· " --· -- , .. •. -r •.•I 2000-1-----+-----t----+--"!'--+-----t--l"'f'-"'"""li-l --·•·-•• -···· -·-·-····-·······-· •··•-··-·• -·····t·· ... + i 1500 -~ ! I 1000 500 ~··-···· ................... ••·• .................. , ... -··••· ·-~ ~---P"'"►-·--·-+-t--t--~---. ~ .. ~ • .._..___._,,___.,___ ~-: :-: : :-: : ~::: :·: ~ :·:: :: : :·::::: :: :: : :: :· ~ ~-:: ::. ~: :.: ::~-t-~-r-~ ~ • -·, • ·-·--·---~,;.___._._,_..__. . . --=--------+-• ~•· .--... • --f --· • -• -0 •• ♦ 0 -0 o • f o ••... • •• 0 I O ._ • • "'' --....... r-r-o...,_ I • -• • t--,• ---+--• ~ .,_ -♦ I ---...---~ --! _ .. _._. .1 I I I I • 500 1000 1500 ~ NIMIIIAl STil£SS (PSF) BOfllftG I DEPTH ,0tsfas1 C ORY IIJISTURE Sfll!OI. OEIStlf C(IIT[ll1 lltlmER (F££f) (PSFJ (PCF) (1) • 1 2.0 35 100 119. 7 10.s 0 2 2.0 33 75 122.4 13.9 A 2 4.0 27 375 114.8 16~9 0 ltOfE: lESTS PEAFObftO OH SATURAt£0 SAMPLES UNLESS SHOIIH BELOW. (FM) FJELD MOISTURE '.500 tESTS PEA#OWO ON UHDistulUIED SAMPLES UNLESS SHOWN BElOH. (A) SA'-PLES A£MOLOEO At 90t OF ~AlfHUtt ORV OENSITV '. 3IIO NorCal Engineering · t SOILS AND OtOTECHNICAt CONSULTANTS PAOJECT nttftft ewpo fU nc, SHEAA TEST RESUI. TS Plate A 1,, • t ,J ..,J -.,\~~_,.+'4CQJU,.LJ.CZCU:Q\F' ff1 I I I l I I l I I NOTE: MATER ADIJ£D AT lfOIIW, I PRESSURE AT 1.0 ICSF i I 0 -,-..• -' -~ ~ -... ... i-i--""'~ 2 ~ ·~ " ~ ...... ... r-.... "' r--. .. 1, " i\ f\. 6 8 10 0.1 0.5 1.0 5 10 20 40 flOIIMl. fllESSUIIE CKSF) IOUM omK ORY IIIISTURE UQUlO PlA$TICtlY SYIIIOl .... (m:rJ OEISl1Y CCIJl'Elf L!IUT IIIJEl (PCf) (I) (I) (I) • 1 4.0 114.2 15.S 0 1 a.o 108.7 17.7 4 0 -CGIHESSlc»I (At) hEI.O _,lffllE • ■ WEI Mal) __ ........ ,., !MIi.£ ..... At tDI O, MJ!U au OEIStn NorCal Engineering SOll.SANDOaoTECHNlCALCONSULTANTS CONSOllOATtON TF.ST RESULTS -. PROJECt • • •• • • • BACA ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS Soils -Foundations -Geology 1141 N. LEMON STREET. AN~HE.IM, CALIFORNIA 92801 (714) 778•0702 August 19, 1989 Projer-t: A-0675-F DeMille and Healy Development 20301 Acacia Street Suite 240 Santa Ana Heights, CA. 92707 Attention: Mr. Dan -DeMille Gentlemen: Submitted · herewith is the report · of a · geot·echnical soils and _foundation investigation· conducted by this office for the proposed • Acacia .· Plaza.:'III · office building project located on Acacia Street in the Orange .County district of Santa Ana _Heights, California. The project -site is •. currently ·occupied · by several one-story re.sider).ce a _nd garage buildings, as well · as other associated features . such as paved drives, fences and yard walls, walkways, . various moderate to large size trees, etc. It is possible that subterranean waste disposal structures (septic tanks, cesspools. etc.) may also occur within the property. Partial excavation and recompaction is ~ecommended to provide for a firm, uniform, subgrade support ~ondition under the building, particularly in view 6f the considerable amount _ of site demolition clea=ing and associated disturbance to be performed. • Conventional shallo...- footings will provide adequate foundation supporc for proposed . buildings and other structures. • • The investigation was made in accordance with generally accepted engineering procedures and included such field and laboratory tests considered necessary in the circumstances. In the opinion of the undersigned, the accompanying report has been substantiated by mathematical data in conformity with generally accepted engineering principles and presents fairly the design information requested by your organization. Respectfully submitted, Baca, RCE 128927,.GE #106 AB/se Distribution: (5) DeMille ~nd Healy Development (1) Nuttall-Uchizono Associates City 9f Newport each Acacia Plaza III Project: A-0675-~ INTRODUCTION -1- The primary objectives of this study were to explo,re subaurface condi;:ions • beneath • the project site and evaluate the existing earth materials relative to foundation support, lateral. pressure design considerations, floor slab .. support and A. C. • pavement. J. design. Also presented in this. report are general observations, • • .: data and recommendations relating to site preparation, grading and earthwork compaction, as well as soil concrete corrosion potential.· The general scope of work directed at meeting the study objectives included the following: (1) R.evi~w of current tentative project plans, as well as ;,eriodic discussion of various project development featu:--es e and considerations wich the client. • • • • (2) Subsurface exploration by means of four test borings with a fllght-auger drill rig . (3) Laboratory testing to establish · earth material characceristics . { 4) Geotechnical evaluation and analysis of field and laboratory test data. (5) Preparation of report .. City o Newport Beach Acacia Plaza III Project: A-0675-F -2- This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the client and their consultants in the design of the proposed Acacia Plaza III .office building development. SITE CONDITIONS . . . The rectangular shaped,·. approximate . one acre property . is located ~· • on the northwest side of Acacia Street about 500 feet southwest cf • • • • • • • . . . . . . its intersection with Orchard Drive in the unincorporated Orange County .community of Santa Ana Heights, California. The Newpo:-:. Be~ch Gali C~urse borders the rear property line on the northwest . . : . • . : . . . The adjacent p?:operty to the northeast is occupied by an e:dsti~.; office· building complex (Acacia Plaza ·. II), while lots to t.h.e so~thwest are occupied by older residences. The approximate site location with respect to surrounding streets and highways, th~ general topographical setting of 'the area, and other landmarks is shown on Plate A, Vicinity Map.· Topographically, the subject property and adjacent lots to th~ northeast and southwest are essentially level, • with a · sligb.t. •• southeast to northwest drainage gradient . towards the somewha.: lower golf course area. The total on-site topographical ·relief is · estimated to be on the order of 4 to 5 feet . The project site is occupied by several small one-story residence • . . -. . . • . : . . . • and garage structures. Other tYPical appurtenances .include paved driveways, concrete walkways, yard fences and walls, lawns, ot.h~::: landscaped areas and numerous moderate to large size trees. It is understood that now abandoned on-site waste disposal syste:::s City of Newport Beach l • Acacia Plaza III Project: A-0675-F . ,-3- (septic tanks, cesspools, etc.) may possibly occur within the property, probably in close proximity to the ezisting residences. PROPOSED CONSTBUCTION It • is · understood . that the · existing buildings and all other appurtenant features will be demolished and/or removed in the course of preparing the site for_new constr~ction. The primary element of the proposed development will consist of a two-sto:::y offic'e building.. The approximate . tentative building location i~ shown on .Plate B, Plot Plan. It is understood that the · planned building structure will probably be of t.ypical woodframe · construction with · lower level concrete floor slabs or. grade. Based on · past experience with similar types of .. construc~ion, it is e : estimated .that structural foundation loads will be on the order of 1500 to 2500 pounds per lineal . foot along cont:.inuous bea::-ing walls, and/or 30. to 50 kips at isolated column supports . • • • • The major portion of remaining non-building sit~ areas will be employed as A.C. paved driveways and parking stall~ with some local perimeter and interior planters . It is anticipated .• that grading required to prepare the site fo= construction . will involv~ relatively modest ·grade chang~s, possibly on the order of 3 to 4 foot maximum depth cuts and/or fills (exclusive of subterranean excavation if any) . City of Newport Beach - J Acacia Plaza III Project: A-0675-F :E..IF,LD INVESTIGATION The field investigation consisted of subsurface exploration by means of four (4) · test borings made with a hollow-stem, contlnuous flight auger drill rig. Exploration depths ranged between 15 to 25 feet. • • Approximate test . boring locations are shown ·. on Plate B. . . . . . . l -: • A continuous record of the earth materials encountered during . . exploratory • drilling was made. by the field engineer . and is . . . ' . . presented on Plates C •and· F, • "Logs of Borings". It should be • • noted that the lines . designating the interfaces between various • strata on the boring logs represent approximate boundaries only since the .actual transition between materials may .be ·. somewhat. •· gradual. • • • • • •11 Undist:urbed" samples were secured at selected depth intervals fer laboratory er.amination and testir lg. • • Sampling · was • accomplished with a 2.5 inch I .. D~ steel. barrel lined with a series of one-inch . . long thin brass rings. The sample burrel was driven approximatel~l • 12 • inches with a 140-pound weight dropped 30 inches. Recorded blow counts for 12 inches of sampler penetration are tabulated .in the •1 Blows per Foot 0 column of the boring. logs. · Disturbed bulk samples of. the. various. predominant materials oi;served were also obtained. It should be noted that the hollow-stem drilling . equipment · employed uses continuous flight.auger sections resulting in full temporary casing of the test boring, thereby not allowing caving to occur . It is p::-obable that an open boring would have City of Newport Beach ~----------- l • • • • • Acacia Plaza III Project: A-0675-F -s- expe:::-ienced only slight to occasional local moderate caving, however. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS In addition to the e:dsting building slabs, immediate 3urface conditions include , various walkway' and drive concrete pavements, lawn grass covers, other landscaping, and local areas of exposed earth~ It is possible that the upper, variable 1 to 3 foot zone may consist of fill and/or processed native materials associated with the original development of the site. .. Natural deposits beneach the project site are mapped ~s Pleistocene age marine terrace deposits reportedly consisting of essentially flat lying, interbedded silty/clayey sands and silty/sandy clays. These upper terrace deposits have bee:-, estimaced to be in excess of 100 feet thick ·in the site vicinity, followed by the Niguel (Pliocene age) arid older Tertiary sedimentary formations (bedrock) which extend down to the granit.ic basement complex at a depth estimated to be about 15,000 feet . The soil profile as observed within the 25-foot maximum dep-ch explored generally consisted of f:'.ne to medium grained sands ·,d.-::h a variable mod~rate to very slight clay content. A silty clay deposit encountered in borings 1 and.2 -at a depth of about 7 feet and 12 feet, respectively, apparently feathers out to· the southeast, or at least dips below the bottom of boring 3 and .; . Also, the sand texture coarseness and clay/silt content appea~ -co increase and decrease, respectively, toward the southeast . City of Newport Beach ~-------- ) • • Acacia Plaza II! Project: A-0675-F -6- As reflected by the common moderate to high sampler blow counts recorded during exploratory drilling operations (see: elates C to F, the site deposits exhibit a firm to very firm in-situ consistency, generally improving gradually with depth. . • ' No groundwater or local perched seepage zones were observed within the 25-foot maximum depth explored . More.detailed descriptions of the soil profile as observed in the test borings are presented on Plates c to F . LABORATORX TESTING In-situ density and/or moisture content values were determined for • all the undisturbed samples obtained during exploratory drilling operations. Test results are plotted and tabulated on Plates Ct~ F, Logs of Borings . • • • • Mechanical analyses by the hydrometer test method were performed on selected samples . to confirm field classifications. Test results we=e as follows: Boring Depth Percent Percent Percent No. {feet> sand Silt Clay 2 2.0 60 25 15 2 5.5 72 10 18 2 9.5 75. 12 13 2 14.5 27 31 42 2 19.5 15 40 45 * 4 2.5 65 18 17 *Bulk Sample City of New art Beach • • • • • Acacia Plaza III Project: A-0675-F -7- An Expansion Index test was performed on a bulk sample selected as being generally representative of the existing.near surface clayey sand soils (boring i4@ 2.5 feet). Test results were as follows: . (1) Moisture@ Compaction= 7.7 percent (2) Dry Unit Weight= 119.0 p~f (3) Expansion.Index= 24 (Low expansive per UBC Tabl~ 29) Direct shear testing was concentrated on various ttundisturbed" samples representative of the common clayey to slight clayey sands within the upper 5 to 10 foot zone.-Testing was performed uncie:: various normal loads in the saturated-drained condition . Individual plotted test results, as well as the estimated average friction angle and cohesion values a.::-e prf:sented on Plate G. Consolidation (load-deformation) tests were • also performed on various typical undisturbed soil samples. are presented on Plates H, I, J. and K, Plotted test results A chemical analysis was performed on a bulk sample specimen obtained in boring #-4 ai:. a depth of 2. 5 feet. • Test results indicated a soluble sulfate content of 169 ppm (Test Method No; Calif. 417A) . .Based on this test result, • th'.e site soils a=e • characterized b, a very low concrete co~rosion potential and the use of special sulfate resistant cement is not considered necessary . City of New art Beach L J Acacia Plaza III Project: A-0675-F CONCLQsrons AND.RECOMMENDATIONS -8- Based on the findings of this investigationf it is concluded that developoent of the ~ite as planned is feasible .relative co soils foundation conditions. • ;. Conventional shallow spread footings should provide adequate foundation support for proposed building structure. . In view of the considerable amount of demolition, site clearing and probable • attendant surficial disturbance anticipated to prepare the site for grading and construction, as well as possible local non- unif or=iities of the upper clayey sand soils> partial excavation • • • • • • and recompaction • is recommended for the building .. area in orde::-t.o secure a known uniform subgrade support condition. Following are more specific observations, conclusions, and design recommendations .. A, s±~~ Preoararion Earthwork: Prior to grading, the site should be cleared Of existing buildings, pavement, slabs ·and other structures, as well as a:1y significant vegetation, debris, demolition rubble; ecc . roots should be remo~ed to a depth of at least 3.0 feet below . e:-:isting or finished grades,· whichever is lower. Any bu:-i-ed ·City _.;f .. N.ewport Beach •• • • • • • Acacia Plaza III Project: A-0675-F -9- debris, rubble or other contaminated material exposed during subsequent earthwork operations should also be removed, Excavations made for removal of any existing foundations, utility lines, septic tinks, other subterranean structures, tree roots, etc. I should be -cleared ' of loose .· material ' and backfilled with clean compacted soil .. '. Existing· cesspools, if any, should -be broken off at a depth of at least 5. O feet,. cleared of any significant bottom sludge, mud, debris, etc., filled with clean pea gravel and covered over with clean compacted fill. Removal of bottom debris and/or sludge can ,, usually be accomplished fairly readily by "drilling out" with a large diameter auger. In order to improve the general consistency and uniformity of the upper subgrade soils, expose and correct any possible existing loose and/or contaminate~ local backfills, shallow buried structures, etc., and recompact any demolition disturbance, it is recommended that the building area be processed in the following manner to a distance of at least 5 feet outside the exterior building wall perimeter: (1) Remove the existing surface soils to a depth of at least 2.5 feet below the existing or final ground surface, whichever is lower, and stockpile for subsequent recompaction. (2) The exposed over-cut surface should ·then .be scarified to an additional depth of at least 6 inches, watered or aerated · as required,· thoroughly mixed to a uniform near optimum moisture condition, and recompacted to at least: 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557-78 laboratory test standard . -City of Newport Beach --------- Acacia Plaza III Project: A-0675-F -10- (3) Backfill with the stockpiled excavation material and/or other approved native or import soils. All backfill should b~ spread, watered, mixed, and compacted by mechanical means in approximate 6-inch thick lifts. The degree of compaction obtained should.be at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557-78 laboratory test standard. (4). Continue filling as required to secure final building pad subgrade elevations. Prior to placing new fill in other non-building areas, the e~poseci cleared •. surface should be plowed, scarified, or otherwise pro~essed to a d9pth of at least 8 inches, watered and/or aerated as required, thoroughly mixed to a uniform, near optimum moistu::.·e condition, and recornpacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTH n- 1557-78 test standard., The final exposed surface within cut or uat grade" A.C. or concrete paved areas should also be processed in this manner. All new fill should be spread, watered, mixed and compacted by mechanical means in approximate 6-inch thick lifts to at least 90 percent of.the aforementioned standard~ Backfill placed in narrow, restricted areas, .such as along utili'Cy trenches, may be placed in 12-to 24-inch thick lifts. Backfill consolidation by flooding or jetting should not be allowed. All backfill should be mechanically compacted to at ~east 90 perc~nt of the aforementioned test standard. Completed building, exterior concrete and A.C. pavement subgra~es should be trimmed and rolled to a firm smooth surface. Fi::.al City _ _0f New rt Beach - Acacia Plaza III Project: A-0675-F -11- watering and rolling should be performed immediately prior to placing concrete or paving. Imported rill material should consist of clean, granular soils free from · vegetation, debris, ·or rocks larger than 3 inches. The . . Expansion Index Value shbuld not exceed a maximum of 20. • • All earthwork operations should be subject to cornpacti<;>n control inspection and t~sting by the Soils Engineer. The Soils Engineer should be notified at least two ,days in advance of the start of e grading. A joint meting between a representative of the client, the contractor and the Soils Engineer is recommended prior to grading to discuss specific procedures and scheduling . • B. Foundation suooort: Assuming compliance with site p~eparation and earthwork compaction • recommendations, the proposed building structure may be supported on conventional shallow spread footings .bearing on the new compacted backfill-fill zone. A maximum allowable bearing value • • • • of 2000 psf may be used · fl':>r design purposes. The recommended design bearing value is for dead plus live • loads and may be . : . increased one~third for combined dead, live and seismic forces . '.. ' Footings should be at least ·12 inches in width and should extend to a depth of at least 18 inches below · the lowest adjace:1t finished subgrade or interior floor slab surface . It is also recommended that nominal steel reinforcement at least equivalent to one :s bar both top and bottom be employed in all continuous bearing walls . City of Newport Beach ~--------- Acacia Plaza III Project: A-0675-F -12- Bearing value analysis by the "Terzaghi" method and using shear strength values shown on Plate G indicates a safety factor of at least 4.4 for the recommended recommended 2000 psf design valu~. . . ,. ). .. Also, the actual safety factor will probably be somewhat great~r due to the recommended excavation and recompaction. Estimated averaae settlements · in inches for footings under the . . . full recommended ·loading condition ·are as follows: Footing Size Cfeet} 1.0 2.0 3.5 5.0 c, concrete Slabs; . Continuous Footino 0.25 0.40 0.55 Square footino 0.25 0.35 0.45 :Based · on field observations and laboratory test results, the uppe:.· e clayey sand subgrade . soils are generally classified as "low" or slightly expansive; Although not considered critical, it is recommended that nominal reirtforcement such as "6x6-10/10" welded • wire mesh be employed ·· for all concrete floor slabs . on grade (properly placed at .· near midpoint of the slab section} . Also, t:he ezposed finished subgrade surface should be maintained or restored • to a moist, near optimum condition prior to placing concrete. • • It is recommended that a moisture barrier be provided under office floors, carpeted areas, . or other concrete slabs where slab moisture would be detrimental. A 6-rnil vinyl plastic membrane with 6 inch sealed laps and 1 to 2 inches of protective clean sane bedding and cover should be adequate . ·.c·ty of Newport Beach Acacia Plaza III Project: A-0675-F -13- It is recommended that concrete slabs which are placed directl'l over a native soil subgrade and are subject to vehicle traffic loads be at least 5.0 inches in thickness. It is also suggest~d J • that nominal reinforcement such as 11 6x6··lO/l0 11 • welded wire mesh b€ employed in new eAterior concrete slabs and paving. e : .. o,· Lateral Pressure; An allowable lateral bearing value against the sides of footings of 300 ·pounds per square foot per foot ·of depth to a maximum of •. 4500 pounds per square foot may be used provided there is positiv~ contact between the vertical bearing surface and th~ adjacen~ • • • • • • soil . Friction between the base of footings and/or floor slabs and the underlying soil may be assumed as 40 percent of the dead loac. Friction and lateral pressure may be ·combined provided the assur..~d lateral bearing resistance does .not exceed two-thirds of the allowable. Recor:unended active lateral soil pressure values • for design of drained retaining walls and/or depressed ramp walls are as follows: *Slope of Retained Earth Level 4:1 2:1' 1-1/2:1 Equivalent Fluid Pressure <ocf) 30 35 45 55 *Slope inclination in a direction perpendicular to the wall face~ City of Newport Beach Acacia Plaza III Project: A-0675-F -14- A pipe and gravel drain (4-inch perforated PVC schedule 40 embedded in at least 3 cubic feet of filter gravel per lineal foot of pipe) should be provided on the retained eaith side and near J the base of all retaining walls. Water intercepted near the base of the wall by the perforated PVC pipe should be directed to appropriate outlets. Typical w·eep-holes leading out of the gravel • drain (no pipe} would be satisfactory for walls which face into open patio or yard areas. • • • • • All backfill placed behind ._ retaining · walls . should be spread, watered or aerated as required, tl1 oroughly mixed to a u11iform near . . optimum moisture condition and compacted by mechanical means to a~ least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557-78 laboratory test standard. E. A,C. 1?avina: In view of the unknown grading changes to be made in the course of developing the .site, it is somewhat difficult to anticipate actual final subgrade soil mixtures and stabilometer test we=e. therefore, not performed. In any case, however, .it is estimat:ed . . that an "R" value of 30 would reasonably represent t.he nea-::- surface site soils. Based on thi~ parameter, recommended pave:ne~t. sections for probable traffic conditions and estimated Traffic Index design values are as follows: Assumed A:C. Rock Base I Iraffic CQDditiQOS T. I, {iDt;b~sl Cinches\ (1) Driveways 5.0 3.0 6.0 (2) Parking Stalls · 4.0 2.5 4.0 ity Qf Newport Beach I I . Acacia ?laza III Project: A-0675-F -15- It is recommended that the top 6 inches of the finished soil subgrade be watered, rolled and compacted at near the optimum moisture content to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557-78 . . . \ . • laboratory compaction standard.• Final subgrade watering, rolling • . . . . ; . . . . •. '; . : . and compaction should be accomplished immediately prior to paving. The • completed · subgrade should be trimmed . and rolled to a firm, 1 · smooth surf ace.· • • • • • Base course material should be at least equivalent to "crushed miscellaneous base" as defined by the Standard Specifications for . . . . . . ·. Public Works Construction, 1985 Edition (section 200_;2. 4, page tel4} . Jl..11 rock base ·should be compacted to at least 95 percent of . . . . the ~..STM D-1557-78 laboratory ~est standard . . . . . . · . Conclusions and recommendations presented in this report represent our best engineering judgement only based on . the available preliminary design information and the data developed during the · course of our st~dy. expressed or implied~ No • other warranty or responsibility . is . Soil conditions have been interpreted from existing surface • • • . ,. • . • ' : . • exposures and the materials · encountered · in the · test borings. • • . . . . . . These conditionsmay not necessarily represent other areas between or beyond the test borings . All shoring and bracing should be in accordance with current requirements to CAL-OSHA, and the Industrial Accident Commission it f > -e . port Beach • • • • • • • • Acacia Plaza III Project:· A-0675-F -16- of the State of California, and all other public agencio~ having jurisdict~on. A reasonable effort was made to restore drill hole sites to their . . original condition. This included.backfilling and tamping of the test borings and general surface cleanup. It should be noted that as with any backfill, residual consolidation and surface subsidence· resulting. in . a• possible hazardous condition.· could occur at t:he test borings. The client is cautioned to periodiall:y . . examine the test boring sites, and, if · necessary, backfill any resulting depressions. This office will be further available for consultation or to make .-·. . . . .· . a final review of project plans ·and specifications to assist in assuring correct interpretation of this report 1 s recommendations for use in applicable sections . This report may be:subject to review by the controlling public agencies for the project . City ·of Newport Beach • • • • • • • • Ref USGS 111 = 20001 SITE VICINITY MAP BACA ASSOCIATES Project A-0675-F Plate= A 1 ) •· . I , ., • c P ◄ ) • • • • __:_-----~--:--··------ I i .• Prop. Two Story Office Bldg. 3 0 . Test Borings -Approx . I"= 30' PLAN BACA ASSOCIATES Project: A-0675-F Plate: B 11111 • • • • • • • • • • LOG OF BORING NI I DATE DRILLED 8/5/89 J DRILLING EQUIPMEHT Hollow-Stem Flight Auger DRIVING WEIGHT 140 lbs. -30" drop I SURFACE ELEVATION 5- 12~ I 2E 10- SAND, fine to medium, variable clayey to sl. clayey, scat. gravels bn:,,,.n rroist rrod. ccrrp. c1arp·- to dry 1-----------1-•-----------CLAY, very silty,. gray very £inn .nurerous veins and and. • rmist l.enses of fine • gray sand and silty sand it~ 109 104 85 SH£Afl ftESISTANC£ @ ANTICIPAT£0 PRESSURE .. KIPS Pt:R SQUARE: FOOT 4 i z 3 4 s MOISTURE CONTENT• •;. DRY WEIIHT • I I I I , 10 20 30 40 !ID I • I I I 11 11 I 11 15,...,•=i=t2-='==9========l=~=~==i==93=l-+H-++-H+.+-H-+.+++t+-+-+++++-:--1JI I I Fnd@ 15.0 ft. Notes: . . . . ( 1) . No ground water , I 11 I 11 Acacia Plaza II I PROJECT No. A-0675-F Santa Ana Heights, California PLATE C BACA ASSOCIATES c ~s y~TINO FOU _!!O~Tl ~H ENGINEERS t ~NQ_!!EERIH9 8E_0LOGISTS vlLY uT I ewporc tjeacin . . . . . ···• • . LOG OF BORING N12 DATE DRILLED 8/5/89 I DRILLING EQUIPMENT ~~•-Stem Flight Auger DRIVING WEIGHT 140 lbs. -30" drop ] SURFACE ELEVATION • -0 C SHEAR RESISTANCE @ ANTICIPATED • <'o-t-<i' PRESSURE -KIPS PER SQUAM'. ,ooT ~-0 ~ -SOILS "o< o{r~ ~,,.r • ~ "+, • I I I ca. i 4 I 2 CLASSIFICATION °-t "-,~ ,.~ ~'9,. ~ I 3 ◄ , -E +c,-~JR-~,~~ ~~ • MOISTURE CONT£NT • •;. DRY WE18HT ~ • t 'I' • ;,, • 10 I 3b I -i 0 ai 20 ~ l:10 • ~-~, fine to meditm, light dJ:y loose variable clayey to brown --------- • t3€ s1. clayey, scat . s1. ,rod. ll8 gravels lrroist carp. 1,..... ___ bro\<.n ' . • 5-. '. 3~ 1.10 0 I I ----I • fine to irediun; carp. I -silty to slight silty BE ll8 0 I 10-I . ' •• '. I I .. I ---------I CIAY, silty, n~..rous gray very fi.l:rn I I veins and lenses with lm:>ist to I 11 of sand and silty red stiff •· • •5= sand · brc:Mn 97 I .lit I 15-stairu • II : I I . ' • I I I 2: 102 :. I I I I 2: ·. I I I Fnd@ 20.0 ft. : I 11 N:>tes: (1) N:J ·ground _water I I I 1 2: I ) Acacia Plaza III PROJECT No. A-0675-F Santa Ana Heights, California PLATE D BACA ASSOCIATES glt(.SU~TING FOUf D~{l (tN ENGINEERS t J NQJN~ERING QE~OGISTS . LOG OF BORING N• 3 DATE DRILLED 3/5/89 I DRILLING EQUIPMENT Hollc,.,.r-Stan Flight J\ug,:r. DRIVING WEIGHT 140 lbs. -30" drop I SURFACE ELEVATION ) -- • ~~O..s, /':1-SHEAR RESISTANC! @ ANTICIPATED • 0 PRESSURE• KIPS PE" SOUAIIIE FOOT •• 0 ... . -SOILS "o< 0<r~ .r✓.r~ • _,,;+.,~ r I ' c: 10 ... A i 2 3 4 ~ -e 1 CLASSIFICATION o~ "'~~ ~+'°'>-'9 ~ ... ◊, I:! 0 • MOCSTURE CONTENT· •;. DRY W£18HT a.1"1 .. /t',tq">- D " ,. • 10 2·0 I ~ • • 30 so C iii _, Sk"ID, fine to rrediun, brown rroist catp. silty, sl. clayey, ··H scat. gravels 116 fine to coarse, r---- mxl. sl. clay binder, CXJJ\1• • variable scat. to to ' 5-• i2E mxierate gravels carp. l.16 " t"---- sl. .. nnist • . •~c 109 0 10-I I • I I I I • •r2e 108 10 I 15- ------------fine to rrediun, tan roist dense . clean, occasional with clay/silt veins pale gray : • veins .15i 103 • I 29- I I ; .. 11 . . • I .. 111 , ~E 2~ I ,101 • I t • End@ 25.0 ft. Notes: ( 1} No ground water Acacia Plaza III PROJECT No. A-0675-F santa Ana Heights, Califomia PLATE E BACA ASSOCIATES • CONSULTING FOUNDATION ENGINEERS C ENQINEERINQ 8EOLOGISTS 'It otNew art Beach .P .. . LOG OF BORING N•4 DATE DRILLED U/5/89 I DRILLING EQUIPMENT Hollow-SteTJ Flight Auger DRIVING WEIGHT 140 lbs. -30" drop I SURFACE EL£VATION -0 0. SHEAR RESISTANCE @I ANTICIPATED • "a < -,, PRESSURE• KIPS PER SQUAltE FOOT .:. 0 ,ft. --SOILS <'o{ 0~~ ;s,.r.,.r 't Al/+✓ ~ .. 4 i 2 I I I .5 a. 1 CLASSIFICATION °.f l/19~ "'e; ~.,,. J .. s E f'c-, Qe·~I. r. ~ • "'t G',s," MOISTURE CONTENT• •,i. DflY W[llffT ~ • • a • 10 20 I f , 0 m 30 40 ~o SAND, fine to rrediun, b:rov.n dry loose I Silty, variable ..._ ___ ---- 11'2( clayey to sl. clayey, sl. mxl. 109 '0 scat. gravels rroist carp . .,_.;._~----- ) m::iist catp. I s-•trn ll5 .. I --------nediun to coarse, red sl. • . variable sl. clay brown rroist ·$~ binder to clean, ill • . heavy gravels I I 10-I I --------• vez:y fine to fine, pale troist I • 3! sl. silty, with gray 101 • I minor silt veins • brcMn . • 15 End@ 15.0 ft. Notes: ( 1) ho ground water . t . • : 2.G I I I I .. . ., • .. I 2! I • Acacia Plaza III PROJECT No. A-0675-F santa Ana Heights, California PLATE F BACA ASSOCIATES • CONSULTING FOUNDATION ENGINEERS C ENQINEERINQ 8EOLOOISTS City .of .e each •• • • • • • • lL VJ . X DIRECT SHEAR TESTS UPPER CLAYF:f. SANDS . , 2.0r------'------~-----.---------+------1 ~ I ~5 ..------;------...-----+------.-----,~ ._·_z ~- II) II) w 0 0 0.5 ... 1.0 1.s · 2.0 2.5 NORMAL LOAD {XSF) {l} Sat~rated-Drained Condition • ( 2) Friction Angle :: • ?8" ( 3). Cohesion = 200 psf . . ' Acacia Plaza III PROJECT No. ~-0675-F Santa Ana Heights, California PLATE G BACA ASSOCIATES CONSULTING FOUNDATION ENGINEERS t ENGINEERING GEOLOGISTS City Qf Newport Beach -----------· • CONSOLIDATION TESTS Load In kips per Square Foot .5 .6 .e 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 20 30 -10 • ' I I ' ' ~ ' ' I ' I ' • I I ' ' ' ' ' I 2 • I • I I I I I ' ' I ' 3 l"o,. I I I -.... I ' ' ....... I t I I I". I ' I I ' . ' . ' I "'J ' I 4 • C I ..... • I I I ' ..... I I I 1 I .... I I I ' ' ' .... ' ' • I 0 5 -I I I I '-I I I I I ''-' I I I I I I I .,._ I I I CJ I • • f ' I '-I I t I I I I ' t I ,, I ' I I I I I I I I ' ,._ I I I I "t:J 6 • I I I I 1 I I I'-. I ' I I I I • • ' ' I '-' I I I I 0 I I I I I I • I I I ""-I I I I I I • I • I • • I '-I I I ' Cl) 7 C I I I ' ' ' I I .... I I I ' I I ' ' I I I I'-I I I -I I I ' I I I I I 'l I 0 I ' . ' ' • I ' ,, I ' I I I ' . • ' ' I I I ' I I I I I I I ' I ' '" Boring #2 @ 2.0 ft. I I I ' I I ' I I I t I I • I I I I I I u 8 • -I I I . ' I I I I I ' I I ' ' I ' ' ' I ' I • I I • I • ' I I ' I I t C 9 Cl) u I I I I • ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I ,-L. I I I I I I I I I ' I . ' I ' I ' . I ... 10 • a., a.. I I I I I I I I I I I ' I ' ' I I I L I I I I ' . ' ' , I ' I ' II I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I • . I ' I I I . I I I ' I ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I I 12 •• I ' ' I I I I . ' I I I ' I I I I I I I ! I I I ; I I I I I I I I ' • . ' I I I I I ' I I . 13 I • I ' ' I I I I I I • I I I I ' ' I I I I I I I . I I I I I I ' I ' I I I 1 I • I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I . . ' I ' t I 1 ' I I I I I I I I I I I I • 14 I I I I I I I I I I I ' I I 1 I I • ' I I t I l I 15 I I I I ' ' . I I ' I I • I e WATER PERMITTED TO CONTACT SAMPLE • Acacia Plaza III PROJECT No A-0675-F Santa Ana Heights, Califomia PLATE H BACA ASSOCIATES • ~ CONSOLIDATION TESTS . . Load in k ie s eer Sguore Foot .5 .6 .8 I 2 3 4 ~ 6 8 10 15 20 30 40 I 1 -I I -~· I ~ ' ' ' I I I I I 2 I I I I ' I I ) I J I I I I I "--I I I 3 I ...... I ' • .... ' ' I I "' I I I ' ' I I ' I 4 , , I ' I I ' • . , • •· I I I ' I C I , I ' I 0 I I I ''-I ' I I I '-I I I -5 ' ' I ' " I ' • • -I I I '-' 1 t 0 . I I lo,. ' I I I I r I ., I I • -c 6 I 1 I I I ' I ' t I ' I -I I I I I I • I " I I I -I I I I I I I I \. I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I I ' I 0 ' I • I I I . ' ' I ' I ' "' 7 I I I I I I I I ... I I I ' I I I I I 1 I I I ,. I . I I C I • ' ' ' I I "' I ' I I 0 I I I I ' I t ... I ' ' I I I I I I I I I"\. I I I I • u 8 I I I I ' I I I ' I . ' ' • , I I I I ' I '' I ' • ' I I I ' . I I ' I I ' I I I I I -I I I I I I " Borinq #2@ 9.5 ft: I I I I I . t I C 9 I J I I • I I I I I ' I Q) I I I I ' . ' ' ' • ' ' t I I I I I I I I I I I CJ I I I ' I I I I ' I • I I I I I I I I I ' ~ 10 I I ' I I t I I I I . • , Q) I ' I I I ' ' I I I • I I I I I ' I ' I I I . I I a.. I . ' I ' I I I I . ' ' ' I I I I I I I I I ' II I ' I I ' I I I I I I • f ' I . ' I ' I ' ' ' I ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I t I + I • 12 I I I ' ' I I I . . ' • I I I ' I I I I ' ' ' I , I I I ' I I I I I I ' ' I ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I 13 I I I I ' I I I ' I I 1 I I I I I . I I t I ' I I I I I I I . ' I I ' I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I ' I I I I 1 I I ' I I ' • 14 I I I , I I I ' I I ' I • t I I t . I t I ' ' . ' I I L I I I I I I ' I I ' I I I I I ' ; I I I t I ' I I I I I I ' ' I I I I . I I 15 I I I ' I ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' . ., e WATER PERMJTTED TO CONTACT SAMPLE • Acacia Plaza III PROJECT Na A..:0675-F Santa Ana Heights, Califomia PLATE I BACA ASSOCIATES • CONSULTING FOUNDATION ENGINEERS e. ENGINEERING GEOLOGISTS Gity of Newport l::3each CONSOLIDATION TESTS . Load in k i E! s 2er Sguore Foot .5 .6 .8 ' 2 3 4 ~ 6 8 10 15 20 !O 4'0 I I -I -I I --I I I I I I 2 , .... • I "-I I ,, I • ' I , .. 3 I ' I . . • I 1, I I I I ' ' I I I •..i t I ) 4 " I I ' ' ' . ' I ' I -.: I I C I I'-I I I I 0 I I '-I I I I 5 I I .... I I I ·-I • • J ,, I ' I • I -I ' l '-l I I I I I C I , } ' I I I I I I I I ' '-! I I I I • "'0 6 I I I J "' I I I I I I -I I I I I I I I 'I. I I I I f -I I I I I I I '-I I I I I 0 I I I I I I I '1 I I I ' I ' I , , I I " I I I I I u, 7 I ' ' I I ' I ,, I ' I I ' I I I ' i I ' I 'lo I I I 1 I ' C I I I I I I I " I ' ' I 0 I I I ' I J I •'-I I I ' -I I ' ' I I I ,, I I I • l.) 8 ~-. ' ' f . I I • I ' I I ' ♦ ' ~-I I I ' . I I I I I'\ I ' I ' ·-I I f I I I I I I '\ f I I I -I ,~• I I I I I ' ' I ' ' ' I I .---........... ' I ' I I '-I I I I C 9 I I I I I I ' I ' • Borinc #3 @ 5.0 ft. Q) I I I I I I I I ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I • j I I I I I I I I ' ' I I I I ... ro I I I I I I r I , I I I I I . cu I I ' I I I I I I I ' I I I ' I I I I r I I I I I I I 0.. I I I I I I I I I I I I I . I I I 1 I I I r I I I I ' I I I( I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I ' I ' . ' ' ' ' I I I ' I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I ' I I I ' I ' I r I I I I I I I I ' ' t I I I I I I • 12 f ' I ' I . I I f ' ' I . . J I I I I I ' I I I ' I ' I ' t I I I ! I I I I I ' J ' I . ' . I I I ' . ' I I ' ' I I I I I I I I I I 13 I I t I ' I ' I t I I I • t I I t t I I ' f ' t I 1 . I I t I ' I I • 1 j I I I I I I J J I I I ' ' I t I I I I I ' I I I • I • 14 I ' I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I ' ' ' I . ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I ' : I I I I t I I I I I I I ' I I I I I • ' I rs I I I I I ' I . t ' . I I I . a WATER PERMITTED TO CONTACT SAMPLE • Acacia P.:aza III PROJECT No A-0675-F Santa Ana Heights# califomia PLATE J BACA ASSOCIATES • CONSULTING FOUNDATION ENGINEERS e. ENGINEERING GEOLOGISTS City of Newport Beach ) CONSOLIDATION TESTS . Load in k i 2 s eer S g u ore Foot . .5 .6 .8 I 2 3 4 s 6 8 (0 (5 20 30 40 • ' I I I I ~ ' I ,- I -I ---• 2 ' -I ' I -I I .... I """ Borin~ #3@ 14.5 ft. I I I I I I I I I ·- 3 I ' • ' . I I I I I I I I I I I I • 4 I I I I I ' . ' ' I I I I t I I C I I I t I I I I 0 I I I I I I I I 5 ' I I I I I I I -I I ' ' I I • I • -I I I I I I I C . I I • I ' I I I I I I I I I • "C 6 I I ' I ' I I -I I I I I I I t I -I I I I I I I I I I 0 ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' ' I . • I I ' I • I en 7 I I I I I I I I I I I r I I ' I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I C I I I I I I 1 I I I r I I I 0 I I I + I I I I I r I r r I I I I I I I I I I I I I • (.) 8 I I I ' I I . I ' I I I I I I I I I ' • ' ' I ' I • I I I ' I I I I I I ' I I I I I ' -I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I C 9 I I I ' • I • I f I I I I I I GJ ' I ' ' I ' . ' I I I I I ' t I I I I I I I I I I I I tJ I t t I I I I I I I I I I r • I I I I I I ' I I I I I I I ... 10 I I ' I I I ' I I I I I I I I I 1 I GJ I I I I I I I I ' ' I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I a. I I I ' ' I ' I ' I I I • I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I I + I I I I I t I I I I I I I I . . I ' • I I ' ' ' ' I I I I I . I I I I I I I I t I I I I ' ' I t I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I • 12 I I • ' ' ' I I I I I • r I I I ' • I I I I I • I . ' I I I ' I I I I I I I I ' t • ' I I • I ' . ; I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 13 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' r I I ' I I I ' ' ' ' I I I . I I I I I I I t t I I I I I I I ' I I I I ' l I I I I t I I 1 I ' l ' I ' I I I t I I • 14 I I I I I I I I I I I I I j I ' ' • I ' . I . I . ' I I J I I I ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I l ' I I 1 ., I r I r I I I I I I I I j 15 I I I I I I . I . ' ' ' • ' I . e WATER PERMfTTED TO CONTACT SAMPLE • Acacia Plaza III PROJECT No A-0675-F santa Ana Heights, Califomia PLATE K BACA ASSOCIATES • CO~SULTING FOJ!NOATION ENGINHRS t ENGINE £RING GEOLOGISTS (.;It OT New Ort eacn y p PWAS_20230915 APPENDIX D SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS Newport Bay Terrace C, Coffee Dose q Irvine Ranch Market ~ e T ~ G o o g le e ·S ~~ Newport Beach ft G f Course Y Irvine Ave Lashsweep C, OS HPD Birch Heights C, Map data ©2024 .................................... Unied Hazard Tool Input U.S. Geological Survey - Earthquake Hazards Program Please do not use this tool to obtain ground motion parameter values for the design code reference documents covered by the U.S. Seismic Design Maps web tools (e.g., the International Building Code and the ASCE 7 or 41 Standard). The values returned by the two applications are not identical. Please also see the new USGS Earthquake Hazard Toolbox for access to the most recent NSHMs for the conterminous U.S. and Hawaii.  Edition Dynamic: Conterminous U.S. 2014 (u… Latitude Decimal degrees 33.6587 Longitude Decimal degrees, negative values for western longitudes -117.8826 Site Class 259 m/s (Site class D) Spectral Period Peak Ground Acceleration Time Horizon Return period in years 2475 Hazard Curve View Raw Data Hazard Curves Time Horizon 2475 years Peak Ground Acceleration 0.10 Second Spectral Acceleration 0.20 Second Spectral Acceleration 0.30 Second Spectral Acceleration 0.50 Second Spectral Acceleration 0.75 Second Spectral Acceleration 1.00 Second Spectral Acceleration 2.00 Second Spectral Acceleration 3.00 Second Spectral Acceleration 4.00 Second Spectral Acceleration 5.00 Second Spectral Acceleration 1e-2 1e-1 1e+0 Ground Motion (g) 1e-9 1e-8 1e-7 1e-6 1e-5 1e-4 1e-3 1e-2 1e-1 1e+0 An n u a l F r e q u e n c y o f E x c e e d e n c e Uniform Hazard Response Spectrum 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Spectral Period (s) 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 Gr o u n d M o t i o n ( g ) Spectral Period (s): PGA Ground Motion (g): 0.6508 Component Curves for Peak Ground Acceleration Time Horizon 2475 years System Grid Interface 1e-2 1e-1 1e+0 Ground Motion (g) 1e-9 1e-8 1e-7 1e-6 1e-5 1e-4 1e-3 1e-2 1e-1 1e+0 An n u a l F r e q u e n c y o f E x c e e d e n c e ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... Deaggregation Component Total ε = (-∞ .. -2.5) ε = [-2.5 .. -2) ε = [-2 .. -1.5) ε = [-1.5 .. -1) ε = [-1 .. -0.5) ε = [-0.5 .. 0) ε = [0 .. 0.5) ε = [0.5 .. 1) ε = [1 .. 1.5) ε = [1.5 .. 2) ε = [2 .. 2.5) ε = [2.5 .. +∞) 5 25 45 Clo s e s t D i s t a n c e , r R u p ( k m ) 65 85 105 9 8.5 8 7.5 Magni t u d e ( M w ) 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 5 % C o n t r i b u t i o n t o H a z a r d 10 15 20 5 25 45 65 Clo s e s t D i s t a n c e , r R u p ( k m ) 85 105 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 Magni t u d e ( M w ) 6 5.5 5 4.5 •• •• • • •• •• • • •• • • • • •• ■ ■ ■ □ □ □ □ □ ■ ■ ■ ■ Summary statistics for, Deaggregation: Total Deaggregation targets Return period:2475 yrs Exceedance rate:0.0004040404 yr⁻¹ PGA ground motion:0.65084062 g Recovered targets Return period:2949.8301 yrs Exceedance rate:0.00033900258 yr⁻¹ Totals Binned:100 % Residual:0 % Trace:0.1 % Mean (over all sources) m:6.7 r:10.93 km ε₀:1.24 σ Mode (largest m-r bin) m:7.69 r:5.67 km ε₀:0.44 σ Contribution:10.71 % Mode (largest m-r-ε₀ bin) m:6.89 r:3.35 km ε₀:0.29 σ Contribution:6.15 % Discretization r:min = 0.0, max = 1000.0, Δ = 20.0 km m:min = 4.4, max = 9.4, Δ = 0.2 ε:min = -3.0, max = 3.0, Δ = 0.5 σ Epsilon keys ε0:[-∞ .. -2.5) ε1:[-2.5 .. -2.0) ε2:[-2.0 .. -1.5) ε3:[-1.5 .. -1.0) ε4:[-1.0 .. -0.5) ε5:[-0.5 .. 0.0) ε6:[0.0 .. 0.5) ε7:[0.5 .. 1.0) ε8:[1.0 .. 1.5) ε9:[1.5 .. 2.0) ε10:[2.0 .. 2.5) ε11:[2.5 .. +∞] Deaggregation Contributors Source Set  Source Type r m ε0 lon lat az % UC33brAvg_FM32 System 32.30 San Joaquin Hills [0]3.35 7.13 0.34 117.885°W 33.671°N 351.83 12.81 Newport-Inglewood alt 2 [0]6.89 7.48 0.77 117.937°W 33.619°N 228.64 6.48 Compton [0]16.72 7.35 1.27 118.043°W 33.702°N 288.18 2.70 Palos Verdes [6]25.33 7.46 1.98 118.119°W 33.544°N 239.84 1.87 Newport-Inglewood (Oshore) [0]8.15 6.55 1.37 117.915°W 33.591°N 201.47 1.83 San Joaquin Hills [1]4.61 6.93 0.52 117.845°W 33.669°N 72.20 1.21 UC33brAvg_FM31 System 27.76 San Joaquin Hills [0]3.35 7.52 0.29 117.885°W 33.671°N 351.83 8.25 Newport-Inglewood alt 1 [0]7.02 7.45 0.77 117.940°W 33.619°N 230.44 7.15 Compton [0]16.72 7.28 1.31 118.043°W 33.702°N 288.18 2.55 Newport-Inglewood (Oshore) [0]8.15 6.46 1.41 117.915°W 33.591°N 201.47 2.01 Palos Verdes [6]25.33 7.29 2.08 118.119°W 33.544°N 239.84 1.74 Whittier alt 1 [2]28.76 7.61 1.98 117.731°W 33.884°N 29.17 1.08 UC33brAvg_FM31 (opt)Grid 20.02 PointSourceFinite: -117.883, 33.699 6.78 5.66 1.34 117.883°W 33.699°N 0.00 3.30 PointSourceFinite: -117.883, 33.699 6.78 5.66 1.34 117.883°W 33.699°N 0.00 3.30 PointSourceFinite: -117.883, 33.717 8.09 5.68 1.53 117.883°W 33.717°N 0.00 2.09 PointSourceFinite: -117.883, 33.717 8.09 5.68 1.53 117.883°W 33.717°N 0.00 2.09 PointSourceFinite: -117.883, 33.735 8.95 5.94 1.54 117.883°W 33.735°N 0.00 1.55 PointSourceFinite: -117.883, 33.735 8.95 5.94 1.54 117.883°W 33.735°N 0.00 1.55 UC33brAvg_FM32 (opt)Grid 19.93 PointSourceFinite: -117.883, 33.699 6.80 5.64 1.35 117.883°W 33.699°N 0.00 3.18 PointSourceFinite: -117.883, 33.699 6.80 5.64 1.35 117.883°W 33.699°N 0.00 3.18 PointSourceFinite: -117.883, 33.717 8.09 5.68 1.54 117.883°W 33.717°N 0.00 2.18 PointSourceFinite: -117.883, 33.717 8.09 5.68 1.54 117.883°W 33.717°N 0.00 2.18 PointSourceFinite: -117.883, 33.735 8.97 5.93 1.55 117.883°W 33.735°N 0.00 1.56 PointSourceFinite: -117.883, 33.735 8.97 5.93 1.55 117.883°W 33.735°N 0.00 1.56 L+ PWAS_20230915 APPENDIX E LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 carlkimgeo@gmail.com Overall Liquefaction Potential Index report Project title : Carl Kim Geotechnical Location : 3100 Irvine Ave, Newport Beach, CA CPTu Name CK G C P T - 1 CK G C P T - 2 CK G C P T - 3 CK G C P T - 4 CK G C P T - 5 CK G C P T - 6 CK G C P T - 7 CP T - 1 CP T - 2 CP T - 3 CP T - 4 LP I v a l u e 17.00 16.00 15.00 14.00 13.00 12.00 11.00 10.00 9.00 8.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 0.192 0.307 0.253 0.47 0.37 0.708 0.494 0.978 0.183 0.569 0.3 LPI color scheme Very high risk High risk Low risk Basic statistics Total CPT number: 11 100% low risk 0% high risk 0% very high risk CLiq v.3.5.2.22 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software 1 Project file: C:\Users\carlk\OneDrive\Documents\CK BUSINESS\projects\Steve Coyne Wavegarden\analysis\wavegarden cove.clq CKGEO ■ □ □ Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 carlkimgeo@gmail.com Overall Liquefaction Severity Number report Project title : Carl Kim Geotechnical Location : 3100 Irvine Ave, Newport Beach, CA CPTu Name CK G C P T - 1 CK G C P T - 2 CK G C P T - 3 CK G C P T - 4 CK G C P T - 5 CK G C P T - 6 CK G C P T - 7 CP T - 1 CP T - 2 CP T - 3 CP T - 4 LS N v a l u e 12.00 11.50 11.00 10.50 10.00 9.50 9.00 8.50 8.00 7.50 7.00 6.50 6.00 5.50 5.00 4.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 0.85 0.851 0.265 1.216 1.136 4.272 1.035 2.688 0.783 1.341 0.736 Basic statistics Total CPT number: 11 100% little liquefaction 0% minor liquefaction 0% moderate liquefaction LSN color scheme Severe damage Major expression of liquefaction Moderate to severe exp. of liquefaction Moderate expression of liquefaction Minor expression of liquefaction Little to no expression of liquefaction 0% moderate to major liquefaction 0% major liquefaction 0% severe liquefaction CLiq v.3.5.2.22 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software 1 Project file: C:\Users\carlk\OneDrive\Documents\CK BUSINESS\projects\Steve Coyne Wavegarden\analysis\wavegarden cove.clq CKGEO ■ ■ ■ □ ■ □ Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. 945 Baileyana Road Hillsborough, CA 94010 carlkimgeo@gmail.com Overall vertical settlements report Project title : Carl Kim Geotechnical Location : 3100 Irvine Ave, Newport Beach, CA CPTu Name CK G C P T - 1 CK G C P T - 2 CK G C P T - 3 CK G C P T - 4 CK G C P T - 5 CK G C P T - 6 CK G C P T - 7 CP T - 1 CP T - 2 CP T - 3 CP T - 4 Ve r t i c a l s e t t l e m e n t ( i n ) 1.30 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.10 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.073 0.096 0.115 0.135 0.115 0.34 0.13 0.238 0.138 1.189 0.089 CLiq v.3.5.2.22 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software 1 Project file: C:\Users\carlk\OneDrive\Documents\CK BUSINESS\projects\Steve Coyne Wavegarden\analysis\wavegarden cove.clq CKGEO This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CKG CPT-1 CRR plot HAND AUGER CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot HAND AUGER Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential HAND AUGER LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements HAND AUGER Settlement (in) 0.060.040.020 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements HAND AUGER Displacement (in) 0 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.5.2.22 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/23/2024, 4:26:38 PM 1 Project file: C:\Users\carlk\OneDrive\Documents\CK BUSINESS\projects\Steve Coyne Wavegarden\analysis\wavegarden cove.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.62 15.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): Average results interval: Ic cut-off value: Unit weight calculation: Use fill: Fill height: 15.00 ft 1 2.60 Based on SBT No N/A Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: N/A Yes Yes Sands only Yes 60.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk - - .. : -\ \ \ :::o-I \ E l -- - - -= I TI I I I - - - - - - - ■ □ □ □ ■ O 0 ~ ~ J pJ r-.. I - - - - - ■ □ □ This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CKG CPT-2 CRR plot HAND AUGER CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot HAND AUGER Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential HAND AUGER LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements HAND AUGER Settlement (in) 0.080.060.040.020 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements HAND AUGER Displacement (in) 0 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.5.2.22 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/23/2024, 4:26:39 PM 2 Project file: C:\Users\carlk\OneDrive\Documents\CK BUSINESS\projects\Steve Coyne Wavegarden\analysis\wavegarden cove.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.62 15.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): Average results interval: Ic cut-off value: Unit weight calculation: Use fill: Fill height: 15.00 ft 1 2.60 Based on SBT No N/A Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: N/A Yes Yes Sands only Yes 60.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk - - .. -\ - - - - I - - - - - - - - - ■ □ □ □ ■ "0 -~o (/> ~ .--, I ~ I -11 _J I I - - - - - - - - - ■ □ □ This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CKG CPT-3 CRR plot HAND AUGER CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 74 72 70 68 66 64 62 60 58 56 54 52 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot HAND AUGER Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 74 72 70 68 66 64 62 60 58 56 54 52 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential HAND AUGER LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 64 62 60 58 56 54 52 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements HAND AUGER Settlement (in) 0.10.080.060.040.020 De p t h ( f t ) 74 72 70 68 66 64 62 60 58 56 54 52 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements HAND AUGER Displacement (in) 0 De p t h ( f t ) 74 72 70 68 66 64 62 60 58 56 54 52 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.5.2.22 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/23/2024, 4:26:39 PM 3 Project file: C:\Users\carlk\OneDrive\Documents\CK BUSINESS\projects\Steve Coyne Wavegarden\analysis\wavegarden cove.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.62 15.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): Average results interval: Ic cut-off value: Unit weight calculation: Use fill: Fill height: 15.00 ft 1 2.60 Based on SBT No N/A Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: N/A Yes Yes Sands only Yes 60.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk - - - -\ \ -\ \ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ■ □ □ □ ■ ~ r ~ I I .- - - - - - - ■ □ □ This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CKG CPT-4 CRR plot HAND AUGER CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot HAND AUGER Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential HAND AUGER LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements HAND AUGER Settlement (in) 0.10.050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements HAND AUGER Displacement (in) 0 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.5.2.22 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/23/2024, 4:26:40 PM 4 Project file: C:\Users\carlk\OneDrive\Documents\CK BUSINESS\projects\Steve Coyne Wavegarden\analysis\wavegarden cove.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.62 15.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): Average results interval: Ic cut-off value: Unit weight calculation: Use fill: Fill height: 15.00 ft 1 2.60 Based on SBT No N/A Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: N/A Yes Yes Sands only Yes 60.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk - - .. -\ \ - \ \ ' I - - - - - - - - - - ■ □ □ □ ■ AA y - - - - - ■ □ □ This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CKG CPT-5 CRR plot HAND AUGER CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot HAND AUGER Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential HAND AUGER LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements HAND AUGER Settlement (in) 0.10.080.060.040.020 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements HAND AUGER Displacement (in) 0 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.5.2.22 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/23/2024, 4:26:40 PM 5 Project file: C:\Users\carlk\OneDrive\Documents\CK BUSINESS\projects\Steve Coyne Wavegarden\analysis\wavegarden cove.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.62 15.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): Average results interval: Ic cut-off value: Unit weight calculation: Use fill: Fill height: 15.00 ft 1 2.60 Based on SBT No N/A Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: N/A Yes Yes Sands only Yes 60.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk -- CJ~ I ~ ll, ■ □ □ □ ■ ■ □ □ This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CKG CPT-6 CRR plot HAND AUGER CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot HAND AUGER Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential HAND AUGER LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements HAND AUGER Settlement (in) 0.30.20.10 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements HAND AUGER Displacement (in) 0 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.5.2.22 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/23/2024, 4:26:41 PM 6 Project file: C:\Users\carlk\OneDrive\Documents\CK BUSINESS\projects\Steve Coyne Wavegarden\analysis\wavegarden cove.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.62 15.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): Average results interval: Ic cut-off value: Unit weight calculation: Use fill: Fill height: 15.00 ft 1 2.60 Based on SBT No N/A Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: N/A Yes Yes Sands only Yes 60.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk - - .. \ ~ -• ~-. Ill.. ~ ----... -, \ l - - - - I I I I i I 11 - - - -y - - - ■ □ □ □ ■ L--r"' ,, I / ~ - - - - ■ □ □ This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CKG CPT-7 CRR plot HAND AUGER CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot HAND AUGER Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential HAND AUGER LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements HAND AUGER Settlement (in) 0.10.050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements HAND AUGER Displacement (in) 0 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.5.2.22 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/23/2024, 4:26:41 PM 7 Project file: C:\Users\carlk\OneDrive\Documents\CK BUSINESS\projects\Steve Coyne Wavegarden\analysis\wavegarden cove.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.62 15.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): Average results interval: Ic cut-off value: Unit weight calculation: Use fill: Fill height: 15.00 ft 1 2.60 Based on SBT No N/A Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: N/A Yes Yes Sands only Yes 60.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk - .. - -- --- - - I - ~ - -ll> - - <><> -00 ~ -~ - - ■ □ □ □ ■ - - _r I .) ' I - - - - - - - - - - - ■ □ □ This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-1 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in) 0.20.150.10.050 De p t h ( f t ) 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in) 0 De p t h ( f t ) 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.5.2.22 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/23/2024, 4:26:41 PM 8 Project file: C:\Users\carlk\OneDrive\Documents\CK BUSINESS\projects\Steve Coyne Wavegarden\analysis\wavegarden cove.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.62 15.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): Average results interval: Ic cut-off value: Unit weight calculation: Use fill: Fill height: 15.00 ft 1 2.60 Based on SBT No N/A Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: N/A Yes Yes Sands only Yes 60.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk - - r - - - I I ~ - - - -• - 0 r -~ ■ □ □ □ ■ I --I-- r· ::::::::=i I J - - - - - - - - ■ □ □ This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-2 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in) 0.10.050 De p t h ( f t ) 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in) 0 De p t h ( f t ) 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.5.2.22 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/23/2024, 4:26:42 PM 9 Project file: C:\Users\carlk\OneDrive\Documents\CK BUSINESS\projects\Steve Coyne Wavegarden\analysis\wavegarden cove.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.62 15.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): Average results interval: Ic cut-off value: Unit weight calculation: Use fill: Fill height: 15.00 ft 1 2.60 Based on SBT No N/A Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: N/A Yes Yes Sands only Yes 60.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk - - - ·r \ , - --- - - - - - -- :.~~ ■ □ □ □ ■ I f - 1 I I ) J I I - - ■ □ □ This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-3 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in) 1.210.80.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in) 0 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.5.2.22 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/23/2024, 4:26:42 PM 10 Project file: C:\Users\carlk\OneDrive\Documents\CK BUSINESS\projects\Steve Coyne Wavegarden\analysis\wavegarden cove.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.62 15.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): Average results interval: Ic cut-off value: Unit weight calculation: Use fill: Fill height: 15.00 ft 1 2.60 Based on SBT No N/A Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: N/A Yes Yes Sands only Yes 60.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk .. \ \ - - - - \ \ ' -- - - - - ■ □ □ □ ■ ~ ----~ ~ ~ - ~ I J l.,/ - - - - - - ■ □ □ This software is licensed to: Carl Kim CPT name: CPT-4 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in) 0.080.060.040.020 De p t h ( f t ) 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in) 0 De p t h ( f t ) 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.5.2.22 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/23/2024, 4:26:43 PM 11 Project file: C:\Users\carlk\OneDrive\Documents\CK BUSINESS\projects\Steve Coyne Wavegarden\analysis\wavegarden cove.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.70 0.62 15.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.): Average results interval: Ic cut-off value: Unit weight calculation: Use fill: Fill height: 15.00 ft 1 2.60 Based on SBT No N/A Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: N/A Yes Yes Sands only Yes 60.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk r 7 - - - -.. ,. -E \· -II , - == --11 --::::l ~ 4L = !.....J II I I .: I I II -- ~ L..J - - - - - - - - - ■ □ □ □ ■ <> - ) J - - - - - - - - - - ■ □ □ PWAS_20230915 APPENDIX F EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS APPENDIX F CARL KIM GEOTECHNICAL, INC. EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Appendix F Page F-1.0 GENERAL ........................................................................................................... 1  F-1.1 Intent ............................................................................................................. 1  F-1.2 Role of Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. ............................................................... 1  F-1.3 The Earthwork Contractor ............................................................................. 1  F-2.0 PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED ..................................................... 3  F-2.1 Clearing and Grubbing .................................................................................. 3  F-2.2 Processing ..................................................................................................... 3  F-2.3 Overexcavation ............................................................................................. 3  F-2.4 Benching ....................................................................................................... 4  F-2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas .............................................................. 4  F-3.0 FILL MATERIAL ................................................................................................. 5  F-3.1 Fill Quality ...................................................................................................... 5  F-3.2 Oversize ........................................................................................................ 5  F-3.3 Import ............................................................................................................ 5  F-4.0 FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION ........................................................... 6  F-4.1 Fill Layers ...................................................................................................... 6  F-4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning .............................................................................. 6  F-4.3 Compaction of Fill .......................................................................................... 6  F-4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes .............................................................................. 6  F-4.5 Compaction Testing ...................................................................................... 6  F-4.6 Compaction Test Locations ........................................................................... 7  F-5.0 EXCAVATION ..................................................................................................... 8  F-6.0 TRENCH BACKFILLS ........................................................................................ 9  F-6.1 Safety ............................................................................................................ 9  F-6.2 Bedding and Backfill ...................................................................................... 9  F-6.3 Lift Thickness ................................................................................................ 9  F-1 F-1.0 GENERAL F-1.1 Intent These Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications are for grading and earthwork shown on the current, approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. (Carl Kim Geo) geotechnical report(s). These Guide Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s). In case of conflict, the project-specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these Guide Specifications. Carl Kim Geo shall provide geotechnical observation and testing during earthwork and grading. Based on these observations and tests, Carl Kim Geo may provide new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s). F-1.2 Role of Carl Kim Geotechnical, Inc. Prior to commencement of earthwork and grading, Carl Kim Geo shall meet with the earthwork contractor to review the earthwork contractor’s work plan, to schedule sufficient personnel to perform the appropriate level of observation, mapping and compaction testing. During earthwork and grading, Carl Kim Geo shall observe, map, and document subsurface exposures to verify geotechnical design assumptions. If observed conditions are found to be significantly different than the interpreted assumptions during the design phase, Carl Kim Geo shall inform the owner, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodate these observed conditions, and notify the review agency where required. Subsurface areas to be geotechnically observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested include (1) natural ground after clearing to receiving fill but before fill is placed, (2) bottoms of all "remedial removal" areas, (3) all key bottoms, and (4) benches made on sloping ground to receive fill. Carl Kim Geo shall observe moisture-conditioning and processing of the subgrade and fill materials, and perform relative compaction testing of fill to determine the attained relative compaction. Carl Kim Geo shall provide Daily Field Reports to the owner and the Contractor on a routine and frequent basis. F-1.3 The Earthwork Contractor The earthwork contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of ground to receive fill, moisture-conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Carl Kim Geo Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications F-2 Contractor shall review and accept the plans, geotechnical report(s), and these Guide Specifications prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing grading and backfilling in accordance with the current, approved plans and specifications. The Contractor shall inform the owner and Carl Kim Geo of changes in work schedules at least one working day in advance of such changes so that appropriate observations and tests can be planned and accomplished. The Contractor shall not assume that Carl Kim Geo is aware of all grading operations. The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish earthwork and grading in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these Guide Specifications, and recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). If, in the opinion of Carl Kim Geo, unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, improper moisture condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, Carl Kim Geo shall reject the work and may recommend to the owner that earthwork and grading be stopped until unsatisfactory condition(s) are rectified. Carl Kim Geo Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications F-3 F-2.0 PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED F-2.1 Clearing and Grubbing Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, governing agencies and Carl Kim Geo. Care should be taken not to encroach upon or otherwise damage native and/or historic trees designated by the Owner or appropriate agencies to remain. Pavements, flatwork or other construction should not extend under the “drip line” of designated trees to remain. Carl Kim Geo shall evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. Earth fill material shall not contain more than 3 percent of organic materials (by dry weight: ASTM D 2974). Nesting of the organic materials shall not be allowed. If potentially hazardous materials are encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed immediately for proper evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area. As presently defined by the State of California, most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, coolant, etc.) have chemical constituents that are considered to be hazardous waste. As such, the indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids onto the ground may constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall not be allowed. F-2.2 Processing Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill, by Carl Kim Geo, shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches (15 cm). Existing ground that is not satisfactory shall be over-excavated as specified in the following Section F-2.3. Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit uniform compaction. F-2.3 Overexcavation In addition to removals and over-excavations recommended in the approved geotechnical report(s) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic-rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be over- excavated to competent ground as evaluated by Carl Kim Geo during grading. All undocumented fill soils under proposed structure footprints should be excavated Carl Kim Geo Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications F-4 F-2.4 Benching Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), (>20 percent grade) the ground shall be stepped or benched. The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15 feet (4.5 m) wide and at least 2 feet (0.6 m) deep, into competent material as evaluated by Carl Kim Geo. Other benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet (1.2 m) into competent material or as otherwise recommended by Carl Kim Geo. Fill placed on ground sloping flatter than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), (<20 percent grade) shall also be benched or otherwise over-excavated to provide a flat subgrade for the fill. F-2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by Carl Kim Geo as suitable to receive fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance (Daily Field Report) from Carl Kim Geo prior to fill placement. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations of processed areas, keys and benches. Carl Kim Geo Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications F-5 F-3.0 FILL MATERIAL F-3.1 Fill Quality Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free of organic matter and other deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by Carl Kim Geo prior to placement. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to Carl Kim Geo or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. F-3.2 Oversize Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 6 inches (15 cm), shall not be buried or placed in fill unless location, materials and placement methods are specifically accepted by Carl Kim Geo. Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur and such that oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 feet (3 m) measured vertically from finish grade, or within 2 feet (0.61 m) of future utilities or underground construction. F-3.3 Import If importing of fill material is required for grading, proposed import material shall meet the requirements of Section F-3.1, and be free of hazardous materials (“contaminants”) and rock larger than 3-inches (8 cm) in largest dimension. All import soils shall have an Expansion Index (EI) of 20 or less and a sulfate content no greater than () 500 parts-per-million (ppm). A representative sample of a potential import source shall be given to Carl Kim Geo at least four full working days before importing begins, so that suitability of this import material can be determined and appropriate tests performed. Carl Kim Geo Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications F-6 F-4.0 FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION F-4.1 Fill Layers Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill, as described in Section 0, above, in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches (20 cm) in loose thickness. Carl Kim Geo may accept thicker layers if testing indicates the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers, and only if the building officials with the appropriate jurisdiction approve. Each layer shall be spread evenly and mixed thoroughly to attain relative uniformity of material and moisture throughout. F-4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly over optimum. Maximum density and optimum soil moisture content tests shall be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Test Method D 1557. F-4.3 Compaction of Fill After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly spread, each layer shall be uniformly compacted to not-less-than (≥) 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557. Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently achieve the specified level of compaction with uniformity. F-4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, compaction of slopes shall be accomplished by back rolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet (1 to 1.2 m) in fill elevation, or by other methods producing satisfactory results acceptable to Carl Kim Geo. Upon completion of grading, relative compaction of the fill, out to the slope face, shall be at least 90 percent of the ASTM D 1557 laboratory maximum density. F-4.5 Compaction Testing Field-tests for moisture content and relative compaction of the fill soils shall be performed by Carl Kim Geo. Location and frequency of tests shall be at our field representative(s) discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test locations shall be selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged Carl Kim Geo Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications F-7 to be prone to inadequate compaction (such as close to slope faces and at the fill/bedrock benches). F-4.6 Compaction Test Locations Carl Kim Geo shall document the approximate elevation and horizontal coordinates of each density test location. The Contractor shall coordinate with the project surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established so that Carl Kim Geo can determine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. Adequate grade stakes shall be provided. Carl Kim Geo Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications F-8 F-5.0 EXCAVATION Excavations, as well as over-excavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by Carl Kim Geo during grading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual extent of removal shall be determined by Carl Kim Geo based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, the cut portion of the slope shall be made, then observed and reviewed by Carl Kim Geo prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope, unless otherwise recommended by Carl Kim Geo. Carl Kim Geo Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications F-9 F-6.0 TRENCH BACKFILLS F-6.1 Safety The Contractor shall follow all OSHA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations. Work should be performed in accordance with Article 6 of the California Construction Safety Orders, 2003 Edition or more current (see also: http://www.dir.ca.gov/title8/sb4a6.html ). F-6.2 Bedding and Backfill All utility trench bedding and backfill shall be performed in accordance with applicable provisions of the current edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book). Bedding material shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SE>30). Bedding shall be placed to 1-foot (0.3 m) over the top of the conduit, and densified by jetting in areas of granular soils, if allowed by the permitting agency. Otherwise, the pipe-bedding zone should be backfilled with Controlled Low Strength Material (CLSM) consisting of at least one sack of Portland cement per cubic-yard of sand, and conforming to Section 201-6 of the current edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book). Backfill over the bedding zone shall be placed and densified mechanically to a minimum of 95 percent of relative compaction (ASTM D 1557) from 1 foot (0.3 m) above the top of the conduit to the surface. Backfill above the pipe zone shall not be jetted. Jetting of the bedding around the conduits shall be observed by Carl Kim Geo and backfill above the pipe zone (bedding) shall be observed and tested by Carl Kim Geo. F-6.3 Lift Thickness Lift thickness of trench backfill shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can demonstrate to Carl Kim Geo that the fill lift can be compacted to the minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment and method, and only if the building officials with the appropriate jurisdiction approve.