HomeMy WebLinkAboutCnb 94 301 Newport Blvd G Part 2L 44OY CRAN'DALL AND ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Consultants • One of the Law Companies
731 East Ball Road, Suite 104, Anaheim, California 92S05, Phone (714) 776-9544, Fax (714) 776.9.541
Offices: Glendale • Anaheim
October 2, 1989
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
301 Newport Boulevard, Box Y
Newport Beach, California 92658-8912
Marina del Rey • San Diego
Attention: Mr. F. W. Evans, III, ALA
Vice President
Facilities Design and Construction
Gentlemen:
Grading Permit o. 2056G-84
(L
Interim Report of Compacted Fill
Pro osed-PIRI-an.d,ER Additions
loag Memorial al,' Prerbkterian
301 Newpor oulevard
Newport Beach, California _
The compacted fill placed for foundation and floor slab support
of the proposed additions to the existing Magnetic Resonance Imaging
(MRI) Center and the existing Emergency Room (ER) buildings is approved
as of September 28, 1989. The earthwork was performed in accordance
with the project specifications and the recommendations of our founda-
tion investigation report dated December 19, 1984 (LCA A-84364), and
supplementary consultation letters dated September 6, and September 14,
1989 (LCA 089068.AB). In addition, our firm previously provided obser-
vation and testing of compacted fill and observation of foundation
excavations for the existing MAI Center; our final inspection report was
dated July 17, 1987 (LCA 13-86155). The scope of our services did not
include either the responsibility for job safety or the function of
surveying. The grading work was done to the limits and at the locations
indicated by stakes and hubs set by others.
Observation and ASTM D1556 (equivalent to UBC-70-2) sand -cone
field density tests were made by our technician during the progress of
089042.B Page 2
the job. The results and approximate locations of the tests are attach-
ed as a part of this report.
The specifications required that the fill be compacted to at
least 902 of the maximum density obtainable by the ASTM Designation
D1557-70 (equivalent to BBC 70-) method of compaction. An allowable
bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot may be imposed on the
fill under the following conditions: Exterior footings extend at least
two feet below the adjacent final grade, and interior footings at least
two feet below the top of the adjacent floor slab.
This approval is limited to the building areas as shown on the
Plot Plan.
Upon completion of the soils related work for the project, our
final report will be submitted, giving the locations and results of all
tests and observations.
The site was first stripped and cleared of existing landscaping
and debris from demolition. Overexcavation of up to 4+ feet in depth
and for a lateral distance of 5 feet beyond in plan was necessary. along
the north and east sides of the proposed MRI Addition due to the pre-
sence of fill soils that were not uniformly compacted. These fill soils
were beyond the limits of the previous grading and placement of compact-
ed fill as part of the original MRI Center construction. Following the
required overexcavation of the MRI Addition, the resultant exposed
natural soils were scarified to a depth of six inches, brought to
approximately optimum moisture content, and rolled with heavy compaction
equipment. The existing compacted fill soils previously observed and
tested by our fir in the rest of the MRI Addition and the EIt Addition
pads were scarified to a depth of twelve inches, brought to approximate-
ly optimum moisture content, and also rolled with heavy compaction
equipment. The required fill soils, consisting of on -site silty sand
and imported sand, were then placed in loose lifts not exceeding eight
inches in thickness, brought to approximately optimum moisture content,
and compacted by a 950 loader and a skip loader. Noisture was added, as
necessary, by spraying with a water hose.
At the iodations and elevations tested by us, the fill was
compacted to at least the specified degree of compaction. In providing
professional gecteohnical observations and testing services associated
with the development of the project, we have employed accepted engineer-
ing and testing procedures and have made every reasonable effort to
ascertain that the soil related work was carried out in general compli-
ance with the project plans and specifications, and the City of Newport
Beach Municipal Cade. Although our observation did not reveal obvious
Ud'G42.B
Page 3
deficiencies, we do not guarantee the contractor's work, nor de the
services performed by our firm relieve the contractor of responsibility
in the event of subsequently discovered defects in his work.
viiiSSrflt SES$/
h&7�y H. JCyrVo �Q tS M. y�ter
Na No. 586
be Qom. „� E:o /Z 3/ L �
. r t OF CALIFO
•
DA1/DA/da
Attachments (3)
(2 copies submitted).
Respectfully submitted,
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
by
wes r y a, cinson
Vice res dent
1��es MMcidee
Director of Ins ion Services
senior Vice President
cc: (2) Miles & Kelley Construction Company (jobsite)
Attn: Mr. Steven Grav
(2) City of Newport Beach
Department of Building & Safety
Grading Division
Attn: Mr. Richard Higley
TABLE OF TEST RMLTS
MOISTURE MAXIMUM
CONTENT DRY DRY
TEST ELEVATION (% OF DENSITY DENSITY PERCENT RETEST DATE OF
NO. (FEET) DRY WT.) (LBS./CU. FT.) (LBS 1CU. FT.) COMPACTION NO._ TESTING
1 751 13.1 122 129 95 9/20/89
2 77 14.5 123 129 95 9/20/89
3 78 11.7 122 129 95 9/20/89
4 77 11.9 124 129 96 9/20/89
5 78 11.7 124 129 96 9/20/89
6 78 14.1 121 129 94 9/20/89
7 78 8.4 103 111 93 9/28/89
8 78 8.9 105 111 95 9/28/89
NOTE: Elevations refer to job datum.
0
0
d
-t
0
O'
TABLEOECOMPACTIONISTDATA
MAXIMUM OPTIMUM
DENSITY* MOISTURE
SOIL TYPE SOURCE (LBS./CU. FT.) (8 OLDRY WT.)
Silty Sand On -Site 129 10.5%
Sand Import 111 9.5%
NOTE: *Test Method: ASTM Designation D1557-70
(equivalent to UBC 70-1)
CID
a
a
a0
0
OVER -EXCAVATED AND
COMPACTED DURING
PRIOR CONSTRUCTION
(HATCHED)
EXISTING EMERGENCY
DEPARTMENT BUILDING
EXISTING MRI
BUILDING
(FFE = 79.02)
APPROX. LIMITS
OF GRADING
(SHADED)
OVER -EXCAVATED AND
COMPACTED DURING
PRIOR CONSTRUCTION
(HATCHED)
APPROX. LIMITS
OF GRADING
(SHADED)
6 • FIELD DENSITY TEST LOCATION
® NEW ADDITION
THE FIELD DENSITY TEST LOCATIONS,
AS GRAPHICALLY SHOWN ON THIS PLOT
PLAN, ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY, AND DO
NOT REPRESENT PRECISE LOCATIONS.
REFERENCES:
SITE PLAN (AS REV. 7-12-991 0
TAYLOR L ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS,
GRADING AND UTILITY PLAN (DATED
2-17-99) BY URS CONSULTANTS, INC.
ADDRESS:
301 NEWPORT BOULEVARD
NEWPORT BEACH
PLOT PLAN
PROPOSED MRI AND ER
BUILDING ADDITIONS
SCALE 1"=20' (APPROX.)
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
DEC : 19'iG
CITY Of NIA/PORT BEACH
(;Al gRiIIIF
I INAI, {2lil"712:1'
(; I;(i f( (11NJCAl. INS1'I i("PION SF RV ICI S;
"..IPI ANl) P,It i31JIl.l4N(; A171)11I(71.1'1
NltWPOR'F I;f)U1.1NAR1)
wPn1?rrw:Ari r,(`Atlh'P)TLNIA
OR
IIOA(; 71ZIAI, IIUSPft'AI, I'RIkSHVILPIAI
(! t'A O59012 It)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
AND ASSOOXJt_S
Edzt 3.4ti k ,a;ne `L: ?.nx� gem Catif,rnr4 92%.03, Payne f> 14i 776.9544 Fsa (714; 7769541
r wt :. w ;!rre9aic • Arxaheirn • M.eriae dci 6?.a:j r>n P7 r x2
6-
Ik),:.i)r 4lclruin; iErspit;<; l'rc::hylr;rcm
“11 ,"-+r ti sat 8':. i ,.:rd, Box Y
Nc.wpart r;c.;;ci_ CaGfr:rnia 9265g.ft912
Allcntinn: Mt. (. SY [wins, IIS, A.I.A.
`i;rc f'rz:':idt
& Construction
rnll::n,cr
;n,,:! I<cport -
ricr.0Insper:lion Services
11,I and ftld I;udding Additions
Ir„t L nx41;11 lin,spital Presbyterian
'.Ot at lhatIt vrutl
Rcac.h, California
Grading i'ernril ,-n t(J 6G S9
(1''A !)rt'N142.I11
\Vc. ;nr r: cal -- l rl- rmr final rcplrct of gcotcchni(-al ituater t an
Wiling Hu d -e •sncnt of lire hila and Nt iiuildinp Additions at Ihap 'v10 u;
Ptut:byttr;:i!I I . «:part provides:
• A n1 prior ;:ire grading;
• A (Irr rj . amid of our ohsery iron and teztinh of the compacted fill, And
• Vcrilir i;ur of our nhscry Lion and apprrrv;il nl the cxc;rvantau; for the
Ii:rarula!i+;ns.
'fhc Intalinn Ot ti:c Mir i.• SI P>wn with relation to the tuistinl! builrlinp; nn thy. Ilthcbcri plot
flan. fill' --li.,a ar,lk wa:: pertnrnu:(1 during the months n1 Seplr:;nhrl and ( )clnhcr
11)Y"1. VirI; -vr ;:J. p<: rli �rmcd ;i liamdation invcstiy ilinn of III: .uhnutlod ow
rrr uuuucncl:,tt.n i<I :1 lcp;lrt d:ncd t)cr.clnbcr 19, I')£KA (ICA 4;GO. ;uui in
s.upl;i, ul Id F z.nll.ltiou h ILr; datad Sept& irtbcr I> ;wr1 Id, 19::V (I (>;
Pc!iourn:d
a1 I lospital
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
been performed using that degree of care ;;nd ;kill ordurendy
rcum tans s. by reputable geolechn cal engineers leg(in lids
�• oil i ir:; ;n cthcr warranty, expressed OE implied, is made as to the n < s.
t x:nal
ni,h"' ,hi; report "(he scope of otrr e toes did not incled�
ether the
or the function or eul vcyint, 1110 ssit-related wort l,e: dome to
;hc limit -, nt t0 I ations ind:calcd ty .st;ake% and lute;;:ct by others.
SUMMARY OFPRIOR r11Tifrl'.AIJING
. for the subject MRI and GR building additions war, prrv,r a iyeraded
,iu;ing ,r tn:ction of the existing MRI Cutter and the existing
,7 }it? building. We
I, <%lowly perh,nn^d ;I !owl:bijou investigation for the MR! Cenlcr and r,hmiiier1 r,ur
mnu, nr n:<,t;:. in a repott dined f)ecenuer 19, 19f1,1- (I 'A A 8I' l)- (tea lion
pi d ,-rv:,tinn and testing of cnmpactcd lilt during the grading ni the MRI Center
rile and pr r;ir,_d our results in a final report than' lulp 17, 19H7 (!.('A 1;( I55J. 11lic
< •etond Friii.rin.ncy Rt,orn building was part of the Minn ISuiteling Addition Inr which we
pctlimn< I Ir•;r„iaueon investigation and vuhntittcd our ccnt5 nt'ndatir illiu a tcport d:1101
`.u_,,nia. rfi,t9F9 (L(.:A A.6(.(186). We perforated nhsc
I rw;dll it ;Itld hiLnf, U1 I(nnpnllC<I
hid d, tr d, the amst ruction of the Main 13uildin}' ne arrd paz.ntetl out rre,lt:; in a
irpntt dmtni 1)<'rctnbcr 0, 1973 (LCA 11-71103i).
As !Jinni] ir. our dorywiliiition letter dated Septcmher b, PRO, the majority nl tbt; lilt could
br Belt in I:fac:e Inv support of the building addition I tt Iations and 101 '..uhyr;nle.:,e„rI
HI (w:rin,ctr r w;Jkwads and slabs adjacent to the MRI and LP. huildiu additiurc_
h u1 this previously placed fill, observer, and tested by t,u; 1it bl •wa: left i;i
p'.,;.c. Est :if eel cxt-.tiwr Id! sails which was not uniformly campac.lcd and vat, beyond the
pnr�ie e, r: limits ed [Irulini! wus exposed in the north ;,nd northeard pant,❑ nt the Mkt
ddiliti-n (id!. :,rr:, 01 poorly camp;,clt tl existing lilt sail:; nn the ordt ; u1 tb: lee- t deep w;
_t uvalcd ar d £')'turd s: prnpt•rly rnntpnt.Icd Idl.
_ HC)N 'tNr)_PES l I :fr Oh c C MPAC"f'ED
I l:c c:crh•..park tor the 'dRI and Itit building adslit}nn: aorz; is
do the sit: for the subject development and prer�idc xul>I,=,rt for to ri!dinc
bit, riml adjacent exterior s}aa. and walkways. The st r ificatinn,
he fill he compacted In at leasi 'XJ% rrf the: maximum ehstsiuy ,hI ir,: hlc fly
the A`i UM fl:.:;ign rticrn 1)1 57-711 (equivalent to ii1;C-7(1-i) method of r,unh,Ictir
iet the required lining consisted tri eirr-site clayey sand ;utzt impe rrtoci ;illy
ImgrraHM RYA!, were pe!iitoned nu represent ice samples of the ::nil- to establish
I her tu:.rnu a dry terrines. The tests wen: pyrrfrsnne-d in accordance with the: ;pecifieet
iur Nu:d of rnmpuction, v:hieh utilizes a 1/[tl c ,lm: reel it mold in which sort, of five luycrs• of
.mil is r. anp;tracd by 2blows of a 10 pound Icaumcr I'.;Ilius_! iR inch+:s. 1h- r:sults of thy.
ipuu u , tests c.crc cried in estnhlishinl, the (levier:, of comparliot] ,,( hu ve,t durirzu the
ptnritr, d WE: fill and h.ieklill. "phc result,: of 1bc: rornpnction t •,Ls ate tee stied in the
=Jtarlle(1 f'tlelc: of Cumpactinn Tz.st Data.
I! xi' - v:u, tint stripped and cleared of existing Luulacaping and dchrr burn dcrne,lit!nh.
t lvtar .,warion of rip t:r -tV fist in depth and lit a later l (11%1:n :col ') !i:<I h1011d in phli
vse, tier-..ary along the north and c.rst %idt s nl Inc prepn:a:d MP Ari'fii n (Inc ti the
lqu'd ec eel fill that were not undi;rnly cumpacic(I. hulluwiny the rcyuirtd
nveit-,u-t::d irrn of the MRI /Addilinn area the rt-:;L t;ml expuscd n:thtrail %: ,Acre sc:nilied
In a dr:pth ul r, inches. hrunigh( lu npprnxi, u,u ty a}aimum moisture euniz i,i and rt duet witft
lied:°:I IMIVICIICUI caluipnu•.m. lhc cxislini� cunipacttd fill suits, previntr.ly .th,cr-,cd and
te,nz} by riot firm in thee rest of the M112f Addition and the IT Addition pod'., :. rrcxcarilicd
ern depth of 12 inches. hruulthl to appntxirn:drly uplinn:m moraine cumeur, and also rtdled
.hith fi_ t y cornpaclit;n equipment. 11te requiu:d fill sick wen: Then ptee e-d in Lsn,c Iifis neel
+:reealiu}t k inehcs in thickness, brought to uppriYiwale!y eeptirnum mnistrn � r+ent-.nt. anti
ruuqat trd ry a e7U loader and a skip luudcr. Mnivw . was addod ri.e.e.,,-ear by .prryin,'.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
tistardirh the drigrte cranpat:tion achieved, ASTN1 Ibmsignation lit 5% tuttniettlent to
lliltUdM sitnd-one field density tests tr..tre made as the filling prop -espial lir it:palls of
tat .tr,dcl tletctity tetds are presented Ili the attached Table of Test li.csults, the .ttatiosimate.
t if dm Ppm :ire 016-0:11 tni thc 11(11. Natl.
An iiiirmirc reratrt the iiiinpinited till placed to grade the. buildirirt
H,Sn''Idlien; and Poor 'slain isuppttirt wAS issued on Octribur 2, 089,
OBSERVNI ION OF INDAlinrj 1:XCAVAIRMllt,
eJtert,kuttet tt. the te(tititett gritting for the building ;Ifta!;. ,ArICIWAt:
r:TI;;1[;prt';:(1 if .fitirlyS MRI and hR htiIdnuaddhjtn-. On I ielit technician
ed F 1trettc.(1 the tot tttutt excavations, to verity (hut the ttoils y.ttirt t idiot- properly
rtirotittctitel HI or trighttuirherl ittatirtil materitits (}111112!'flth"Cl 111I 10121111:111“:1:.i1111)1111. !IC
were cleaned tit muse soils pi ior tired iptrtssil. Alter id/ancmion indicated
111.1r approval Mr, Id' ;11Iiio old f(11
.;). remoiailde patties.
Ric d ti,c ttf tun odisciv,ition, the mtil cow111ioo Pr III( I I .1 citing •fr.
man top: At, iichmilial in ,i letter datial Septcnittcr 19ttlir, Hulul kaoline. lor 11,c
liuddiria imiabin,lital in Minim poorly cornpic led HI in firm civIr,trabed natural
rain hi: darted Ii impow a net (lead plus live lind ples.ifitt. 2.UIw, pounds per
%thee hr.:. A 1}111: rIird I1Cte.ISC III OW hcatitto value (mild he lewd Je,r wind or
t. MN( thltMl\lh
111', 11!11; 1(.111311 V. to 1111: 1..1111!lVI Ilk {)f 11:31111C 1111.(1111,11 1:1111,15f )
id • (04 1,:' ,I) ' ( .111(1/111 tt".(i1111 PI kel411 (1 V.Crk 1111 111f' 1)fcrio I
OW;n42,B
f'ag.e
te•eeil CV% Cac)r observations, we art satisfied that the foundation excavatii)liti TONI ‘tilagrairiCS
1{ ATT1T11:11: 5.11{{)S and walks wee prepared in accordttnee with the project plans and
:tyro: icationn. Also. iit the locations and elevations tester' by us, die fill phip.tal Icar TO21{{-{011.
A The'. e;tiks •*a:•: compacted to at feast the specified degree of compaction lit our opinion,
t„ittchhicat :Mated work was petrol total in general OTTfilpliallte With {{0' plOrta
ccH:c {{{C T{{{01in, Nutt the City ot Newport Beach Municipal (tide and is considgicit ttuliamit
atierided use.
Iti professional geotriclinical observations and testing 1,111V14:1-{, wlattpicayed
Tc. eriiiirtecring and tasting proterlures, and nit other warranty, cuiptc%scri or implicit,
providing this ptof(rsional (wiling]. While wit made every leasoualtle Mita t
Csi,1::1T1VCCCS {11ICTIS{ manikin' rif C{ITC, of our profession, and out oh:en:idital.;
itat obvious va- (lc) not guarantee the ct)ittratioi va k, {101 {10 lice
cnrac:c C pc:T{0111VA IV OM 1{1111 relieve Je 1:(,11/1{{e{01 of respow.ibility in the event rii
Ht-n!;:i (lCit't EN hiN Vank.
lei iiiy iwtirnitted,
! CRANIMI,I, AN I) ASSOC/NI f•S
.411 r il I
.11U Pylifietti
p7) iii/( 1, . , ....!„)....e„. , ...._ k .,
I, tit, • '4 tvic1/2Vet.t
--• i •
i,•-• No- of tni,pection•lkeivice ti
(-mit : Vii e Presiderd 41
I ri":: I tA
Hilil'441(.. (.4)
/.,•,)e..,
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.1) Taylor & AS;5;e4,:iiiteS, Architects
(T.) Im,lcir and (Clines
Attn: Mr, likilliarn Taylor
(7.) Mika; & Keliey Clenstruction Company
Atm, /If. 'Wayne G. fiddle
)y Nev)porl
Bffil(brig ffilmitromit
Attie Mr, Richard Higley
Grading Engineer
(2) Ottice of the Statc Architect (w)i Verified 1{):))())1 N,J)
..)Iliteturil Safety Section
Attn: Mr. John P. McCourt, SE.
Principal Structural Engineer
1
1
1
1
1
1
Faye 6
tai
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
RESULTS
cm» MAXIMUM
mvre DRY =e
TEST ELEVATION (% DENSITY DEDENSITY PERCENT
OF
: 1 (tBSICU.Fii j r LCOMPACTION
»1 122 129 95
a; o 129 95
«, 122 m 95
19 m m *
27 m 129 x
». c 129 m
« w 111 e
w m 95
mElevation'. <«ew «_
'FABLE OF C OMPACT!ON -11FISI DATA
1111.1IPI SOI;PC:F.
MAXIMUM
DENSITY•
1- .j
Gt'JMtJref
,Vt(ISI U 1
[2 0E f ItY W'I;J
On -Site 129 ItLY/v,
lirgprt III
tr'tS1f.. '"I'cs� Method: AtifM ricignt+ti+m D15577U
{c�piiv;drrt Ir. U13C 70-1 j
1
1
1
1
1
r./11((lik1Efr
••••,,r-Ir(trr..• irD ()tic', I !IC,
(((iti(lik()((1 i (41
HT( ( (1(10)
' (111)1,1111 r
APPI(OX.
(.:(• (((kP(I) I NI,
6e
(11. I I NC Pi(kr
ER BUILDING ADDITION
...
30
r/ f 1
t1(1)/, 11
11
MRI BUILDING ADDITION
(T,
1); ((11;;() (1((
So r •ri4,-1•( -r •
r101( •
THE t ! (( ((t (4',
f((( [(PAH( I (,(1riwuY4 1-1.((e; pi ry
pi Ali pp; r,p((j((if.IKAr f•rrir Aro'
nor kr r•:-; •rr !I! PP; ouri (ON:
('( '11( i 1(3) '
1(1),(1' ( (.1( '(() I(' • ; 1(1 (..(j
1'4
C.
i(j11(1,(
!al ( PAL', ,
PLOT PLAN
HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
PRESBYTERIAN
MRI AND ER
BUILDING ADDITIONS
*Al "e-r,
4(10(:TY CR4NDAI,I AND TA.Y.(0((lATES
TAB L E OF TEST R ESU L T S
MOISTURE MAXIMUM
CONTENT DRY DRY
T ELEVATION (Z OF DENSITY DENSITY PERCENT RETEST DATE OF
NO. (FEET) DRY WT.) (LBS./CU. FT.) (LBS./CO.FT.) COMPACTION NO. TESTING
1 59 11.0 121 130 93 11-21-88 •
2 601 10.0 120 130 92 11-21-88
3 66 11.2 113 121 93 11-22-88
d 62i 10.8 122 130 94 11-22-88
5 68 9.3 122 130 94 11-22-88
6 70 8.9 119 130 92 11-23-88
7 71 } 8.1 120 130 92 11-23-88
8 73 8.7 120 130 92 11-23-88
9 .58 8.0 121 130 93 11-23-88.
0: 59 8.6 122 130 94 11-23-88
11 60i 9.0 122 430 94 11-23-88
Note: Elevations refer to Job Datum.
TABLEOF COMPACT' ON TEST DAT A
MAX/MUM OPTIMUM
DENSITY* MOISTURE
,..IL TYPE SOURCE (LES./CU. FT.) (% OF DPI WT.)
Silty Sand On -Site 130 8i
Silty Sand On -Site 121 Ili
NOTE: * Test Method ASTM Designation D1557-70
(E.',uivalent to UBC-70-1)
TRLACT
FIELD DENSPPY TEST SUMMARY
Moisture Dry ativa
Depth or Content Density Test Soil`
'rest Location Elevation % P.C.F. C ,,action Method Tgpe:::
See Plans Surf 9.5 115.0 93.1 SC
See Plans. Surf 9.3 114.6 92.8 SC
80
See Plans FG 5.2 131.4 95.4 SC
See Plans FG 4.9 132.6 96.1 SC 5
5 Below Subdrain SG 9.7 114.4 92.6 SC
8j6/80
West Slope 37 9.4 . 115.5 93.5 SC
3/7/80
'`7 South Slope 38 9.6 114.7 92.9 SC
UNTY OF RANGE
HEALTH CARE AGENCY
/
PUBLYC.. HEALTH AND MEDICAL SERVICES
1 2, 1986 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
R. C. Gossett
Unocal Refining & Marketing Div.
Unocal Corporation
1450 Frazee Road, Suite 615
an Diego, CP. 92138
otREao
L: REX EHLPNG, M.D.
HEALTH OFFICER
1722 WEST , ITH STREEY
SANTA ANA. CA 92$04
TELEFHONE•714/094.7f01
MAILING AGGRESS: P.O. POE S59
SANTA ANA: CA 92702
CERTIFIED
RETURN RECEIPT
REQUESTED
SUBJECT: NOTICE CF yi' r ' i re to Mitigate Soil
Contamination a 3001 Newport Bl'fd,:, Newport Beach
Dear Mr. Gossett:
This Agency, which is authorized to enforce both the State
hazardous waste and underground storage tank laws and regulations
(Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapters 6.5 and 6.7, and
California Administrative Code, Tittle 22, Division 4, Chapter 30,
and Title 23, Subchapter 16), has not received verification that
the soil contamination of the property referenced above has been
mitigated. Section 25298(o)4 of the California Health and Safety
Code states that no person shall close an underground storage
tank unless it has been demonstrated to the local agency that no
significant soil contamination has occurred.
Appropriate site evaluation/mitigation action must be initiated
immediately as failure to comply with this provision of the law
:may result in civil penalties of not less than $500.00 or more
than $5000.00 for each day the facility is in violation.
f you have any questions regarding specific procedures an('
requirements, please call me at (714) 834-6648.
Very truly yours,
Sylvia Marion
Hazardous Waste Specialist
Waste Management Section
Environmental Health
SM:mfm
Cc:
City of Newport Heach Fire Department
Diane Stavenha=en—Kadletz District Attorney's Office
Kurt Eerchtoid, Regional Water Quality Control Board
City of hew ort Beach
.33.00 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, California 92663
Re: CPC473-79
Attention: Mr. James Lotman
Dear Sirs:
srial Hospital has been advisedat
._r,.po-ary parkin., area en G?C = 473-79 cf 2-
in question and the City of .._.port P,each is
asphal over a 4" Lase.
. for surfacing
over a 4"
Hoag Memorial Hospital requests the srecification as submitted be accepted
in - t this area is temporary in nature and is not emsected ts be in use
er.cess of seven years. Additionally, the Hospital will maintain the area
at an level of -epair and will not seer#ss theCity of
_;- -Dort Beach should deterioration or breaF:da:i: in the surface occur_
This request is in keeping with the Hospital's desire to conrrnl cost
w:enever rossible.
Your favorable consideration to this request is appreciated.
Sincerely,
Lou Kaa, Director
P-r4'ities and Development
cc: 'Mike Stephens, Administrator
Fri
>�f
/e Ale o S.:'S /
r�SS✓���
✓s - 41.r tyO.c 2 �• r
3SX
Q
Xl ✓dl
or et)
per *me'01ohsV
O
(
2.2 5", !a
E "iP9la
ok'
O cam- derlaP... 4'v/en 924 69
, hod,dd
gc. . 7OZI
&i4) 7S/--fz7
i rr YOUR REC.:_E' '_ Than, 7 1P70 WE ARE H R:5Y AMENC!NC rde AECVE
T A5FOtiO'h'.=_- - Dote cf CemFteti0n extcr,dAd to .7171'!® 3da 1530
"^£(CLTT AS AMe4cE3, Au. OTHER ITEMS AND PROVISIONS CF THE ORIGINAL. PERMIT SHALL REMAIN IN E?FZCT.
2lCSt MUST BE ATTAQ?:D TO THE C21GNNAL PERMIT.
�svrCNI B OASF. •
LOCAVaw
., tc 12-28-79 Los Ar_ie1es
€,P H HTB I D- =A a:mict fl7it Etter oa Atlf.X0J¢ED ae?VE,zwAme
L,A.BROOKS
ertfiLt—
Aspte Dist. Permit Engr.
i L l 0l'•_' ._
d.Te`d'JortBeach.' C.k
I s Inc anca t, ;, ;Isar requea-' o ' = ; iL 27� 79 : ".t, .er act
•
cll-t t t..JI iS ac-ctior.,a:..J Teti- ...,PS a' r-.c,: 2.'eloto anpp:-
y, :sn:-.� en any part of this form ar'f nr ctta. *ed. wreto.
P: "MISSION l5 Err 1, ai:,l TO enter the State '.C7".'^_ iay P/ T o^-, ss'e 'ri esrstda'.
of Ne-aport Boulevard at "^rjreal Drive iinn re-jeort Beach, 0R-O5j5-0...
for the j-l-urtaaae of removing rho— e,icns of an er Sung concrete
,-ac ad-tng the e 'strong Slope t t"_ the State EAT and Servo v^=y nC
zetlacin g the enav' HAI fence as storm on the' at 4.aChed-clansja_
t^�ari 94 eA in this pe —1t, and as i Erected by the State Permit
in the. .field. _ _ _
...Prior to -the start of any iorkziuthorized oy j:'.-ems Via_=i t, Pa i1t.
shall a an=e for a-nSre-;jcT conference with the 'Permit Field Ensir.e
Er. Z.edir a Ey calling c53 E5 17 to insure a_ ^oonolete u'.5erst2,rid-
of the rscra:rezan'vs by both na ties. -
Traffic s^a 'r _be maintained accordance with Se`^.i,_C=s
and 7-1.09 of the went. of Transto_toticn Stsn a'G specifications
dated alai. 1978 and with the Lt ni=;al o_ n sf__c Control_.
9t Gt.eQ 1977.
u affic steals- not be diverted or inter—runinter-runted. without' cr 2tn_y3:
r.'f. the State Inspector.
PeTririttee. —will not be tatnitted to park ecll=_-ent err .S`o=a mate
.--itb ' the Stave -?/'rT.
1+`^i sting ground. ..cove= and 1andscaa-ns trth.i the State RAT
5'II3i-1 Qe replaced. at the r n tee;s• eroense to the satisfaction n
the State Pep. in. the field-
- Chain 15nir fence shall-confo m to State Standard tlzn ?78-A-1_
• Me attached GillF-0AT, ini-6.12D COiWITIO's,'S, PEICE1 and S t= STA
PLAN sleets•are-tart o: this permit. •
- This permit is to be stiietly construed and no work other than that specifc47g
inentioned.above is authorized hereby. - -
Thspe, niit shall be roidu::iess the work herein contemplated shall hats been cornp?eted
•
befo-e September 22, _Z9 79-- -
Special attention is directed to General Provisions 2, 3 5zn_d 6
priryted on this .fora. DIPAan ENT OF Tr^1.NSPORTATIO
IB: jc .
cc I2 HTBCH MEDINA R. S. Dam . - -
iXr:nct Tn'rettor of : r..nr,..r at+
%ryiyeLf . BEOCR'S
s ~.• Dienc:: Pettit £=Hater
FINAL REPORT
OBSERVATION AND flST NG OF COMPACTED FILL
INCINERATOR .DEMOLITION
gACH
301 NEWPORT BEACH
NEWPORT B=AC, CALIFORNIA
FOR
HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN
(OUR J013 NC. B-88232)
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
MARE 9 1989
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
CALIFORNIA
uKants m p.a.. box 25088 a 900 g,pnq ivirrirAt ova. ❑ gland$$, ei. 91201-3009
the r818) 246-4308
March 27, 1989
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
301 Newport Boulevard, Box Y
Newport gaach, California 92658-8912
Attention: Mr. F. W. Evins, III, A.I.A.
Vice President
Facilities Design & Construction
Gentlemen:
Grading Permit No. 1845-88
(LCA 8-88232)
Final Report -
Observation and Testing of Compacted Fill
Incinerator Demolition
301 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California
SCOPE
This report provides a formal tecord of our observation and
testing of the compacted fill placed to grade the site for the subject
Incinerator Demolition Area. The location of ':he site is shown with
relat'on to adjacent buildings en the attached Plot Plans. The obser-
vation work was performed during November, 1988. We previously submitted
our recommendations in a consultation report dated September 28, 1988
(our Job No. C-880211).
Our professional services have been performed using that degree
of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by
reputable geotechnical engineers practicing in this or similar local-
itiec. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the
professional opinions included in this report. The scope of our obser-
vation services did not include the responsibility for job safety.
232 Page 2
Also, since surveying is not within the scope of services, the earthwork
was done to the limits indicated by stakes and hubs ,;etby ochers.
OBSERVATION AND TESTING OF COMPACTED ply€.
The earthwork for the project consisted of the placement of
compacted fill to grade the subject demolition area, as shown on the
Plate 1-A, Plot Plan, as well as the placement of compacted soils as
backfill around an underground grease interceptor tank, located at the
west side of the existing cafeteria building as shown on the Plate 1-B,
Plot Plan. In the demolition area the fill surface was sloped and the
depth of fill varied from approximately 2 to 14 feet. Approximately 10
feet of backfill was placed in the grease interceptor area. The specifi-
cations required that the fill and backfill be compacted to at least 90%
of the maximum density obtainable by the ASTM Designation D1557-70
method of compaction.
The soils used for the required filling and hackfilling con-
sisted of on -site silty sand and imported 3/4-inch crushed rock, which
was used for backfill around the tank. Compaction tests were performed
on representative samples of the soils, to establish the maximum dry
densities. The tests were performed in accordance with the specified
method of compaction, which utilizes a 1/30-cubic-foot mold in which
each of five layers of soil is compacted by 25 Mows of a ten -pound
hammer falling 18 inches. The results of the compaction tests were used
in establishing the degree of compaction achieved during the placing of
the fill and backfill.
88232 :Page 3..
The demolition work was done a few weeks before our observation
services started; old footings, sprinkler lines and trash were excavated
and removed. Following the required excavation, tha resultant exposed
soils were scarified to a depth of twelve inches, i.'tenght to approxi-
mately optimum moisture content, and rolled with heavy compaction
equipment. The required fill materials were then placed in loose lifts,
brought to approximately optimum moisture content, and compacted. A
644B rubber tire loader as used to compact the fill. Moisture was
added by spraying with a water hose. Areas to receive hackfill were
first cleared of any construction debris and loose soils, and the
required hackfill soils then placed in loose lifts, brought to approxi-
mately optimum moisture content, and mechanically compacted with a
manually guided impact ct pactor. To establish the degree of compaction
achieved, ASTM D1556 sand -cone field density tests were made as the
filling and backfi.11ing progressed. The results of the field density
tests are presented in the attached Table of Test Results; the approxi-
mate locations of the te__.;:, are shown on the Plot Flans. A section of
perforated 4-inch PVC subdrain with class 2 permeable filter was placed
next to the existing banding. The subdrain extends up to the edge of
concrete driveway slab.
CONCLUSIONS
This final report is limited to the earthwork performed through
November 23, 1988, the date of our last observation and testing of
compacted soils work for the project.
At the locations and elevations tested by us,
fill were compacted to at least the specified degree of compaction. In
providing professional. geotechnical observations and testing services
associated with the development of the project, we have employed
accepted engineering and testing procedures and have made every reason-
able effort to ascertain that the soil related work was carried out in
general compliance with the project plans and specifications, and the
applicable Newport Beach Municipal requirements. Although our observa-
tion did not reveal obvious deficiencies, we do not guarantee the
:anti -actor's work, nor do the services performed by out firm relieve the
contractor of responsibility in the event of subsequently discovered
defects in his work.
I and back -
Yours very truly,
Qej £SS IAA LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
S9ri
�o�6SSy9�CY.4F S „9. yC �0. > >P �F G' by1�0. 58m' Well. v hnson
Ex,C473/ Vice resident
eo
itJ}'8OFCAtel'-�P ' by / /f( ' CI tC —
ames M. McWee lA
irector of Inspection Services
enior Vice President
BA30/GH/bs
Attachments (4)
(6 copies submitted)
(2) City of Newport Beach
Building Department
EXIST. BUILDING
1 TO BE REMOVED
FIELD DENSITY TEST
LOCATION & NUMBER
APPROX. LIMITS
OF BACKFILL
(SHADED)
APPROXIMATE LOCATION
OF SUBDRAIN
EXIST. BUILDING
TO REMAIN
THE FIELD DENSITY TEST LOCATIONS,
AS GRAPHICALLY SHOWN ON THIS PLOT
PLAN, ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY, AND 00
NOT REPRESENT PRECISE LOCATIONS.
ADDRESS:
HOAG MEMORIAL HOSP.
301 NEWPORT BEACH, CA.
REFERENCE:
GRACING PLAN (DATED 10-1-88)
BY TAYLOR AND ASSOCIATES.
PLOT PLAN
INCINERATOR DEMOLITION
SCALE 1 10'
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
PLATE 1-A
EXISTING CENTRAL
POWER PLANT
/
APPROX. LIMITS
OF BACKFILL
(SHADED)
EXISTING HOSPITAL BUILDING
FIELD DENSITY TEST
LOCATION & NUMBER
TOP OF CW6
EL. 62
NOTE: REFERENCE:
THE FIELD DENSITY TEST LOCATIONS,
AS GRAPHICALLY SHOWN ON THIS PLOT
PLAN, ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY, AND DO
NOT REPRESENT PRECISE LOCATIONS.
PARTIAL PLAN PROVIDED BY HOAG
MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN.
PLOT PLAN
GREASE INTERCEPTOR TANK BACKFILL
NOT TO SCALE
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATE
PLATE 1
LAW/CRANDALL, INC.
geotechnical, environmental & construction materials consultants
Sir/
REPORT OF CONSULTATION REGARDING
FOUNDATION DESIGN
PROPOSED € 4 RHJA6 SERVICES-74041710N
301 NEWPOR OULEVARD
NE , CALIFORNIA
FOR
HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN
(092072AB)
DECEMBER 16, 1991
OC18/PS/mw
(2 copies submitted)
cc: (1) Taylor & Gaines
Attn: Mr. Hodge G. Gaines
(3) Barry Klein Architects
Attn: Mr. Barry Klein
QtpFESSt
LAW/CRANDALL, INC. ♦ gcotechnical, environmental & construction materials consuitants
731 East Ball Road, Suite 104, Anaheim, California 92805, Phone (714) 776-9544, Fax (714) 776-9541
Los Angeles ♦ Anaheim ♦ 1 us Alamitos ♦ Marina dcl Rey ♦ Riverside ♦ San Diego
December 16, 1992
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterial
301 Newport Boulevard
Box Y
Newport Beach, California 92658-8912
Attention: Mr. F. W. Evins
Gentlemen:
(092072.AB)
We are pleased to submit our "Report of Consultation Regarding Foundation Design,
Proposed Cardiac Services Addition, 301 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California,
for Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian."
The scope of the consultation was planned in collaboration with Mr. Hodge C. Gaines of
Taylor & Gaines, Structural Engineers. We were advised of the structural features of the
addition by Taylor & Gaines, and the results of our consultation and preliminary
foundation recommendations were discussed with them.
The results of our prior investigation at the site and recommendations for design of
foundations, grading, and for floor slab support are presented in the report.
It has been a pleasure to be of professional service to you on this project. Please call if
you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance.
Respectfully submitted,
LAW/CRANDALL, INC
O
Paul R. Schade t� Q
,� a No. 49679 ..
Project Engineer et-Exp. 9-30.96 A
CIVI
CALO
_mot..}
Shaken Askari
Principal Engineer
Branch Manager
-. QQOFESS/py-
cEro. 12-31.93� gi
P� r
s4>F OFC CAC!
j!
REPORT OF CONSULTATION REGARDING
FOUNDATION DESIGN
CARDIAC SERVICES ADDITION
301 NEWPORT BOULEVARD
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA
FOR
HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN
O92072.AB Page 1
SCOPE
This report presents the results of our geotechnical consultation performed for the
proposed Cardiac Services Addition. The locations of the proposed addition and our
prior nearby exploration borings are shown on Plate 1, Plot Plan.
This investigation was authorized to review the field and laboratory data obtained in our
prior nearby investigations, and to provide recommendations for foundation design and
floor slab support for the proposed addition. More specifically, the scope of the
investigation included the following objectives:
To evaluate the subsurface conditions, including the soil and ground
water conditions within the area of proposed construction.
To recommend appropriate foundation systems along with the
necessary design parameters.
To provide recommendations concerning construction procedures and
quality control measures relating to earthwork
To provide recommendations for floor slab support.
The assessment of general site environmental conditions or the presence of pollutants in
the soil and ground water at the site was beyond the scope of this investigation.
Our recommendations are basc on the results of our prior field explorati ns and
laboratory tests and appropriate engineering analyses. The results of the field
explorations and laboratory tests are presented in the attached Appendix.
O,c professional serv.4 have been performed using that degree of care and skill
ordiiurily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants
O92072.AB Page 2
practicing in this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made
as to the professional advice included in this report. This report has been prepared for
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian and their design consultants to be used solely in
the design of the proposed development. The report has not been prepared for use by
other parties, and may not contain sufficient information for purposes of other parties or
other uses.
PRIOR STUDIES
We have performed several investigations for nearby projects, within the hospital complex.
We have been able to use the results of those prior investigations in this study. The logs
of nearby prior borings are presented in the Appendix. The pertinent prior investigations
arc as follows:
Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed South Tower Addition, for Hoag
Memorial Hospital Presbyterian (AE-84159).
Foundation Investigation, Proposed Nursing Wing and Power Plant,
for Hoag Memorial Hospital (A-69080).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Cardiac Services Addition will be located on the west side of the existing
hospital building. The addition will be one story in height and will be of light frame
construction. The maxis . •m column loads are estimated to be about 40 kips. The floor
of the addition will match the lower floor elevi:,on of the adjacent existing hospital; some
compacted fill will be required to achieve the desired floor elevation. We understand the
foundations of the adjacent hospital may be about 10 to 12 feet below grade.
O92072.AB Page 3
EXPLORATIONS AND TESTS
FIELD INVESTIGATION
The soil conditions beneath the site were explored during our previous investigations by
drilling four borings. The locations of the prior borings are shown on Plate 1, Plot Plan.
Details of the explorations and logs of the prior borings are presented in the Appendix.
LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory tests were performed during our previous investigations on selected samples
obtained from the borings to aid in the classification of the soils and to determine their
engineering properties. The following tests were performed: moisture content and dry
density determinations, direct shear, consolidation, and compaction. Details of the
laboratory testing program and test results are presented in the Appendix.
SOIL CONDITIONS
Fill soils, 2 to 11 feet in thickness, were encountered in the borings. The fill consists of
moderately firm silty sand, clay and silt, and contains only slight debris. Deeper and/or
poorer quality fill could occur between borings.
The natural soils consist primarily of medium dense to dense sand and silty sand and
medium stiff silt and clay.
Ground water seepage was encountered at depths of 27 to 32 feet below ground surface.
Ground water levels were measured at 34 to 491/2 feet below ground surface.
092072. AB
RECOMMENDATIONS
Page 4
FOUNDATIONS
Feasible Foundation Types
Shallow and deep foundation systems have been considered for support of the proposed
addition. The fill soils are not considered suitable for support of the proposed addition
because of settlement considerations. If the existing fill soils are excavated and properly
recompacted, the addition could be supported on spread footings in the compacted fill.
Alternatively, the addition could be supported on drilled cast -in -place concrete piling
extending through the fill and into the natural soils.
Recommendations for grading and support of floor slabs are presented in following
sections of the report.
Spread Footings
Bearing Value
Spread footings for the addition supported in the undisturbed natural soils or properly
compacted fill, compacted to at least 90%, and extending at least 2 feet below the
adjacent grade or floor level may be designed to impose a net dead plus live Toad pressure
of 2,500 pounds per square foot.
Footings for minor structures (retaining walls less than about 5 feet in height, etc.)
established in the undisturbed natural soils or properly compacted fill may be designed to
impose a net dead plus live load pressure of 1,500 pounds per square foot at a depth of
11/2 feet below the adjacent grade.
A one-third increase in the bearing values may be used for wind or seismic loads. The
recommended bearing values are net values. The weight of concrete in spread footings
O92072.AB
Page 5
may be taken as 50 pounds per cubic foot and the weight of soil backfill neglected when
determining the downward loads.
While the actual bearing value of any required fill will depend on the material used and
the compaction methods employed, the quoted bearing values will be applicable if accept-
able soils are used and are compacted as recommended. The bearing value of the fill
should be confirmed during the grading.
Settlement
The settlement of the pron aed addition, supported on spread footings in the manner
recommended will be about 1/2-inch.
Lateral Loads
Lateral loads may be resisted by soil friction and by the passive resistance of the soils. A
coefficient of friction of 0.4 may be used between footings or the floor slabs and the
supporting soils. The passive resistance of the natural soils or properly compacted fill
against footings may he assumed to be equal to the pressure developed by a fluid with a
density of 250 pounds per cubic foot. A one-third increase in the passive value may be
used for wind or seismic loads. The frictional resistance and the passive resistance of the
soils may be combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance.
Footing Observation
To verify the presence of satisfactory soils at design elevations, all footing excavations
should be observed by personnel of our firm. Footing excavations deeper than 5 feet
should be sloped back at 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) or shored.
Inspection of footing excavations may also be required by the appropriate reviewing
governmental agencies. The contractor should be familiar with the inspection require-
ments of the reviewing agencies.
O92072.AB Page 6
All applicable requirements, including OSHA requirements, should be met.
Backfill and Drainage
All required footing backfill and utility trench backfill within the building areas should be
mechanically compacted; flooding should not be permitted. Measures should be taken to
prevent ponding of water adjacent to the proposed structures. The exterior grades should
be sloped to drain away from the structure to minimize ponding of water adjacent to the
foundations. Proper grade and drainage devices should be provided to direct water away
from the building areas.
Drilled Punta
Drilled Piie Capacities
The downward and upward capacities of 18-, 24-, and 30-inch-diameter piles a-e 'resented
on Plate 2, Drilled Pile Capacities. Dead plus live load capacities are shown; a one-third
increase may be used when considering wind or seismic loads. The capacities are based
on penetration into undisturbed natural soiLs. Longer piles will be required if the fill
thickness is found to be greater than 11 feet during installation. The capacities are based
on the strength of the soils; the compressive and tensile strength of the pile section itself
should be checked to verify the structural capacity of the piles.
Piles in groups should be spaced at least 21/2 diameters on centers. If the piles are so
spaced, no reduction in the downward capacities of the piles need be considered due to
group action.
Settlement
The settlement of the proposed structure, supported on drilled piling in the manner
recommended, will be about %-inch.
O92072.AB Page 7
Lateral Loads
Lateral loads may be resisted by the piles, by soil friction on the floor slab, and by the
passive resistance of the soils. The soils adjacent to a 18-inch-diameter pile, at least 20
feet long, can resist horizontal loads imposed at the top of the pile up to 9,000 pounds.
The lateral resistance of other sizes of piles may be assumed to be proportional to the
diameter.
In calculating the maximum bending moment in a pile, the lateral load imposed at the top
of the pile may be multiplied by a moment arm of 5 feet. For design, it may be assumed
that the maximum bending moment will occur near the top of the pile and that the
moment will decrease to zero at a depth of 20 feet below the 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 will be properly
compacted.
A coefficient of friction of 0.4 may be used between the floor slab and the supporting
soils. The passive resistance of the natural soils or properly compacted fill soils against
pile caps and grade beams may be assumed to be equal to the pressure developed by a
fluid with a density of 250 pounds per cubic foot. A one-third increase in the quoted
passive value may be used when considering wind or seismic loads.
The resistance of the piles, the passive resistance of the soils against pile caps and grade
beams, and the frictional resistance between the floor slab and the supporting soils may
be combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance. If the actual
lateral loads on the structure can be resisted by the piles or by the passive resistar ce, or
by a combination of these elements, it is our opinion that foundation tie -beams between
piles will not be necessary unless there are other reasons for including them.
O92072.AB Page 8
Installation
All drilled pile excavations should be observed by personnel of our firm. Longer piles will
be required if the fill thickness is found to be greater than 11 feet during installation.
Our prior exploration borings were drilled to depths of up to 50 feet with 18-inch-
diameter bucket -type drilling equipment. Heavy caving and sloughing of the auger boring
walls occurred during drilling in one boring below a depth of 32 feet from the ground
surface. Precautions should be taken during the installation of the piles to reduce caving
and raveli ;g. Among other precautions, the drilling speed should be reduced as necessary
to minimize vibration and sloughing of the sand deposits.
Piles located 5 diameters on center or closer should be drilled and filled alternately, with
the concrete permitted to set at least eight hours before drilling an adjacent hole. Pile
excavations should be filled with concrete as soon after drilling and inspection as possible;
the holes should not be left open overnight. The concrete should be placed with special
equipment so that the concrete is not allowed to fall freely more than 5 feet and to
prevent concrete from striking the walls of the excavations.
GRADING
General
After clearing the site, the existing fill soils within the proposed building area should be
excavated. If the building is to be supported on piling extending into the natural soils and
the slab is to be structurally supported, the existing fill may be left in place. If the slab
is to be supported on grade and some potential for future settlement of the floor slab is
acceptable, at least the upper two feet of fill below the existing grade could be excavated,
but not less than 3 feet below the final grade. The exterior grades should be sloped to
drair away from the structure to minimize ponding of water adjacent to the foundations.
O92072.AB Page 9
Compaction
After excavating as recommended, the exposed soils should be scarified to a depth of
6 inches and rolled with heavy compaction equipment. The upper 6 inches of exposed
soils should be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density obtainable by the
ASTM Designation D1557-78 method of compaction. All required fill should be placed
in loose lifts not more than 8 inches in thickness and compacted to at least 90%. It is
recommended that the moisture content of the sands and silts at the at the time of
compaction vary no more than 2% below of 2% above optimum moisture content. The
moisture content of the clay soils should be brought to about 4% over optimum moisture
content.
Material for Fill
The on -site soils, less any debris or organic matter within existing fill, may be used in
compacted fills. Clay soils should not be used within 1 foot of the subgrade beneath
concrete slabs on grade.
Field Observation
The reworking of the upper soils and the compaction of all required fill should be
observed and tested by a representative of our firm. This representative should have at
least the following duties:
Observe the clearing and grubbing operations to assure that all
unsuitable materials have been properly removed.
Observe the exposed subgrade in areas to receive fill and in areas
where excavation has resulted in the desired finished subgrade
observe proof -rolling, and delineate areas requiring overexcavation.
Perform visual observation to evaluate the suitability of on -site and
import soils for fill placement; collect and submit soil samples for
required or recommended laboratory testing where necessary.
O92072.AB
Perform field density and compaction testing to determine the
percentage of compaction achieved during fill placement.
• Observe and probe foundation bearing materials to confirm that
suitable bearing materials are present at the design grades.
• Observe the installation of drilled piles.
Page 10
The governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the project should be notified prior
to commencement of grading so that the necessary grading permits may be obtained and
arrangements may be made for the required inspection(s).
FLOOR SLAB SUPPORT
If the existing fill soils are excavated and properly recompacted, the floor slab and
adjacent walks and slabs may be supported on grade. If the fill is left in place and the
addition is supported on piling, we recommend that the slabs be structurally supported.
However, if the fill thickness is too great making the reworking of it uneconomical, and
if some risk of settlement is acceptable, the upper soils may be excavated to a depth of
at least 2 feet below the existing grade but not less than 3 feet below the final grade. If
only the upper fill soils are excavated, there is a potential for up to 2 inches of additional
settlement due to consolidation of the underlying left in place fill soils.
Construction activities and exposure to the environment can cause deterioration of
prepared subgrades. Therefore, we recommend that our field representative observe the
condition of the final subgrade soils immediately prior to slab on grade construction and,
if necessary, perform further field density and moisture content tests to determine the
suitability of the final prepared subgrade.
O92077.AB
Page 11
Where a floor slab covering that would be critically affected by moisture, such as vinyl,
is to be used, we suggest that the floor slab be supported on a 4-inch-thick layer of gravel
or on an impermeable membrane as a capillary break. A suggested gradation for the
gravel layer would be as follows:
Sieve Size Percent Passinp
3/4" 90 - 100
No. 4 0 - 10
No.100 0-3
If the membrane is used, a low -slump concrete should be used to minimize possible
curling of the slabs. The concrete slabs should be allowed to cure properly before placing
vinyl or other moisture -sensitive floor covering.
O92072.AB Page 12
BASIS FOP RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations provided in this report are based on our understanding of the
described project information and on our interpretation of the data collected during the
subsurface exploration. We have made our recommendations based on experience with
similar subsurface conditions under similar loading conditions. The recommendations
apply to the specific project discussed in this report; therefore, any change in building
loads, building location, or site grades should be provided to us so we may review our
conclusions and recommendations and make any necessary modifications.
The recommendations provided in this report are also based on the assumption that the
necessary geotechnical observations and testing during construction will be performed by
representatives of our firm. The field observation services are considered a continuation
of the geotechnical investigation and essential to verify that the actual soil conditions are
as anticipated. This also provides for the procedure whereby the client can be advised of
unanticipated or changed conditions that would require modifications of our original
recommendations. In addition, the presence of our representative at the site provides the
client with an independent professional opinion regarding the geotechnically related
construction procedures. If another firm is retained for the geotechnical observation
services, our professional responsibility and liability would be impaired.
-oOo-
O92072.AB Page A-1
APPENDIX
EXPLORATIONS
The soil conditions beneath the site were explored during two previous investigations by
drilling four borings at the locations shown on Plate 1. The borings were drilled to depths
of 45 to 51 feet below the existing grade using 18-inch-diameter bucket -type drilling
equipment. Caving of the boring walls did occur during the drilling of one boring with the
bucket auger but casing or drilling mud was not used to extend the bucket borings to the
depths drilled.
The soils encountered were logged by our field technician, and undisturbed and loose
samples were obtained for laboratory inspection and testing. The logs of the previous
borings are presented on Plates A-1.1 through A-1.4; the depths at which undisturbed
samples were obtained are indicated to the Left of the boring logs. The energy required to
drive the sampler 12 inches is indicated on the logs. The soils are classified in accordance
with the Unified Soil Classification System described on Plate A-2.
LABORATORY TESTS
The field moisture content and dry density of the soils encountered were determined by
performing tests on the undisturbed samples. The results of the tests are shown to the left
of the boring logs.
Direct shear tests were performed on selected undisturbed natural samples from our two
previous investigations to determine the strength of the soils. The tests were perforated
at field and increased moisture contents and at various surcharge pressures. The yield -point
values determined from the direct shear tests are presented on Plate A-3.1 and A-3.2,
Direct Shear Test Data.
O92072.AB
Page A-2
Confined consolidation tests were performed on four undisturbed samples to determine the
compressibility of the soils. Water was added to one undisturbed sample during the test.
The results of the tests are presented on Plates A-4.1 through A-4.3, Consolidation Test
Data.
-oOo-
0
Y
V
Q 23
Q24
13Q
4
0
Q 14
JOBAE 84153
Q10
Q 12
Q9
EXI STI N G
HOSPITAL
Q 4
. F01 EON. EL EV S.
FFE OF EXIST. HOSPITAL
FL x65.0
(55)
1 L.:4
2(51)
(52)
Q 20
Q 2
9
13•QI
0
PROPOSE;
SERVICE :..
NNNN
•
6
EXISTING PARKING
STRUCTURE
0 5
0 4
D CARDIAC
ADDITION
REFERENCE:
PLAN (UNDATED) BY
BORROW / THOMAS ASSOCIATES.
KEY:
3®PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (AE-84159)
90 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (A-71235)
3 0 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (A-69080)
LL BORING LOCATION
BORING NUMBER
(55) ELEVATION OF SURFACE OF FIRM SOILS
PLOT PLAN
SCALE I° = 1001
PLATE I
DATE 6 / 8 / 8 4
w
h 1 ; A
,v O LQ -14., i o` 0,• 2 • o�
v :2
cc .
4v co ae OPa O.c yP
60
55 -
50
45 -
40 -
0
8.5
129
3
DATE DRILLED
EQUIPMENT USED
ELEVATION 63.7*
BORING I
June 4, 1984
18"-Diameter Bucket
(PRIOR JOB AE-84159)
SSMM FILL - SILTY SAND, SANDY SILT and SILTY
CL CLAY - mottled brown
9.8 122
1.0 117
1
1
15 -
- 20
- 25
13.3
.6
2.5
117
101
100
10
r,
1
SM
FILL - SILTY SAND - fine, brown
Grey and brown
CL SANDY CLAY - light brown
tat
CL
SP
SILTY CLAY - light brown
Thin layers of Sand, light brown and light
grey
SAND - fine, light brown
Thin layers of Sandy Silt
CONTINUED ON FOLLOWING PLATE)
*See Plate 1 for location and elevation of
bench mark.
LOG OF BORING
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
PLATE A-1.1a
- gel
n
•
MS
0
DATE 6/ 8/84
JOB AE-84 159
M
F.
'2
BORING I (CONTINUED)
DMt DRILLED: June 4, 1984
EQUIPMENT USED: 18"-Diameter Bucket
cr.: I
0.2
101
8
..
35
30
IIIII
ML
CL
30 -
35
2.3
87
6
%
/
25
1 40
8.9
72
2
2.1
56
4
20 -
- 45
0:1
0
15
- 50
'71.1
55
4
-;
��,
10
SS
52.1
66
8
•�,
NOTE:
Thin layer of Clay
SANDY SILT - light grey
SILTY CLAY (POSSIBLE WEATHERED SHALE) - grey
Light greyish -brown
Gypsum fragments
SHALE - massive, dark grey to black
Slight water seepage encountered at a depth
of 27 . Water level measured at 491/2' 10
minutes after completion of drilling. No
caving.
LOG OF BORING
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
PLATE A•1.1b
3i
i5
0
w
2
m
m
N
N
E
2
LL
4-
60
55
50
45-
40-
10
15
20
25
4. h {
e A. v. e"
A :
v 2. Je ?y e
to 4' 4., w 4/
e o\ oe�
to
so
/rµr/
CL
SM
Ir
L
15.4
110
1
,:iI
1111
ly
/.I
17.4
102
I
I
/
i 4i
/ /;
17.3
111
< 1
/1,c14
CT
/
C.
17.8
111
3
lee/
111
SM
//
CL
26.9
96
2
/
28.1
94
5
1�
27.9
93
3
1
((-'sp
15 6A9
11
/,.
v 037E DRILLED:
EQUIPMENT USED:
ELEVATIGN 62.6
SILTY SAND -
FILL - CLAY
brown
Lenses of
BORING 2
June 4, 1984
18"-Diameter Bucket
(PRIOR JOB AE-84159)
fine, brown
and SILTY SAND - fine, mottled
Sandy Silt
Some concrete chunks
SANDY CLAY - light brown
SILTY SAND - fine, light brown
SILTY CLAY (POSSIBLE WEATHERED SHALE) -
light brown and light grey
Some cementations
SAND (POSSIBLE WEAKLY CEMENTED SANDSTONE) -
fine, light brown
(CONTINUED ON FOLLOWING PLATE)
LOG OF BORING
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
PLATE A-1.2a
MS
0
2
S
0
0
TE6/ &LO
WIQ
m
0
BORING 2 (CONTINUED)
DATE DRILLED: June 4, 1984
EOUIPMENT USED 18"-Diameter Bucket
/ w1 /
/ /v'-/'J / /
35-
30
18 0
86
6
30-
-
35-
25-
20.1
106
10.
f.,
40
20-
45
22.1
101
10
�
',-
15-
cn
NOTE:
Some gravel
Some medium Sand
(BORING TERMINATED DUE TO HEAVY CAVING,
SLOUGHING, AND LACK OF PROGRESS)
Water seepage encountered at a depth of
32'. Water level measured at 34' 20
minutes after completion of drilling.
Heavy caving and sloughing below 32'.
LOG OF BORING
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
PLATE A-1.2b
0.4
DR ALAN O.E�'�.C=�.c CHKD.
0
0
0
CO
0
4j
60 -
55 -
50 -
s•
•
`` '4O JPa �ay\CA,P4
5
10
8.5 113
16.4
8.5
113
113
- 15
45 -
- 20
40 -
- 25
- 30
L
6.7
4.5
101
109
BORING 3
DATE DRILLED : April 28, 1969
EQUIPMENT USED:18'-Diameter Bucket
ELEVATION 62.0
P
30.7
30.0
91
94
7.8
88
17.6
101
4
4.2
19.5
38.1
111
106
83
(PRIOR JOB A-69080)
FILL - CLAYEY SAND and SILTY CLAY MIXTURE -
brown
SAND - fine, some Clay, brown
Coarse, few gravel
SILTY CLAY - mottled grey and brown
NOTE: Water encountered at a depth of 39'; water .
level at a depth of 40' 15 minutes after com-
pletion of drilling. No caving.
SAND - fine, light grey
Cemented layer
Layer of SILTY SAND
Layer of SILTY SAND
Clayey, mottled dory grey and brown
SANDY SILT - mottled grey and brown
'.EROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
PLATE A-1.3
60 -
55
50 -
45-
40 -
35
30 -
5
20
5
e4?
`r-
4 4. �4y`,
. •
rs a O 1
6. a .b` 5p/
,
8.3 105
9.8 105
4.7 104
3.3 100
29.3 95
29.7
20 6
25-
0
35-
0
45
5
5.0
24.7
127
14.3
42.3
94
94
93
95
L18
117
78
BORING 5
DATE DRILLED : May 2, 1969
EQUIPMENT USED: 1B"-Diameter Bucket
ELEVA ION E1 p
FELL - SILTY SAND and CLAYEY SILTMIXTURE -
brown .
CLAYEY SAND - fine, rootlets, brown
(PRIOR JOB A-69080)
SAND - fine, some Clay, light brown
SILTY CLAY - jointed, mottled grey and brown
NOTE: Water encountered at a dep11. Mf 36'; water
level at a depth of 38' 15 minutes after com-
pletion of drilling. No caving,
SILTY SAN D - fine, light grey
Brownish _I ey
Layer of CLAYEY SAND
SANDY SILT - some mica, brownish -grey
CLAYEY SAND - fine, few gravel, brownish -grey
SAND - fine, few gravel, some Clay, mottled brown
and grey
SILTY CLAY - jointed, grey
LOG OF BORING
LEROY 'CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
PLATE A-1.4
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GROUP
SYMBOLS
TYPICAL NAMES
COARSE
GRAINED
SOILS
(More than 50% of
material es LARGER
Shan No. 200 sieve
ize)
GRAVELS
(Man than 50% of
coarse fraction is
LARGER than the
No. 4 sieve sisal
yb�a GW
CLEAN
GRAVELS ?Y:
(Little or nofines) o,Ifl� Gp
Wen eroded prowls, 9rowi•smd mutuns,
Inge or no fines.
Poorly graded gravels or gravel -sand matures,
little or no fines.
GRAVELS
WITH FINES
(Appreciable amt.
of fines)
GM
GC
Silty grovels , gravel- sand - silt matures.
Clayey grovels, grovel•sand-p% mixtures.
SANDS
More Ivan 50% of
coarse 'radian is
SMALLER Than tne
No.4 sievt size)
CLEAN SANDS
(Little or no fines I
W
well graded sands, gravelly Sands, Mille Or
no fines.
Poorly graded sands or gravelly tends, bilk
or no fines.
SANDS
WITH FINES
(Appreciable amt.
of fines)
SM Silly sands, Bond -sift mistures-
SC Clayey sands, sand -cloy matures.
FINE
GRAINED
SOILS
(More than 50% of
materim is SMALLER
Shan Na.200 sieve
rse)
SILT$ AND CLAYS
(Liquid limit LESS Ilan 50)
SILTS AND CLAYS
(Liquid limit GREATER than 50)
Inorganic silts and very line sands, reek flour.
ML silly or pays, fine sands or clayey silt'
with slipnl plasaeily-
Inorganic cloys of low to medium DlastiCily,
qravelly clays, sandy clays, silly clays, lean
clays.
OL Organic tilts and orgor, a silly Clays of low
aloshcily .
MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or dmlomoceoes
fine Sandy Or filly sails, elant is silt..
CH Inargonic cloys of high plasticity, fat cloys.
H organic silts.
Organic clays of medium to hien pa$tieity,
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
ZaZit
PI Peat and olher highly organic sods.
BOUNDARY CLASSIFICATIONS: Sons possessing Ohara tent! et of Ira groups ore designated by
canbinations of group web
PA RTICLE
S 1 2 E LIMITS
SILT OR CLAY
net
SANG
sinus
ram!
GRAVEL
tam
cornet
COBOL ESt BOULDERS
NO200 Na40 N0.10 N0.4 syn 34. 112in1
Y. S. STANDARD SIEVE 512E
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Reference :
The unified Soil CIUSWIC0i,onn 5ytum, Carps of
Engineers, U.S.Army loon/cal Memorandum No 3.357,
Vol 1, Match.1953. (Revised April, 19601
LAW/CRANDALL, INC
PLATE A_2
5
0
0
U
w
6
c
0cc
0
LL
0 1000
0
a
N
2000
.13
c
3000
w
D:
(0
N
w
Cc 4000
w
Q
5000
CC
6000
SHEAR STRENGTH in Pounds per Square Foot
1000 2000 3000 4
000 5000 60(
ti/®20 /s/6
•
3./2
•2./5
• 2./2
•
/0/4
BORING NUMBER
SAMPLE DEPTH
8
(FT.)
Argo d.ir
•3m/2 •?e/2
•2ai5
m/4
• /
•30/6
3.9
VALUES
IN ANALYSES
USED
• Tests at field moisture content
0 Tests ct increased moisture content
DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA
(PRIOR JOB AE-84159)
LEROY CRANDALL 8 ASSOCIATES
PLATE A-3.1
•
3
c
O
O
d 1000
O
or
N
o. 2000
c
300
W
CC
to
(n
a 4o0
W
0
Cr
2
U 500
e DD'.
SHEAR STRENGTH In Pounds per Square Foot
000
\
F/9
�.,g,3 •
O
GC, C
•
/os f/
•
ce See
•
e@ zo
v v JJJIJ
5J.
('�'^0?OSED 'R JR SitJG 1'JING
/
-• s
+e•/ 4R/5
\•
e—
90R::3 C?:9ER 8
•
•
F- e4
I
I
•
1C3n
0230
c 3F
\G€'
st 1
• i
/c z z:
JALLES USED
N ANALYSES
' \
e*//
•1
\
•
1 �
• Tests c' teld moisture content
o Tests c• -eased mois•ure content
DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA
(PRIOR JOB A-69080]
LEROY CRANDALL 8 ASSOCI,;TE;.
PLATE A-3.2
DR. JOHN O.E.
DATE 6 / 18 / 84
m
N
Q
0
0
•
a
a
U
2
INCHES PER
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
2 0.04
O
CONSOLID
J.05
0.06
0 . 0 /
LOAD IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT
0.5 06 07 0
o.v 4u 50 60 ZO
.`!
�`
��11,•-..
(POSSIBLE
Boring 1
SILTY
WEATHERED
at 35'
CLAY
SHALE)
8.
Bor.ng.2
(POSSIBLE
at
SILTY `JV
15'
SHALE)
WEATHERED
•
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
\A
NOTE: Samples tested at field co store content.
CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA
(PRIOR JOB AE-84159)
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
PLATE A-4.1
'u
0
0
CONSOLIDATION
LOAD IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT
04 06 08 10 20 3 4
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.0
\�\
1 1
rSILTY
I
Boring
i l
3 at
CLA"
i
15'
l
'...v
L.V SC
I
IN
N.
1 '
I
I
1
N
1
-yam
1
Boring
4 at
SAND
1
22';
1
li
I
i
L
I
NOTE: Samples tested at field moisture content.
CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA
(PRIOR JOB A-69080J
LEROY CRANDALL 8 ASSOCiATES
.0
P1 ATF A-4.2
'1
0
0
0
a
0
04
0
0.01
z 0.02
Cr
w
a
cn
0.03
CONSOLIDATION
0.04
0.05
0.0o
0.0
LOAD IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT
0.6 0.8 1.0 2.0 3.0 4
•
j
[
Boring
SILTY
5 of 4'
SAND!
cVu
JC
!
�
�
\\
I
\\
\`
I
1.
I
Tom`
I
Boring 6 at 30' 2
SANDY SILT
i
1
I
I i1
i !
_t
J:cter added to sample from Loring 5 after consolidation
under a load of 3.6 kips per square foot. The other
sample tested of field moisture content.
CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA
(PRIOR JOB A-69080)
LEROY CRANDALL a ASSOCIATES
0
DATE 12/10/92
CO
0
N
01
PENETRATION BELOW PILE CAP In Feet
0
10
20
30
40
50
0
50
DOWNWARD PILE CAPACITY in Kips
100
150
200
250
Recommended
(Due to depth
Pile Penetration
of existing till)
Minimum
in Inches
Pile diameter
m m m
N. ---....„,_
NOTES:
25
50
75
UPWARD PILE CAPACITY in Kips
100
(1) The indicated values refer to the total of dead plus live loads: a one-third increase may
be used when considering wind or seismic loads.
(2)
125
Piles in groups should be spaced a minimum of 2-1/2 diameters on centers, and should
be drilled and filled altemately with the concrete permitted to set at least 8 hours before
drilling an adjacent hole.
(3) The indicated values are based on the strength of the soils; the actual pile capacities
may be limited to lesser values by the strength of the piles.
DRILLED PILE CAPACITIES
LAW/CRANDALL INC`%
PLATE 2
Pc 41-9?
LAW/CRANDALL, INC. ♦ geotechnical, environmental & construction materials consultants
731 East Ball Road, Suite 104, Anaheim, California 92805, Phone (714) 776-9544, Fax (714) 776-9541
Los Angeles ♦ Anaheim ♦ Los Alamitos ♦ Marina del Rey ♦ Riverside ♦ San Diego
March 10, 1993
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
301 Newport Boulevard, Box Y
Newport Beach, California 92658-8912
Attention: Mr. F.W. Evins, III, A.I.A.
Vice President
Facilities Design and Construction
Gentlemen:
OSHPD No HL-
Grading Permit
(2681.3010
Interim Report of Rough Grading
Proposed Emergen lon and Renovation
1 ewnort Boulevar�%"'�
each. California
The rough grading of the site consisting of the excavation performed to reach the design building
elevations for the proposed Emergency Room Expansion and Renovation project is approved as
of March 8, 1993. The exposed natural soils will provide support for the building foundations and
floor slab, as well as subgrade support for adjacent walks and slabs. The grading was performed
in accordance with the project specifications and the recommendations of our geotechnical
investigation report dated November 7, 1990 (090072.AEO). The scope of our services did not
include either the responsibility for job safety or the function of surveying. The grading work was
done to the limits and the locations indicated by stakes and hubs set by others.
The specifications require that any fill to be placed be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum
dry density obtainable by the ASTM Designation D1557-78 (equivalent to UBC 70-1) method of
compaction. Spread footings carried at least 1 foot into the firm undisturbed natural soils and at
least 2 feet below the adjacent grade or floor level may be designed to impose a net dead plus live
load pressure of 6,000 pounds per square foot. A one-third increase in the bearing value may be
used for wind or seismic bads. Adjacent to the existing building, footings should extend to at least
the same level as the existing footings.
Footings for minor structures (auxiliary retaining walls and free-standing walls) may be designed
to impose a net dead plus live load pressure of 1,500 pounds per square foot at a depth of at least
1 foot below the adjacent grade. Such footings may be established in either properly compacted
fill or the natural soils.
This approval is limited to the building area shown on the attached Plot Plan.
Upon completion of the grading, our final report will be submitted, giving the locations and results
of all tests and observations.
2631.30107.0001 Page 2
After the site was stripped and cleared, the building area was excavated up to approximately 15
feet in depth below the existing grade for the service level, and established in firm, natural soils.
These natural soils are considered to be suitable for the construction of the proposed project.
Temporary unsurcharged construction slopes were made at 1:1. During the rough grading, no fill
soils were placed.
In our opinion, the geotechnical related work was performed in the general compliance with the
project plans, specifications, and the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code and is considered
suitable for the intended use.
The City of Newport Beach required, prior to issuing a certificate of occupancy, a statement from
the geotechnical engineer that all subgrades supporting either concrete slabs -on -grade or asphaltic
paving have been observed for adequacy for the intended use. To comply with this requirement
it is essential that a representative of our firm observe all such subgrades so that we can confirm
their proper preparation. Our firm must observe the subgrade for all concrete slabs -on -grade and
for asphaltic paving, immediately prior to placement, so that our final report can provide the
required documentation to the City of Newport Beach.
In providing professional geotechnical observations and testing services, we have employed
accepted ougineering and testing procedures, and no other warranty, expressed or implied, is made
in providing this professional opinion. While we have made every reasonable effort to perform
our services to at least the standard of care of our profession, and our observations did not reveal
obvious deficiencies, we do not guarantee the contractor's work, nor do the services performed
by our firm relieve the contractor of responsibility in the event of subsequently discovered defects
in his work.
Respectfully submitted,
LAW/CRANDALL, INC.
Shahen Askari
Principal Engineer
Branch Manager
OCI-2/DA/mw
Attachment
(2 copies submitted)
AciscESs,04,
�4 �ENAS �.
No. Jo' ��:+ e
�Exp. 12-31.93� m
*lrF�leCHN GP�e
op CAtt
cc: (1) Taylor and Associates, Architects
Attn: Mr. Neal Rinella
(1) Pozzo Construction
Attn: Mr. Steve Keller
(1) OSHPD Resident Inspector
Attn: Mr. Pete Philpott
(2) City of Newport Beach
Building Department
Attn: Mr. Richard Higley
Grading Engineer
David Atkinson
Coordinator of Inspection Services
EXISTING
ASPHALTIC
PAVING
u
Z
n
D
n
tc
0
0
LL
;;64.1
6
EXISTING
'4';
X65.5 X67.4 X72.3 X29.2 X241
.
APPROACH TO
LOADING DOCK
(F.F.E. = 61)
62.5
r EXISTING
ASPHALTIC
PAVING —�
PROPOSED PARTIAL BASEMENT
(SERVICE LEVEL)
(F.F.E. = 64)
.6 6 i.0 X60.8 60.8
x60.9
PROPOSED FIRST LEVEL
(F.F.E. = T3)
60.6
60.5 X
X
61.0
60.8 X
JENTILATION PLANT
1
5.0
x
76.1
76.1
EXISl1NG
LOADING DOCK
(F.F.E. = 64)
EXISTING
EMERGENCY
ROOM
(F.F.E.= 64)
REFERENCE:
"POGRAPHY MAP (UNDATED) BY
HOL-:RT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST AND
ASSOCIATES
SITE PLAN (DATED 8-7-90) BY
TAYLOR AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTS
KEY:
K �6 1 EXISTING GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION
El
LIMITS OF PROPOSED ADDITION
LIMITS OF PROPOSED PARTIAL BASEMENT
PLOT PLAN
PROPOSED
EMERGENCY ROOM
EXPANSION
AND RENOVATION
SCALE 1' = 20'
LAW/CR AN DALL , INC.
Job rhjmber
Job Name
Address
Pc t-j-61a
ALAW/CRANDALL, INC.
ENGINEERING ANDENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
Los Angeles
(21S) 889-6300
(213) 721-8700 Fax
❑ orange
(714) 7769544
(714) A69541 Fax
San Diego
(619) 278-3600
(619) 278-5303 Fax
OBSERVATION OF FOUNDATION SOILS -'€1r%v
Al r�/iJ/C/7,;zo7/ Date -- ?14
The following
1;.r,excavatlons were observed by us and, as
of this date, the soil conditions were found to conform with the findings of our Investigation
report dated ( 1
1 ,
-11- e 711/></// /U'///X //�,¢.
V11 ' /7t: 4z / 41Jet </'t rr /ire> 7, -(.
LAW/CRANDALL, INC.
Employee No. 1 <5/2
NOTES: 1. This observation does fat cover footing location, size, depth or reinforcement, and
does not constitute authority for placing oonctete in excavations without approval
by the governmental Building Inspector.
2. Any changed sail conditions subsequent to this date, such as disturbance, excessive
drying or wetting, will require re -inspection.
3. Loose and/or soft soils must be removed prior to placing conaete In the excavations.
Fam 303(NW)
LAW/CRANDALL, INC.
EJ Los Angeles UOranger ca San Diego la Inland Empire
(213) 889-5300 (714) 776-9544 (619) 278-3600 (909) 656-1995
(213) 721-6700 Fax (714) 776-9541 Fax (619) 2784300 Fax (909) 656-3233 Fax
NOTIFICATION OF INSPECTION HOURS
Date: siC
Job Name; 4/
Address: / /Li /it t
Typo of Inspection:
Job Number 1r c
17-)
/1'e%; Aeve.,
Hours
LAW /CRANDALL, INC.
Signed:
Employee No.: -
For verification purposes only; does not necessarily
imply responsibility for cost of inspection:
Verified by.
Of-
it 4/7- 902-
LeROY CRANDALL
and ASSOCIATES
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS
REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PROPOSED EMERGENCY R XPANSION AND RENOVATION
�T.
cNEWPORT BOULEVAR
k BE FORNIA
FOR
IIOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBY'TERIAN
(LCA 090072.AEO)
NOVEMBER 7, 1990
'e7OV C ANDALL AND ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Consultants • One of the Law Companies
. '.00 jra-id Central Avenue, Glendale, California 91201-3009, Phone (818) 243-4140, Fax (818) 246-4308
Offices: Glendale • Anaheim • Marina del Rey • Riverside • San Diego
November 7, 1990
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
301 Newport Boulevard, Box Y
Newport Beach, California 92658-8912
Attention: Mr. F. W. Evins, III, AIA
Vice President
Facilities Design and Construction
Gentlemen:
(LCA 090072.AEO)
Our 'Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Emergency Room Expansion and
Renovation, 301 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, for Hoag Memorial
Hospital Presbyterian" is herewith submitted.
The scope of the investigation was planned in collaboration with Mr. Neal Rinella of Taylor
and Associates, Architects. We were advised of the structural features of the proposed
addition by Mr. William Taylor of Taylor & Gaines, Structural Engineers. The results of
our investigation and preliminary recommendations were discussed with the parties involved
as the data became available.
The results of our investigation and design recommendations are presented in the report.
Please note that the owner or his representative should submit copies of this report to the
appropriate govemmental agencies for their review and approval prior to obtaining a
building permit.
It has been a pleasure to be of professional service to you on this project. Please call if you
have any questions or if we can be of further assistance.
Respectfully submitted,
LeROY CR A? DA L AND ASSOCIATES
Shaken Askari
Senior Engineer
ames L. VanBeveren
Vice President
Orange County Branch Manager
R22/PS/sle
(6 copies submitted)
cc: (1) Taylor and Associates, Architects
(1) Taylor & Gaines, Structural Engineers
Mervin E. Joh( on, C.E.G. 26
Director of Geological Services
Vice President
LCA O90072.AEO
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Tent Page No.
Summary 1
Scope 2
Structural Considerations 3
Explorations and Tests 4
Fie'i Investigation 4
Lahoratcry Testing 4
Site Conditions 4
Soil Conditions 5
Geology 5
General 5
Geologic Materials 6
Ground Water 6
Geologic Hazards 7
Conclusions and Recommendations 11
Geologic Considerations 11
Foundations 11
Excavation and Slopes 13
Shoring 13
Building Walls Below Grade 14
Grading 15
Floor Slab Support 17
Paving 18
Basis for Recommendations 20
Appendix A - Explorations and Tests
Appendix B - Geologic and Seismic Data
LCA O90072.AEO
List of Plates
Plate No.
Plot Plan 1
Regional Geology 2
Local Geology 3
Regional Seismicity 4
Recurrence Curve 5
Logs of Borings A-1.1 — A-1.3
Unified Soil Classification System A-2
Direct Shear Test Data A_3
Consolidation Test Data A-4.1 — A-4.2
Compaction Test Data A-5
Expansion Index Test Data A-6
M. J. Schiff and Associates Report A-7.1 — A-7.4
ii
REPORT OF GEOTECHMCAL INVESTIGATION
PROPOSED EMERGENCY ROOM EXPANSION AND RENOVATION
301 NEWPORT BOULEVARD
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
FOR
HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN
LCA O90072.AEO Page 1
SUMMARY
We have recently completed a geotechnical investigation for a proposed emergency room
expansion and renovation at the Hoag Memorial Hospital in Newport Beach, California.
The expansion, which will be constructed adjacent to the existing emergency room, will be
two stories high and will have a partial basement.
No unusual geologic conditions appear to be present on or adjacent to the site that would
constitute a geologic hazard to the proposed expansion.
Fill soils (possibly sewer line backfill), about 5 feet in thickness, were encountered in one
of the borings_ The underlying natural soils consist of dense sand and silty sand and
moderately firm to firm clay and silt. The natural soils will offer adequate support to the
proposed addition on spread footings.
No exceptional difficulties are anticipated in excavating at the site; conventional earth -
moving equipment may be used. Where the necessary space is available, temporary
unsurcharged excavations may be sloped back without shoring. To provide support for slabs
on grade, all fill soils and any disturbed natural soils should be excavated and replaced as
properly compacted fill, and all required additional fill should be properly compacted. Slabs
on grade should be underlain by a layer of relatively non -expansive soils.
LCA O90072.AEO Page 2
SCOPE
This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation of the site of the subject
proposed Hoag Memorial Hospital addition. The locations of the existing hospital
buildings, the proposed addition, and our exploration borings are shown on Plate 1, Plot
Plan.
This investigation was authorized to determine the static physical characteristics of the soils
beneath the proposed addition and to provide recommendations for grading, design of
foundations and walls below grade, and for floor slab support. More specifically, the scope
of the investigation included the following objectives:
• To evaluate the existing surface and subsurface conditions, including the
soil and ground water conditions, within the area of the proposed
construction.
• To perform geologic -seismic studies to meet the current requirements
of the Office of the State Architect.
• To recommend appropriate foundation systems together with the
necessary design parameters.
• To provide recommendations for excavation and design data for design
of shoring.
• To provide earth pressure parameters for basement calls.
• To present recommendations relating to earthwork and grading.
• To provide recommendations for floor slab support and for pavement
thicknesses.
In addition, corrosion studies were to be performed for us by M. J. Schiff & Associates,
Consulting Corrosion Engineers.
LCA O90072.AEO Page 3
The results of the field explorations and laboratory tests, which together with the previous
data form the basis of our recommendations, are presented in Appendix A The results of
the corrosion studies are also presented in Appendix A. Geologic and seismic supporting
data arc presented in Appendix B.
Our professional services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily
exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants practicing in
this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the
professional advice included in this report. This report has been prepared for the Hoag
Memorial Hospital Presbyterian and their design consultants to be used solely in the design
of the proposed addition. The report has not been prepared for use by other parties, and
may not contain sufficient information for purposes of other parties or other uses.
STRUCTURAL CONSIDERATIONS
The proposed addition, which is shown in plan on Plate 1, will be two stories high and will
be constructed over an existing loading dock and service area that are to remain. There
will be an enclosed service area at grade. The addition will be of steel frame and metal
deck construction with light -weight concrete. Maximum column loads will be about
300 kips.
The service level slab will be at Elevation 64, requiring excavation up to about 12 feet deep.
Retaining walls will be constructed along the excavated areas. The loading dock will be at
about Elevation 64, which is the finished floor level of the adjacent existing hospital
building. The existing concrete slab within the approach to the loading dock will be
demolished and replaced with a new concrete slab at about Elevation 61.
LCA O90072.AEO
EXPLORATIONS AND TESTS
Page 4
FIELD INVESTIGATION
The site was explored by drilling three borings at the approximate locations shown on
Plate 1. Each of the borings was drilled to a depth of approximately 30 feet below the
existing grade. Further details of the explorations and logs of the borings are presented in
Appendix A.
LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory tests were performed on selected samples obtained from the borings to aid in
the classification of the soils and to determine their engineering properties. The following
tests were performed: moisture content and dry density determinations, direct shear,
consolidation, compaction, and Expansion Index. Details of the laboratory testing program
and test results are presented in Appendix A. The results of corrosion studies are also
presented in Appendix A.
SITE CONDITIONS
The proposed addition will be constructed adjacent to the northwest corner of the existing
emergency room. The majority of the proposed construction area is paved with asphalt and
concrete and is used as a service area. A concrete ramp and grass area exist on the north
side of the site. The ground surface slopes to the south and west Underground utility
lines (sewer, water, and electrical) cross the site.
LCA 090072.AEO Page 5
SOIL CONDITIONS
Fill soils, 51/2 feet in thickness, were encountered in one of the borings; an 8-inch-diameter
clay pipe was encountered in the fill. The existing fill (possibly sewer line trench backfill),
which is not uniformly well compacted, consists of sand, silt, and clay, and was found to be
free of debris at the boring location. Deeper and/or poorer quality fill could occur between
borings.
The natural soils beneath the site consist of sand, silty sand, clay, and silt. The sand and
silty sand are dense. The silt and clay soils are moderately firm to firm. The clay soils are
somewhat expansive and would swell and shrink with changes in the moisture content.
Water was not encountered within the 301/2-foot depth explored.
Based on the corrosion studies, the results of which are presented in Appendix A, the site
is classified as severely corrosive to ferrous metals. The Schiff report should be referred
to for a discussion of the corrosion potential of the soils.
GEOLOGY
GENERAL
The site is situated on Newport Mesa, about .75 mile from the Pacific Ocean at an
elevation of about 60 to 76 feet above sea level (United State Geological Survey datum).
Newport Mesa is one of several physiographic features that compose the Orange County
Coastal Plain. The hills and mesas of the Newport area are separated by erosional gaps
that were incised into the late Pleistocene land surface. Two such features are Santa Ana
Gap, which is occupied by the Santa Ana River northwest of Newport Mesa, and Upper
Newport Bay, which separates Newport Mesa from the San Joaquin Hills to the east. The
site is near the southern end of the Los Angeles Basin, a deep, northwest -trending
structural basement trough filled with a thick sequence of Quaternary sediments and
Tertiary and Cretaceous sedimentary rocks.
LCA O90072.AEO Page 6
The site is shown in relation to regional geologic features on Plate 2, Regional Geology.
The relationship of the site property to local geologic features is shown on Plate 3, Local
Geology. The site is shown in relation to major fault zones on Plate 4, Regional Seismicity.
GEOLOGIC MATERIALS
Fill
Artificial fill materials, 535 feet in thickness, were encountered in one of our borings. The
fill is composed of mottled brown mixtures of sand, silt, and clay. This depth may not
reflect the overall conditions at the site, however, since we believe the boring was placed
over a backfilled trench. Two other borings drilled on -site did not encounter artificial fill.
Terrace Deposits
All three borings encountered Pleistocene marine terrace deposits composed of interbedded
grey and brown clay, silt, and sand. These deposits are typical of the poorly indurated
sediments that blanket the mesas of the Orange County Coastal Plain. The terrace deposits
are underlain by claystone and siltstone of the late Miocene age Monterey Formation,
about 40 feet below the existing ground surface.
Monterey Formation
Monterey Formation rocks are exposed in the bluffs at the south and west edges of
Newport Mesa. The Monterey Formation, together with other underlying Tertiary age
sedimentary rocks, are estimated to be about 13,000 feet thick beneath Newport Mesa and
are underlain by igneous and metamorphic basement complex rocks.
GROUND WATER
Significant water -bearing materials do not occur on the Newport Mesa, but perched ground
water is present locally within the terrace deposits capping Newport Mesa and at the
contact between the terrace deposits and the less permeable Monterey Formation. The
LCA O90072.AEo Page 7
underlying bedrock is considered to be non-waterbearing. Because of the proximity of the
site to the Pacific Ocean, however, the formation may be saturated at or near sea level
elevation.
The ground water level beneath the site occurs at about 40 feet near the terrace -bedrock
contact. Water was not encountered in our exploratory borings drilled to a maximum depth
of 304 feet.
GEOLOGIC HAZARDe
General
The geologic hazards at the site are essentially limited to those caused by earthquakes. The
major damage from earthquakes is the result of violent shaking from earthquake waves;
damage due to actual displacement or fault movement beneath a structure is much less
frequent. The violent shaking would occur not only immediately adjacent to the earthquake
epicenter, but within areas for many miles in all directions.
Faults
The numerous faults in Southern California include active, potentially active, and inactive
faults. Detailed information concerning the faults is presented in Tables B-1, B-2, and B-3
in Appendix B. No faults or fault -associated features were observed on the site during the
field reconnaissance.
The site is not located in a currently established Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. No
known faults underlie the proposed building. In our opinion, there is little probability of
surface rupture due to faulting on the site.
The nearest active fault is the North Branch fault of Newport -Inglewood fault zone, located
0.5 mile to the southwest. Other active faults in the region are the Whittier and San
Andreas fault zones located approximately 21 miles north-northeast and 51 miles northeast
of the site, respectively.
lEra
LCA 090072.AEO Page 8
The potentially active Pelican Hill fault is located 3.0 miles east of the site.
The nearest inactive fault is the Shady Canyon located 6.7 miles north-northeast of the site.
This inactive fault will not adversely impact the site.
Seismicity
The epicenters of earthquakes with magnitudes equal to or greater than 4.0 within a radius
of 100 kilometers (62 miles) of the site are shown in Table B-4 in Appendix B. Other
pertinent information regarding these earthquakes is also shown in Table B-4. The historic
seismic record indicates that 296 earthquakes of Richter magnitude 4.0 and greater have
occurred between 1932 and 1987 within about 100 kilometers of the site. An earthquake
recurrence curve, based on the data presented in Table B-4, is included as Plate 5,
Recurrence Curve.
The location of the site in relation to the active Newport -Inglewood fault zone indicates
that the site could be exposed to a greater than normal seismic risk than other areas of
Orange County.
The epicenter of the March 11, 1933 (Greenwich Civil Time) magnitude 6.3 Long Beach
earthquake was located approximately 2.5 miles southwest of the site. This earthquake,
although of only moderate magnitude, ranks as one of the major disasters in Southern
California. The majority of the damage was suffered by structures that are now considered
substandard construction and/or were located on filled or saturated ground.
The epicenter of the February 9, 1971 magnitude 6.4 San Fernando earthquake was about
61 miles north-northwest of the site. Surface rupture occurred on several segments of the
San Fernando fault zone. The large amount of damage caused to buildings occurred
primarily because of inadequately designed or built structures.
LCA O90072.AEO Page 9
The epicenter of the October 1, 1987 magnitude 5.9 Whittier Narrows earthquake was
located about 32 miles north-northwest of the site. The majority of the structural damage
resulting from this earthquake occurred in structures built prior to the more stringent
building codes adopted after the 1971 San Fernando earthquake. A magnitude 5.3
aftershock occurred three days after the main shock along a previously unrecognized fault
that may be a northem extension of the Whittier Fault.
Recently, minor earthquakes, registering 5.0 and 4.6 magnitude, occurred in the Pasadena
and Newport Beach areas on December 3, 1988 and April 7, 1989, respectively. These
earthquakes resulted in only minor damage. The epicenter of the Pasadena earthquake was
about 38 miles north-northwest of the site. The Newport Beach earthquake epicenter was
located about 1 mile southeast of the site.
Liquefaction
Liquefaction potential has been found to be greatest where the ground water level is
shallow and loose Fine sands occur within a depth of 50 feet. Liquefaction potential
decreases with increasing grain size and clay and gravel content, but increases as the ground
acceleration and duration of shaking increase. Ground water level is at an estimated depth
of 40 feet below ground surface near the contact between the terrace deposit and the
Monterey Formation siltstone. The terrace deposits and siltstone are generally dense to
very dense; accordingly, the potential for liquefaction is judged to be low.
Seismic Settlement and Subsidence
Seismic settlement often occurs when loose to medium dense granular soils densify during
ground shaking. If such settlement were uniform beneath a given structure, damage would
be minimal. However, because of variations in distribution, density, and confining
conditions of the soils, such settlement is generally non -uniform and can cause serious
structural damage. Such seismically induced settlement can occur in both dry and partially
saturated granular soils as well as in saturated granular soils. Differential settlement may
also be induced by ground failures such as liquefaction, flow slides, and surface ruptures.
LCA O90072.AEO Page 10
Generally, differential settlements due to such conditions would be much more severe than
those due to densification alone. The site is underlain by dense Pleistocene terrace
deposits; th.; probability of settlement of this material is slight.
Subsidence due to the extraction of fluids is not known to have occurred at this location.
Additionally, no peat was encountered in our exploratory borings; therefore, subsidence
associated with peat oxidation is unlikely.
Stability
The site is located on the eastern bank of a northwest -trending drainage channel on the.
Newport Mesa. The channel has been recently developed and is now a paved driveway;
no future erosion of the drainage is anticipated. The floor of the proposed structure will
be below the adjacent drainage channel elevation, and the building walls will buttress a
proposed cut slope to the north and east. The cut slope will expose the relatively flat -lying
terrace deposits, but not the Monterey formation siltstone. These terrace deposits are
generally massive with no well-defined planes of weakness such as bedding or joints. No
indications of slope instability were noted on the site. The site is not on or in the path of
any known existing or potential landslides. The potential for future slope instability is
judged to be low.
Flooding, Tsunamis, and Seiches
The site is in a "Zone X" flood hazard area as established by the Federal Insurance
Administration. As defined, "Zone X" is an area of a 500-year flood or an area of a 100-
year flood with average depths of less than 1 foot, or with areas less than 1 square mile and
areas protected by levees from 100-year floods.
As the site is located about .75 mile from the Pacific Ocean at an elevation of about 60 feet
above sea level, the risk of damage from seismic sea waves (tsunamis) need not he
considered.
LCA O90072.AEO Page 11
The site is not located downslope of any large bodies of water that would adversely affect
the site in the event of earthquake -induced failures or seiches (wave oscillations in a body
of water due to earthquake shaking).
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
GEOLOGIC CONSIDERATIONS
Based on the geologic findings, no active or potentially active faults are known to exist on -
site. Accordingly, surface rupture from faulting is considered unlikely. The site could be
subjected to significant ground shaking in the event of an earthquake cn any of the nearby
active or poter.tially active faults. Ground shaking hazard is common in the Southern
California area and can be minimized by proper structural design and construction. The
location of the site in relation to known fault. indicates that the immediate area could be
exposed to greater than normal seismic risk for the Orange County Coastal Plain as a
whole. The possibility of liquefaction is judged to be low, considering the dense nature of
the underlying granular materials and the absence of shallow ground water in the site
vicinity. No landslides are indicated on or adjacent to the site, and the potential for future
slope instability is judged to be low. The site is in an area between 100- and 500-year flood
boundaries. Other hazards, such as tsunamis, seiches, and subsidence, are not indicated.
FOUNDATIONS
General
The existing fill soils are not considered suitable for foundation or floor slab support. The
underlying natural soils are generally firm and dense, and will offer good support to the
proposed addition on spread footings.
Bearing Values
Spread footings carried at least 1. foot into the firm undisturbed natural soils and at least
2 feet below the adjacent grade or floor level may be designed to impose a net dead plus
live load pressure of 6,000 pounds per square foot. A one-third increase in the bearing
value may be used for wind or seismic loads. Adjacent to the existing building, footings
LCA O90072.AEO Page 12
should extend to at least the same level as the existing footings. The recommended bearing
value is a net value, and the weight of concrete in the footings may be taken as 50 pounds
per cubic foot, and the weight of soil backfill may be neglected when determining the
downward loads.
Footings for minor structures (auxiliary retaining walls and free-standing walls) may be
designed to impose a net dead plus live load pressure of 1,500 pounds per square foot at
a depth of at least 1 foot below the adjacent grade. Such footings may be established in
either properly compacted fill or the natural soils.
While the actual bearing value of any required fill will depend on the material used and the
compaction methods employed, the quoted bearing values will be applicable if acceptable
soils are used and are compacted as recommended. The bearing value of the fill should be
confirmed during the grading.
Settlement
The settlement of the proposed building, supported on spread footings as recommended,
will be less than three -fourths inch.
Lateral Loads
Lateral loads may be resisted by soil friction and by the passive resistance of the soils. A
coefficient of' friction of 0.4 may be used between footings or the floor slab on grade and
the supporting soils. The passive resistance of the natural soils or properly compacted fill
against footings may be assumed to be equal to the pressure developed by a fluid with a
density of 300 pounds per cubic foot. A one-third increase in the passive value may be
used for wind or seismic loads. The frictional resistance and the passive resistance of the
soils may be combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance.
LCA O90072.AEO Page 13
Footing Observation
To verify the presence of satisfactory soils at design elevations, all footing excavations
should be observed by personnel of our firm. Footings should be deepened as necessary
to extend into satisfactory soils. Where it is necessary to deepen a footing below the design
depth, the overexcavated portion should be backftlled with concrete. Soil backfill above
the footings and utility trench backfill should be mechanically compacted; flooding should
not be permitted. The exterior grades should be sloped such that surface water will drain
away from the foundations.
Inspection of footing excavations may also be required by the appropriate reviewing govern-
mental agencies. The contractor should be familiar with the inspection requirements of the
reviewing agencies.
EXCAVATION AND SLOPES
Excavation approximately 12 feet deep will be required for the service level. Temporary
unsurcharged slopes i,,ay be made at 1:1 in Lieu of shoring. Care should be taken in
excavating adjacent to the existing building so as to avoid damage to the building.
All applicable requirements of the California Construction and General Industry Safety
Orders, the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, and the Construction Safety Act
should be met.
Where sloped embankments are used, the tops of the slopes should be barricaded to
prevent vehicles and storage loads within 5 feet of the tops of the slopes. If the temporary
construction embankments are to be maintained during the rainy season, berms are
suggested along the tops of the slopes as necessary to prevent runoff water from entering
the excavation and eroding the slope faces. These recommended temporary excavation
slopes do not preclude possible local raveling and sloughing.
LCA 090072.AEO Page 14
SHORING
Where there is not sufficient space for sloped embankments, shoring will be required. For
design of cantilevered shoring, a triangular distribution of lateral earth pressure may be
used. It may be assumed that the retained soils with a level surface behind the cantilevered
shoring will exert a lateral pressure equal to that developed by a fluid with a density of 25
pounds per cubic foot.
For the design of soldier piles spaced at least two diameters on centers, :he allowable
lateral tearing value (passive value) of the soils below the level of excavation may be
assumed to be 600 pounds per square foot per foot of depth, up to a maximum of 6,00ft
pounds per square foot. 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 to the surrounding soils.
Continuous lagging will be required between soldier piles. If the clear spacing between
soldier piles does not exceed 4 feet, the lagging may be omitted in the stiff clay soil. We
should approve any areas where lagging is omitted.
All applicable requirements of the California Construction and General Industry Safety
Orders, the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, and the Construction Safety Act
should be met.
BUILDING WALLS BELOW GRADE
For design of the walls below grade as planned, where the surface of the backfill is level,
it may be assumed that the soils will exert a lateral pressure equal to that developed by a
fluid with a density of 30 pounds per cubic foot.
LCA O90072.AEO
Page 15
The upper 10 feet of the basement walls should be designed for an additional lateral
p essure of 100 pounds per square foot due to adjacent traffic, unless the traffic is kept at
least 10 feet away from the walls.
All required backfill should be cachanically compacted in layers; flooding should not be
permitted. Proper compaction of the backfill will be necessary to minimize settlement of
the backfill and to minimize settlement of overlying slabs, walks, and paving. Backfll
should oe compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density obtainable by the ASTM
Designation D1557-78 method of compaction. Backfll soils should consist of relatively
:ton -expansive soils such as a silty sand. The backfill soils should contain sufficient fines so
as to be relatively impermeable when compacted.
Some settlement of the backfill should be anticipated, and any utilities supported therein
should be designed to accept differential settlement, particularly at the points of entry to
the buildings. Also, provisions should be made for some settlement of concrete walks on
grade supported on backfill.
Compaction of the backfill and providing good surface drainage will minimize but not
prevent infiltration of water into the backfill. Building walls below grade should be
waterproofed or at least dampproofed, depending upon the degree of moisture protection
desired. We recommend that walls below grade be drained. Such drainage could consist
of a 4-inch-diameter perforated pipe, placed with perforations down, surrounded by filter
material loc :ed at the base of the wall backfill. The drain should be sloped to drain to a
sump or other drainage device.
GRADING
Site Preparation and Compaction
To provide support for slabs on grade, any existing fill and unsuitable soils should be
excavated and replaced as properly compacted fill. The on -site clay soils near the existing
grade should be excavated as necessary to allow the placement of at least 1 foot of
relatively non -expansive material beneath concrete walks and slabs.
LCA 090072.AEO Page 16
After excavating as recommended, the exposed soils should be carefully inspected to verify
the removal of all unsuitable deposits. Next, the exposed soils should he scarified to a
depth of 6 inches, brought to optimum moisture content, and rolled with heavy compaction
equipment. At least the upper 6 inches of exposed soils should be compacted to at least
90% of the maximum dry density obtainable by the ASTM Designation D1557-78 method
of compaction.
After compacting the exposed soils, all required fill should be placed in loose lifts not more
than 8 inches in thickness and compacted to at least 90%. The moisture content of the on -
site clay soils at the time of compaction should be brought to between 2% and 4% over
optimum moisture content. The n)isture content of the relatively non -expansive soils
should vary no more than 2% below or above optimum moisture content.
Material for Fill
The on -site soils, less any debris or organic matter within existing fill, may be used in
compacted fills. Because of their expansive characteristics, however, the on -site clay soils
should not be placed within 1 foot of subgrade level beneath concrete walks and slabs. Any
required imported fill and at least the upper 1 foot of fill should consist of relatively non -
expansive soils with an Expansion Index of less than 35.
Field Observation
The reworking of the upper soils and the compaction of all required fill should be observed
and tested by a representative of our firm. The observation and testing should include:
• Observe the clearing and grubbing operations to assure that all
unsuitable materials have been properly removed.
• Observe the exposed subgrade in areas to 'ceive fill and in areas where
excavation has resulted in the desired finished subgrade, observe
proofrolling, and delineate areas requiring overexcavation.
• Perform visual observation to evaluate the suitability of on -site and
import soils for fill placement; collect and submit soil samples for
required or recommended laboratory testing where necessary.
LCA O90072.AEO Page 17
Perform field density and compaction testing to determine the percent-
age of compaction achieved during fill placement.
Observe and probe foundation materials to confirm that suitable bearing
materials arc present at the design foundation depths.
The governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the project should be notified prior to
commencement of grading so that the necessary grading permits may be obtained and
arrangements may be made for the required inspection(s).
FLOOR SLAB SUPPORT
If the grading recommendations are followed, the service level slab may be supported on
grade.
if a floor covering that would be critically affected by moisture, such as vinyl, is to be used,
we suggest that the floor slab be supported on a 4-inch-thick Layer of gravel or on an
impermeable membrane as a capillary break. A suggested gradation for the gravel layer
would be as follows:
Sieve Size Percent Passim,
3/4" 90 - 100
No. 4 0 - 10
No.100 0-3
If the membrane is used, a low -slump concrete should be used to minimize possible curling
of the slabs. The concrete slabs should be allowed to cure properly before placing vinyl or
other moisture -sensitive floor covering.
LCA O90072.AEO Page 18
PAVING
Compaction of the subgrade to at least 90%, including trench backfills, will be important
for paving support. The preparation of the subgrade should be done immediately prior to
the placing of the base course. Proper drainage of the paved areas should be provided
since this will reduce moisture infiltration into the subgrade and increase the life of the
paving.
The paving design thickness will depend on the subgrade soils and on the Traffic Index.
If the subgrade soils consist of sandy soils, a lesser paving section may be used than if the
soils consist of clay soils. Design data for different traffic indices are presented on the
following page; if needed, design data for other traffic indices can be provided. The
following recommendations are based on the Caltrans Method adopted by Orange County.
Assuming that the subgrade will consist of the on -site clay soils, compacted to at least 90%
as recommended, the following paving sections may be used:
Type of Use
Traffic
Index
Asphaltic
Paving
(inches)
Gravel
Base
(inches)
Driveways subject to automobile
traffic
5
4
9
Driveways and areas subject to light
truck traffic
6
4
13
Driveways and areas subject to heavy
truck traffic
7
5
15
LCA O90072.AEO
Page 19
Assuming that the subgrade will consist of sandy soils, or if it is decided to place a layer of
non -expansive material, the following paving sections may be used. It is assumed that such
a subgrade will have an "R" value of at least 40; this must be verified during site grading.
Type of Use
Traffic
Index
Asphaltic
Paving
(inches)
Gravel
Base
(inches)
Thickness of
Non -expansive
Material
(inches)
Driveways subject to automobile
traffic
5
3
4
12
Driveways and areas subject to light
truck traffic
6
3
7
12
Driveways and areas subject to heavy
truck traffic
7
4
8
12
The base course should meet the specifications for Class 2 Aggregate Base as defined in
Section 26 of the State of California, Department of Transportation, Standard Specifica-
tions, dated July 1984. Alternatively, the base course could mee: the specifications for
untreated base as defined in Section 200-2 of the 1985 edition of the Standard Specifica-
tions for Public Works Constr.:ction. The base course should be compacted to at least
95%.
For design of portland cement concrete paving, the modulus of subgrade reaction (k) for
the on -site clay soils may be assumed to be 100 pounds per cubic inch. Where the subgrade
consists of on -site sandy soils or select predominantly granular soils, the modulus of
subgrade reaction (k) may be assumed to be 200 pounds per cubic inch. These values were
estimated from published empirical relationships.
LCA O90072.AEO Page 20
BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations provided in this report are based upon our understanding of the
described project information and on our interpretation of the data collected during the
subsurface exploration. We have made our recommendations based upon experience with
similar subsurface conditions under similar loading conditions. The recommendations apply
to the specific project discussed in this report; therefore, any change in building loads,
building location, or site grades should be provided to us so that we may review our
conclusions and recommendations and make any necessary modifications.
The recommendations provided in this report are also based upon the assumption that the
necessary geotechnical observations and testing during construction will be performed by
representatives of our firm. The field observation services are considered a continuation
of the geotechnical investigation and essential to verify that the actu:soil conditions are
as anticipated. This also provides for the procedure whereby the client can be advised of
unanticipated or changed conditions that would require modifications of our original
recommendations. In addition, the presence of our representative at the site provides the
client with an independent professional opinion regarding the geotechnically related
construction procedures. If another firm is retained for the geotechnical observation
services, our professional responsibility and liability would be impaired.
-oOo-
y
0
3
e
A
w
r
Q
3
0
O
LL
LEXISTING
ASPHALTIC
PAVING
x67.4
EXISTING H1y':
l
x22.3 x747
EXISTING
ASPHALTIC
PAVING -�
PROPOSED PARTIAL BASEMENT
(SERVICE LEVEL)
(F.F.E. = 64)
61.6 x61.0 x60.8
x60.9
PROPOSED FIRST LEVEL
(F.F.E. = 79)
21
60.5
x
x65.5
x64
62.8
APPROACH TO
LOADING DOCK
(F.F.E. = 61)
62.5
/
60.6
x
3
•
60.6
81.0 60.0 x
/EN.ILATION PLANT
x
76.1
®2
X 76.1
EXISTING
LOADING DOCK
(F.F.E. = 64)
EXISTING
EMERGENCY
ROOM
(F.F.E.= 64)
REFERENCE:
TOPOGRAPHY MAP (UNDATED) BY
ROBERT BEIN. WILLIAM FROST AND
ASSOCIATES
SITE PLAN (DATED 8-7-90) BY
TAYLOR AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTS
KEY:
® 3 CURRENT INVESTIGATION (LCA 090072.AEO)
0 21 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION (LCA A-69080)
HBORING LOCATION AND NUMBER
x 161 EXISTING GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION
LIMITS OF PROPOSED ADDITION
LIMITS OF PROPOSED PARTIAL BASEMENT
PLOT PLAN
PROPOSED
EMERGENCY ROOM
EXPANSION
AND RENOVATION
SCALE 1' = 20'
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
PLATE 1
S
0
E{S
La 1
fee,1
f�l
-o
-r
LECENO
�- .....,e.e....�...L.o-..�...._w.
STATION
SEAI :BEACH
NJING
HILL.
(,L.]NANEMI
BM'
CNICA
ESL
GAROEN
GROVE
*ONTINNGTOM-
BEACHI
NUNTINGTO
BEAC
ME
00` rAs
LES-
BASE MAP REFERENCE:
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES PRC:i.
REPORT AND GROUND WATER GEOLOGY 0
COASTAL PLAIN OF ORANGE COUNTY, 1982':,
MODIFIED ACCORDING TO: USGS PROFESS!
PAPER 420 - D, 1981, DWR BULLETIN 147.1
USGS MAP OM - 193, 1957.
0 I2
MILES.
REGIONAL GEOLOGY
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
PLATE 2
0
0
a
w
0
b
EXPLANATION :
Q a I
0b
Qt
Tm
•
v;
NEWPORT
HOLOCENE ALLUVIUM
HOLOCENE BEACH DEPOSITS
PLLISTOCENE TERRACE DEPOSITS
MIOCENE MONTEREY FORNATION
FAULT , dashed and queried
where uncertain
---- — GEOLOGIC CONTACT
REFERENCE:
BASE MAP U.S.G.S. NEWPORT
BEACH 7.5' QUADRANGLE (1965)
PHOTOREVISED 1981 .
GEOLOGY MODIFIED FROM CMG
SPECIAL REPORT 15 (1973) AND
GEOLOGIC SEISMIC STUDY FOR NEW -
PORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN (1972) .
0 2000 4000
SCALE IN FEET
LOCAL GEOLOGY
LeROY CRANDALL A' 3 ASSOCIATES
PLATE 3
J
w
0
m
O
922
).3
1992.
9
SANLUIS OBISPO
OMSPO
n
9
3
.2
A n t y5m B, A R B
iif
MENIM
asa[12e1011 O ENCN229W GEOLOGIST,
1973
Nit
^r•.i
we
Nods
111 NO
1e2�/
R.A
s�elN 997
Ile.
1925
1930
X T L R
''YY CpQ L 0
r992
.o.
MA'
\ 1971
r. N 6.5
ANGE
NOP
d N
IP
PNGELE
Samar
sEN
33
40
fxr• hX1' uY
MAJOR
EARTHQUAKES AND RECENTLY ACTIVE FAULTS
IN THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGION
EXPLANATION'
ACTIVE FAULTS
Teti length of fault cone Mal becks Holocene deposits
a Itgl hos Itl4 seismic activity.
Fault ooMmW with owoa rupture creep.
m Nwwip
egnNgeaa, a vied dseiswie table seep.
•
0 KNOW ' volcanic activity
1 NmNq, POI" Cann Free eve :alen 131.11N91
0
EARTHQUAKE LOCATIONS
App oumwe epicentral area at ewlequakes that
occurred 1769-133. Magnitudes NO recorded
69 Instruments prev to 1906 were estimated
from damage reports assigned on Intensify W
(Waded Meese sealel ar twee; this a men
equivalent 10 Richer a 6.0. 31 mdderatr
earthquakes. 7 mop old me clot ewlFqud4
(I857) were reported in the 164-yew period
1769-1933.
ENMpde eNcent.s sun 1933, *tied from
i- .nlnmah 29mlyoir wd 'twee
trap earthquakes wee recorded lithe 40-yea
plead 1933-1973,
- 5. L..., 9.Mw, en.l. PIN w:s r.rei.N,.NN.e19 a ..p.
lore . e.M ar•M lr•• F nr. Sm 99.14 es11-...,.In- 4.Nein. em.. s.^... eel
AKIN IINun ILA gnaw. . r C. • Vw.n lnt9wu f•9 r.
E.^PI^p LyANN,. J Pa[M ^ N. 5anwnO M Mpµ'M Nis } N ea/ow Orna.NO o/ Mn.1wed C G*h..w [reb..
a Sbttr AYwa. &SAh /6 ? 19641. miechNn Nye p;6lnn of m. /µyKo one Senonciagnd $rcw/M N *Amor; hen C [ [barer,
EM.n6.y Sac nb)y l 9581, n d M ,ibrtw arts, 66
INN
0
E E S
G.rnord
957 /r
YJ
1.412
ti0
'GRANGE
SITE,'
.93?
.90
> Salton
"4 1 Sea
REGIONAL SEISMICITY
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
0
Y
1
0
a
V
100 YEARS
ffi
a2
V, Al
WN
0
Yw
E-
O h
a z
H O
cc
Qf
W
0
K
W
m
Z
10,000
1,000
100
10
0.1
0.01
0.001
I
i
1
296
100 Km
1932
I I
EVENTS
SEARCH
— 1987
M>_ 4 —
RADIUS —
—
INCLUDES
EST. MAG.
BETWEEN
2 EARTHQUAKES
= 6.0 TO
1906 AND
-
U 5 _
1931
\
APR. 21,
EST. MAG.
DIST.=87
1918 L-
= 6.8 _
KM. -
FEB. 9,
EST. MAG.=
DIST.=58
\
1890 t3\\
-
-
7.0
KM.
I
1
1
1
1 1
I
3 4 5 6
MAGNITUDE, M
RECURRENCE CURVE
0 REPRESENTS SINGLE EVENT, AND THEREFORE
NAS BEEN DISCOUNTED IN PREDICTION.
7
8
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
APPENDIX A
LCA O90072.AEO Page A-1
APPENDIX A
EXPLORATIONS
The site was explored by drilling three borings at the locations shown on Plate 1. Each of
the borings was drilled to a depth of about 30 feet below the existing grade using 20-inch-
diameter bucket -type equipment. Caving of the boring walls did not occur during drilling,
and casing or drilling mud was not used to extend the borings to the depths drilled.
The materials encountered were logged by our field technician, and undisturbed and loose
samples were obtained for laboratory inspection and testing. The logs of the borings are
presented on Plates A-1.1 through A-1.3; the depths at which undisturbed samples were
obtained are indicated to the left of the boring logs. The energy required to drive the
sampler 12 inches is indicated on the logs. The soils are classified in accordance with the
Unified Soil Classification System described on Plate A-2.
LABORATORY TESTS
The field moisture content and dry density of the soils encountered were determined by
performing tests on the undisturbed samples. The results of the tests are shown to the left
of the boring logs.
Direct shear tests were performed on selected undisturbed samples to determine the
strength of the soils. The tests were performed at field and increased moisture contents
and at various surcharge pressures. The yield -point values determined from the direct shear
tests are presented on Plate A-3, Direct Shear Test Data.
LCA 090072.AEO Page A-2
Confined consolidation tests were performed on three undisturbed samples to determine
the compressibility of the soils. Water was added to one of the samples during the test to
illustrate the effect of moisture on the compressibility. The results of the tests are
presented on Plates A-4.1 and A-0.2, Consolidation Test Data.
The optimum moisture content and maximum dry density of the upper soils were
determined by performing a compaction test on a sample obtained from Boring 1. The test
was performed in accordance with the ASTM Designation D1557-78 method of compaction.
The results of the test are presented on Plate A-5, Compaction Test Data.
The Expansion Index of the soils was determined by testing two samples in accordance with
the Uniform Building Code Standard No. 29-2 method. The results of the tests are shown
on Plate A-6, Expansion Index Test Data.
Soil corrosivity studies were performed for us by M. J. Schiff and Associates. The Schiff
report is presented on Plates A-7.1 through A-7.4.
-000-
s
1-
O
0
0
w
0
O90072,AEO
0
0
0
m
0
L
a
m m
o E
o
00 m
m
C
O
O
0
U O
U m
o o
m m
c
o
c
0
0 U
m m
N '0
c
o .0
coy
m
a,
c
3
o'C
n 0c
0
- m
O m
c
Ug
0 o
m -0
m
a m
m m
0 3
meo c
m N
F
F L
•
0
Z
ELEVATION (ft.)
IDEPTH (ft.)
MOISTURE
(% of dry wt.)
_
trl=
01 b
w0
0 .
> n
0 c
0
IDRIVE ENERGY,
SAMPLE LOC.
65-
11.1
111
4
9.5
99
2
- 5
15.0
114
6
60-
15.7
10S
6
10
8.5
i02
4
55-
5
34.8
77
14
31.3
88
8
50-
- 20
11.3
93
6
45
- 25
12.6
95
12
40-
30
305
90
6
35-
c
DATE DRILLED:
EQUIPMENT USED
BORING 1
September 27, 1990
20" - Diameter Bucket
ELEVATION 67
7" Asphaltic Paving - 3" Base Course
Nil SP FILL -(POSSIBLE SEWER LINE BACKFILL) - SAND.
CL SILT, and CLAY - mottled grey and brown
IIII
/4'
yy� (ENCOUNTERED 8" DIAMETER CLAY PIPE AT 5'.
fJ' k MOVED BORING 2' SOUTH)
CL -L SURFACE OF NATURAL SOIL
SANDY CLAY - dark brown
Brown and light brown
SP SAND - fine, grey
SM SILTY SAND - fine, oxide stains, light grey and white
SP SAND - tine, light brownish grey
Oxide stains, light grey
Some Sift, grey
NOTE: Water not enocuntered. No caving.
* Elevations refer to datum of reference survey; see Plate 1.
LOG OF BORING
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
PLATE A-1.1
s
a.
0-
ui
Q
Y
0
DATE 10/4/90
ELEVATION (ft.)
75—
m
0
g 70—
m
O
_
. O U
CC w= O
1- 00 D 0L1J O uJ
W Q x- ala > = 2
o 20 oc E -<
0
.c
-o 10
g 65—
o E
�c m
c o
0 .0 0 15
O 0
0 60
m =
0 0
`• a.
S La
N O
o C 20
O
O U
m m 55—
o
0 co
t
c ,'n
0 .0
m n
h
='0
C m 25
o
N ▪ a
0
c
o m
D 0
Sa
8 g 30
t$
a m
• a
N N
O 0
m O
O C
m V-i
•
0
O
Z
DATE DRILLED:
EQUIPMENT USED:
ELEVATION 76
28.1 95 4
29.8 92 6
SP
6.0 98 12
5.1 93 18 ifc!:
61 44 16
62 95 22 F:+'..
SM
CL
4.2 100 18
4.1 97 20 �t
4.6 94 22 SLY;
66 94 16 r
BORING 2
Septernber27, 1990
20' - Diameter Bucket
4" Asphaltic Paving - 6' Base Course
SILTY SAND - fine, brown
SILTY CLAY- brown and grey
SAND - fine, light grey
Grey with brown
Oxide stains, brown
Brown and grey
NOTE: Water not encountered. No caving.
LOG OF BORING
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
PLATE A-1.2
0-
ui
O
rE
0
Oi
0
0
W
N
O
O
O
0
0
0
0
D
D
m
D
N 0
o
To"
0 D
0o
0
en
E
0 a
0
O 0
• 0
0
O 0
'a g
o
O 0
m 0
0
n0
n
O 0
d
L 0
c
3 D.
ui o
o` m
m
3-0
AO 'O
0
t
O N
`0 3
0 o
o 0
0 H
iE
0
O
L
' ELEVATION (ft.)f
0
Lu
0
PMOISTURE
(% of dry wt.)
DRY DENSITY
(Ibs./cu. ft.)
DRIVE ENERGY
(ft.-kips/ft.)
SAMPLE LOC.
60-
3.2
101
12
1'
5
50
95
8
■
55-
4.7
97
12
r
10
24.7
98
12
50
2.4
103
14
- 15
45
15.7
93
22
L'
- 20
40-
24.2
87
10
►:
- 25
35-
/
50.8
70
4
in
DATE DRILLED:
EQUIPMENT USED:
ELEVATION 61
BORING 3
September 27, 1990
20" - Diameter Bucket
7"Reinforced Concrete Slab -5"Base Course
SP SAND- fine, grey with brown
Oxide stains
Some Sill, grey
CLayer of Sandy Silt, brown
Light greyish brown
Some Silt, grey and brown
Grey
CL SILTY CLAY - dark brown
NOTE: Water not encountered. No caving.
LOG OF BORING
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
PLATE A-1.3
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GROUP
SYMBOLS
TYPICAL NAMES
CLEAN
GRAVELS
b',r
'Pratto
Aso;
.$,:,;
GW
well graded grovels , grovel-sandm
lime or no lines. ware].
GRAVELS
((lore Ivan 509 of
(Lithe or no lines)
a
GP
Poorly graded grovels or grovel -sand mnlures,
lime or no lines.
coarse fraction is
LARGER than the
Na. a sieve size)
GRAVELS
WITH FINES
'OEe
rJ
{AC GM
Silly gravels, grovel - sand - sill minares.
COARSE
GRAINED
SOILS
(of fines] le amt.
GC
Clayey oy mi.
v y grave,, grovel- sand -clay ores l
(mote than 50% af
material is LARGER LARGER
man No.200 sieve
sire)
CLEAN SANDS
)
Well graded sands, gravelly sands, lirlle ot
no lines.
SANDS
(More than 50 6 0l
(Lime or no fines)
SP
Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands , little
or no tines.
coarse traction is
SMALLER m== the
No. 4 siege el
SANDS
WITH FINES
SM
Silty sonds, sand -sin roil lures,
(Appreciable amt.
1 lines)
SC
Clayey sands, sand - clay mieres,
m
Mt.
Inoponic silts and very fine sonds, rock flour,
silly or clayey line sonds or clayey silts
will. slignl plaslieily.
SILTS AND CLAYS
(Liquid limit LESS than 50)
%
CL
Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity,
gravelly cloys, sandy clays, silty clays, lean
cloys.
FINE
GRAINED
GL
Organic silts and organic silty clays of low
piashcny.
SOILS
(Moreothan 50: of
Ikon No.20SMALLER
size)
\
N
MH
inorganic sills, micaceous 01 diatomaceous
line sandy or silly sods, elastic sills.
SILTS AND CLAYS
(Liquid limit GREATER Ikon 50)
CH
Inorganic clays 0I nigh pies icily, fat clays.
OH
Organic cloys at mswum to high plasticity,
organic
H IGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
pt
Peal and ether highly organic sails.
sadr
BOUNDARY CLASSIFICATIONS: Soils possessing chord 'eristcs of Iwo groups ore designoled by
combinations of group symb Is.
P A RTICLE SIZE LIMITS
SILT OR CLAY
SAND
GRAVEL
T
nNf I .eomw
LL
con
roof
canes[
COBBLES! BOULDERS
NO. ZOO Na40 NO.10 Wlo ash. ]w. uznl
U. S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Reference
The Unified Soil ClassdimFon System, Corps of
Engineers, U. 5 Army Technical Memorandum No 3-357.
Vol I. Morch.1953. (Revised April, 1960)
LEROY CRANDALL a ASSOCIATES
PLATE A-2
0
0
U
0
c
a
w
1—
Q
0
0
0
Li
10oC
0
c
v
G1
2000
N
c
0
c
300re
re
0
co
co
w
Cr 4000
6000
0
SHEAR STRENGTH in Pounds per Squore Foot
1000
\@14
•
@2
3@60
1@12•
•1@6
2@5
„Bak./li
CAA
\20
r BORING
II' SAMPLE
IY'
NUMBER AND
DEPTH (FT,)
�@° 14
2@50
3@60
1@12•
1@6
VALUES
IN ANALYSES
I
USED
• Tests at field moisture content
0 Tests at increased moisture content
DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA
LEROY CRANDALL a ASSOCIATES
PLATE A-3
0
U
m
a
ui
s
re
0
DATE ' 9/15/90
O90072.AEO
m
O
00.4
0.01
=
Z 0.02-�
O.
= 0.03
0
Z
Z
0 0.04
1-
a
0
J
O
W
0 0.05
0
0.06
0 07
LOAD IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 50 60 7.0 8.1
lc_
---
.....
Boring
SAND
2 at 23'
-
-----
•
Boring
SANDY
1
CLAY
at 6'
•
NOTE: Samples tested at field moisture content.
CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
PLATE A-4.1
0
x
0
rn
a
w
O
DATE 10/15/90
090072.AEO
re
O
LOAD IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT
n0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 60 7.0 8.0
CONSOLIDATION IN INCHES PER INCH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
i
J Obi ton _ A W
lIIk..
,I
Boring 3 at 13i
SAND
NOTE: Water added to sample after consolidation under a bad of 3.6 kips per square foot
CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
PLATE A-4.2
0
0
:J
Cr)
0
O90072.AEO
m
BORING NUMBER
AND SAMPLE DEPTH:
SOIL TYPE :
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY :
(Ibs./cu.ft. )
OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT :
(% of dry wt. )
1 at 1' to 4'
FILL - SAND. SILT and CLAY
125
11
TEST METHOD: ASTM Designation D1557 - 78
COMPACTION TEST DATA
LeFROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
PLATE A-5
w
N
O
w
N
O
BORING NUMBER
AND SAMPLE DEPTH:
SOIL TYPE :
CONFINING PRESSURE:
( Ibs./sq. ft. )
1 at 1' to 4' 1 at 6' and
1 at 9'
FILL - SAND, SILT and CLAY SANDY CLAY
144 144
FIELD MOISTURE CONTENT : 9.0
(%ofdry wt. )
FINAL MOISTURE CONTENT:
(% of dry wt. )
DRY DENSITY:
( Ibs./cu. ft.)
EXPANSION INDEX:
11.3
15.7 27.7
113 104
26 76
TEST METHOD: Uniform Building Code Standard
No. 29 - 2, Expansion Index Test
EXPANSION INDEX TEST DATA
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
PLATE A-6
APPENDIX B
LCA O90072.AEO Page B-1
APPENDIX B
GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC DATA
GENERAL
The geologic -seismic studies included a field reconnaissance of the site and office analysis
of published and unpublished literature pertinentt to the study area. The Safety Element
for Orange County (1987) and the City of Newport Beach General Plan (1972) were
reviewed as part of our literature analysis.
This appendix presents additional background information regarding faults and ground
shaking.
FAULTS
The numerous faults in Southern California include active, potentially active, and inactive
faults. The criteria for these major groups, as established by Slemmons (1979), are
presented in Table B-1. Table B-2 presents a listing of active faults in Southern California
within 100 miles of the site with the distance in miles and direction from the site to the site
and the nearest point on the fault. Table B-3 provides a similar listing for potentially active
faults. No faults or fault -associated features were observed on the site during our field
reconnaissance.
Active Faults
The nearest active fault to the site is the North Branch fault of the Newport -Inglewood
fault zone- The actual position of the fault trace through the Newport Peninsula has not
been firmly established; however, the Geologic -Seismic Study for the Newport Beach
General Plan (1972) projects the fault as passing about 0.5 mile southwest of the site and
trending northwest, as shown on Plate 3.
LCA 090072.AEO
Activity Classification
and Definition
Page B-2
TABLE 8-1
CRITERIA FOR CLASSIFICATION OF FAULTS WITH REGARD TO SEISMIC ACTIVITY
(After D. B. Slemmons, 1979)
Active - a tectonic fault with a
history of strong earthquakes
or surface faulting, or a fault
wirh a short recurrence inter-
val relative to the life of the
planned project. The recur-
rence interval used to define
activity rate may vary ac-
cording to the consequence of
activity.
Potentially Active - a tectonic
fault without historic surface
offset, but with a recurrence
ircerval that could be suffi-
ciently short to be significant
to the particular project.
Activity Uncertan - a fault with
insufficient evidence to define
past activity or recurrence inter-
val. The following classifi-
cations can be used until the
results of additional studies
provide definitive evidence.
Tentatively Active - predomi-
nant evidence suggest that the
fault may be active even
though its recurrence ;tterval is
very long or poorly di fined.
Tentatively inactive - predom-
inant evidence suggests that
fault is not active.
Inactive - a fault along which it
can be demonstrated that sur-
- face faulting has not occurred
in the recent past, and that the
requirement interval is long
enough not to be of signifi-
' ) canoe to the particular project.
Criteria
Historic
(1) Surface faulting and as-
sociated strong earth-
quakes.
(2) Tectonic fault creep or
geodetic evidence of fault
displacement or defor-
mation-
No reliable report of historic
surface faulting.
Geologic
(1) Geologically young dep-
osits cut by fault.
(2) Youthful geomorphelogica]
features that are char-
acteristic of geologically
young displacements
along the fault trace.
(3)Ground water barriers in
geologically young or un-
consolidated deposits.
(1)Geomorphic features that
are characteristic of active
faults, but with subdued,
eroded, and discontinuous
form.
(2) Faults not known to cut
or displace youngest
alluvial deposits, but
offset older quaternary
deposits.
(3) Water barriers in older
deposits.
(4) Geological setting in
which the geometry in re-
lation to active or poten-
tially active faults suggest
similar degree of activity.
Seismologic
Earthquake epicenter can be
assigned with confidence to
the fault.
Alignment of some earthquake
epicenters along or near fault,
but assigned locations have
low degree of confidence in
location.
Available information is insufficient to provide criteria that are sufficiently definitive to establish
fault activity. This lack of information may be due to the inactivity of the fault or to lack of
investigations needed to provide definitive criteria.
Available information suggests evidence of fault activity, but evidence is not definitive.
Available information suggests evidence of fault inactivity, but evidence is not definitive.
No historic activity.
Geomorphic features characteristic of
active fault zones are not present and earthquakes.
geological evidence is available to
indicate that the fault has not moved
in the recent past and recurrence is
not likely during a time period con-
sidered significant to the site. Should
indicate age of last movement: Holo-
cene, Pleistocene. Quaternary,
Tertiary, etc.
Not recognized as source of
LCA O90072.AEO Page B-3
TABLE B-2
MAJOR NAMED FAULTS CONSIDERED TO BE ACTIVE (a)
IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
Fault
(in alphabetical order)
Maximum Distance
Credible From Site Direction
Earthquake (Miles) From Site
Coyote Creek 7.2 (a) SS 86 E
Cucamonga 6.5 (b) 38 NE
Elsinore 7.5 (b) 26 NE
Elysian Park Structure 6.75 (b) 34 NNW
Helendale 7.5 (b) 78 NE
Malibu Coast 7.0 (a) RO 44 NW
Newport -Inglewood 7.0 (b) 0.5 SW
Pinto Mountain 7.5 (b) 80 ENE
Raymond 6.9 (a) RO 35 NNW
San Andreas 8.25 (b) 51 NE
San Cayetano 7.0 (a) RO 74 NW
San Fernando Zone 6.5 (b) 50 NW
San Gabriel 7.5 (a) SS 38 N
San Jacinto Zone 7.5 (b) 47 NE
Whittier 7.0 (a) SS 21 NNE
(a) Slemmons, 1979
(b) Greensfelder, C.D.M.G. Map Sheet 23, 1974.
SS Strike Slip
RO Reverse Oblique
LCA O90072.AEO Page B-4
TABLE B-3
MAJOR NAMED FAULTS CONSIDERED TO BE POTENTIALLY ACTIVE(a)
IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
Fault
(in alphabetical order)
Maximum Distance
Credible From Site Direction
Earthquake (Miles) From Site
Charnock 6.5 (a) SS 28 NW
Chino 7.1 (a) NO 28 NE
Duarte 6.7 (a) RO 35 N
El Modeno 6.5 (a) 15 N
Northridge Hills 6.5 (b) 51 NW
Norwalk 6.7 (a) RO 17 N
Oakridge 7.5 (b) 75 NW
Overland 6.0 (a) SS 34 NW
Palos Verdes 7.0 (b) 16 WNW
Pelican Hill 6.7 (a) 3 E
Peralta Hills 6.6 (a) 15 NE
San Jose 6.9 (a) RO 30 NNE
Santa Cruz Island 7.1 (a) RO 90 WNW
Santa Monica -Hollywood 6.9 (a) RO 40 NNW
Santa Susana 6.5 (b) 59 NNW
Santa Ynez 7.5 (b) 87 NW
Sierra Madre 7.5 (b) 36 N
Verdugo 7.4 (a) RO 42 NNW
(a) Slemmons, 1979
(b) Greensfelder, C.D.M.G. Map Sheet 23, 1974.
SS Strike Slip
NO Normal Oblique
RO Reverse Oblique
M. J. SCHIFF & ASSOCIATES
Consulting Corrosion Engineers
October 19, 1990
LeROY CRANDALL & ASSOCIATES
731 East Ball Road, Suite 104
Anaheim, California 92807
Attention: Mr. Paul Shade
Gentlemen:
1291 NORTH INDIAN HILLBOULEVARD
CLAREMONT. CALIFORNIA 91711 3860
714/626-0967
FM 714/621-1419
Re: Soil Corrosivity Study
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
Newport Beach, California
Your t090072.AEO, MJS&A 190294
Laboratory tests have been completed on three soil samples we selected from
your boring logs for the subject emergency roam expansion project at 301
Newport Boulevard. The purpose of these tests was to determine if the soils
may have deleterious effects on underground utilities, hydraulic elevator
cylinders, and concrete foundations.
The electrical resistivity of each sample was measured in its as -received
condition and again with distilled water added to create the standardized
condition of saturation. Resistivities are at about their lowest value when
the soil is saturated. The samples were chemically analyzed for the major
anions and cations, and pH was measured. Test results are shown on Table 1.
One of the most useful factors in determining soil corrosivity is electrical
resistivity. The electrical resistivity of a soil is a measure of its resist-
ance to the flow of electrical current. Corrosion of buried metal _s an
electrochemical process in which the amount of metal loss due to corrosion is
directly proportional to the flow of electrical current (DC) from the metal
into the soil. A soil's resistivity decreases and, therefore, its corrosivity
increases as its moisture and chemical contents increase.
A commonly accepted correlation between electrical resistivity and corrosivity
toward ferrous metals is:
Soil Resistivity
in ohm -centimeters
Corrosivity Category
0 to 1,000 severely corrosive
1,000 to 2,000 corrosive
2,000 to 10,000 moderately corrosive
over 10,000 mildly corrosive
Electrical resistivities measured in the laboratory with as -received moisture
content were in the moderately corrosive category, When saturated, they
dropped into corrosive and severely corrosive categories.
Soil pH values varied from 8.0 to 8.6 which are moderately to strongly alka-
line. This is not significant in evaluating corrosivity in this case unless
lead or aluminum will be used underground.
CORROSION AND CATHODIC PROTECTION ENGINEERING SERVICES
SURVEYS • PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS • INTERFERENCE PROBLEMS • SOIL TESTS • SUPERVISION, INSPECTION ANO ADJUSTMENT OF INSTALLATIONS
PLATE A-7.1
LeROY CRANDALL & ASSOCIATES October 19, 1990
MlS&A i90294
The chemical content of the samples was low and moderate.
This site is classified as severely corrosive to ferrous metals.
Page 2
The life of buried materials depends on thickness, strength, loads, construc-
tion details, and soil moisture as well as soil corrosivity and is, therefore,
difficult to predict. 0f more practical value are corrosion control methods
that will increase the life of the material at a reasonable cost. The follow-
ing corrosion control measures are recommended to prolong the life of materi-
als buried in these soils.
Underground steel utilities should be abrasive blasted and given a high quali-
ty protective coating such as extruded polyethylene, a tape coating system,
hot applied coal tar enamel, or fusion bonded epoxy, and cathodic protection
should be applied.
Buried steel wiping must be electrically insulated from dissimilar metals,
cement -mortar or concrete coated steel, and above ground steel pipe to prevent
dissimilar metal corrosion cells and to facilitate the application of cathodic
protection.
Underground steel pipe with rubber gasketed, mechanical, grooved end, or other
nonconductive type joints must be bonded for electrical continuity for corro-
sion monitoring and cathodic protection.
Hydraulic elevator cylinders should be well coated as described above. Each
cylinder should be isolated from building metals by installing dielectric
material between the piston platen and car and also in the oil line. The oil
line should be placed above ground if possible but, if underground, should be
protected as described above for steel utilities. Cathodic protection is
recommended for hydraulic cylinders or, as an alternate, each cylinder may be
placed in a plastic casing with a plastic watertight seal at the bottom.
Cast or ductile iron pipe, valves, and fittings should be encased in an 8 mil
polyethylene tube or wrap per AWWA Standard C105/ANSI 21.5. As an alternate,
iron piping not under pressure, such as sewers and drains, may be bedded and
backfilled with cement slurry or alkalized sand (25 pounds hydrated lime mixed
into each cubic yard of sand) at least 3 inches thick surrounding the pipe.
Underground iron pipe should also be electrically insulated from dissimilar
metals and above ground iron pipe.
Bare copper tubing should be bedded and backfilled in sand at least 3 inches
thick surrounding the pipe. However, if a recirculating hot water system is
installed underground, buried hot copper tubing would be subject to corrosion
by a thermogalvanic cell. The best corrosion control measure would be to
place the hot copper tubing above ground. If buried, bare copper tubing
should be encased in impermeable, unstretched, nonshrink insulation with the
joints and seams sealed.
PLATE A-7.2
LeROY CRANDALL & ASSOCIATES October 19, 1990
MJS&A 990294 Page 3
No special precautions are required for reinforced concrete, asbestos -cement,
or plastic piping placed underground from a corrosion viewpoint. However, any
iron valves or fittings should be protected as mentioned above.
Where metallic pipelines penetrate concrete structures such as building floors
or walls, plastic sleeves, rubber seals, or other dielectric material should
be used to prevent pipe contact with the concrete and reinforcing steel.
On any type of pipe, bare steel appurtenances such as bolts, joint harnesses,
or flexible couplings should be coated with a coal tar or rubber based mastic
after assembly.
Standard construction practices and concrete mixes may be used for concrete in
contact with these soils using type 2 cement.
The scope of this study is limited to a determination of soil corrosivity and
its general effects on materials likely to be used for construction. If the
architect and/or engineers desire more specific information, designs, specifi-
cations, or review of design, we will be happy to work with them as a separate
phase of this project.
Respectfully submitted,
M. J. SCHIFF & ASSOCIATES
Robert A. Pannell
bk
Enc: Table 1
L48
PLATE A-7.3
Table 1 - LABORATORY TESTS ON SOIL SAMPLES
Location Soil Resistivity Chemical Analysis in mg/kg (ppm) of dry soil
and ohm -centimeters Calcium Magnesium Sodium Bicarbonate Chloride Sulfate
Depth Soil Type As R.ac'd Sat'd a Ca Mg Na HCO3 Cl SO4
B1 1-4' silty sand 4,200 970 8.0 trace trace 230 trace 425 trace
81 a' sandy clay 3,000 1,100 8.3 40 trace 115 122 212 55
B2 2' clay 2,200 960 8.6 80 24 58 244 212 trace
Carbonate = 0 for all samples
h L-V Hivld
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
Newport Beach, California
Your #090072,AE0, MIS&A #90294
F14
LCA O90072.AEO Page B-5
Several other branches of the Newport -Inglewood fault zone are located in Orange County
and include the South Branch, Bolsa-Fairview, Yorktown, Adams Avenue, and Indianapolis
faults.
Available information on the North Branch and other faults of the Newport -Inglewood
zone indicate that there has been no displacement of the Holocene age Talbert aquifer
underlying Santa Ana Gap, which is estimated to be less than 10,000 years old. The
Pleistocene and older formations have been affected by faults of the Newport -Inglewood
zone. There is some evidence in Bolsa and Sun..et Gaps, farther to the northwest, that
Holocene deposits have been disturbed by movement on the North and South Braaches of
the Newport -Inglewood fault zone.
The Whittier fault is a southeast trending fault along the south edge of the Puente Hills,
21 miles north-northeast of the site. The 1929 Whittier earthquake may have originated
on this fault, although some geologists believe that movement on the Norwalk fault was the
cause.
The Elsinore fault is located on the northeast side of the Santa Ana Mountains. Several
earthquakes have originated along this fault system. The largest was in 1910 with a
magnitude of about 6.0. The northern terminus of the Elsinore fault is about 26 miles
northeast of the site.
The San Andreas fault is the best known and most significant fault in California. This fault
is about 51 miles northeast of the site.
Potentially Active Faults
The Pelican Hill fault is located about 3 miles east of the site. A branch of the fault has
displaced higher marine terrace deposits in the San Joaquin Hills, indicating upper
Pleistocene or younger activity. Holocene activity has not been established; therefore, the
fault is considered potentially active.
LCA O90072.AEO Page B-6
The potentially active El Modeno fault is located about 15 miles north of the site. The
fault is a steeply dipping normal fault about 9 miles in length, which has about 2,000 feet
of uplift on its eastern side. Movement on the fault has been inferred during Holocene
time, suggesting the fault is active; however, further study is needed to confirm this_
ThePeralta Hills fault is located approximately 15 miles north of the site. This reverse
fault trends east -west and dips to the north. The fault is approximately 5 miles in length
and has a sinuous surface trace across the southern Peralta Hills, which lie northeast of the
City of Orange. Pleistocene age offsets arc known along this fault; on this basis this fault
is classified as potentially active. Some geologists believe that the Peralta Hills fault may
be active based upon recent Carbon 14 dating of known offsets estimated to be 3,000 to
3,500 years old (Fife and Bryant, 1983).
Inactive Faults
The Shady Canyon fault is located about 6.7 miles northeast of the property. Miller and
Tan (1976) show that the youngest rocks cut by the fault arc middle Miocene in age.
Miller and Tan (1976) suggest that a lineament in the topographic expression of the marine
terrace might be due to the fault. However, no other publications consider the Shady
Canyon fault potentially active. Until more definite information is developed, wr: will
consider the Shady Canyon fault to be inactive.
SEISMICITY
The seismicity of the region surrounding the site was determined from a computer search
of a magnetic tape catalog of earthquakes. The catalog of earthquakes included those
compiled by the California Institute of Technology for the period 1932 to 1987, and
earthquakes compiled by Richter and the U.S. National and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) for the period 1812 to 1931. The computer printout of the earthquakes is
presented as Table B-4. The historic seismic record indicates that 296 earthquakes of
Richter magnitude 4.0 and greater have occurred between 1932 and 1987 within 100
kilometers (62 miles) of the site.
LCA O90072.AEO Page B-7
The information listed for each earthquake found in Table B-4 includes date and time in
Greenwich Civil Time (GCT), location of the epicenter in latitude and longitude, quality
of epicentral determination (Q), depth in kilometers, and magnitude. Where a depth of
0.0 is given, the solution was based on an assumed 16-kilometer focal depth. The
explanation of the letter code for the quality factor is presented on the first page of the
table.
GROUND SHAKING
Duration of Ground Shaking
Movements on any of the above -described active and potentially active faults could cause
ground shaking at the site. The relationship between the magnitude of an earthquake and
the duration of strong shaking that results has been investigated by Bolt (1973). The
relationship is set forth in Table B-5. The period of strong shaking is defined as that
period of time when the acceleration of the ground due to seismic waves is in excess of
0.05g.
TABLE B-5
BRACKETED DURATION OF STRONG SHAKING AS A FUNCTION OF
MAGNITUDE AND DISTANCE TO SOURCE
(after Bolt, 1973)
Brack^ted Duration (seconds)
Distance to Magnitude
Source (km) 5.5 6.0 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5
10 F 12 19 26 31 34 35
25 4 9 15 24 28 30 32
50 2 3 10 22 26 28 29
75 1 1 5 10 14 16 17
100 0 0 1 4 5 6 7
125 0 0 1 2 2 3 3
150 0 0 0 1 2 2 3
175 0 0 0 0 1 2 2
200 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
LCA O90072.AEO Page B-8
Postulated Design Earthquakes
The causative faults were selected from the list of fault presented in Tables B-2 and B-3
as the most significant faults along which earthquakes are expected to generate motions
affecting the site. Postulated design earthquakes were selected in accordance with the
seismic criteria set forth in the "Hospital Code" of the State of California.
Two maximum credible earthquakes were selected. The maximum credible earthquake
constitutes the maximum earthquake that appears to be reasonably capable of occurring
under the conditions of the presently known geological framework; the probability of such
an earthquake occurring during the lifetime of the facility may be low. The descriptions
of these earthquakes are presented in Table B-6, Postulated Maximum Credible
Earthquakes (MCE).
Earthquake
A
B
TABLE B-6
POSTULATED MAXIMUM CREDIBLE EARTHQUAKES
Fault
San Andreas
Newport -Inglewood
Distance From
Estimated Fault to Site
Magnitude (Miles)
8.3 51
7.0 0.5
The Maximum Probable Earthquake (MPE) is considered to be an event having a 20%
probability of being exceeded in 100 years. Table B-7 below summarizes the estimated slip
rates and MPE of the most significant active and potentially active faults affecting the site.
LCA O90072.AEO Page B-9
TABLE B-7
POSTULATED MAXIMUM PROBABLE EARTHQUAKES
Fault
(in alphabetical order)
Slip Rate
(mm/year)
Magnitude
Chino 0.1 5.8
Cucamonga 3 6.5
El Modeno 0.01 <5.0
Elsinore 4.5 7.4
Elysian Park Structure 0.5 6.5
Malibu Coast 0.7 6.6
Newport -Inglewood 1 6.8
Norwalk 0.01 <5.0
Palos Verdes 0.3 6.3
Pelican Hill 0.01 <5.0
Peralta Hills 0.01 <5.0
Raymond 0.13 5.9
San Andreas 25 8.1
San Fernando Zone 1 6.5
San Gabriel 4 7.4
San Jacinto Zone 10 7.5
San Jose 0.01 <5.0
Sierra Madre 4 7.4
Verdugo 0.01 <5.0
Whittier 1 6.8
The slip rates were estimated from data published by Ziony and Yerkes (1985) and
Wesnousky (1986). Using the slip rates, the accumulated slip over an approximate 450 year
period (corresponding to 20% probability of exceeding in 100 years assuming Poisson
probability theory) was determined. Using the surface displacement versus magnitude
relationships developed by Slemmons (1979), the magnitude for each significant fault was
determined as summarized above.
LCA O90072.AEO Page B-10
Estimated Peak Ground Motion Values
Thee peak ground accelerations for the subject site and postulated design earthquakes are
based on the studies by Seed (1987), who developed peak ground acceleration relationships
for four broad site classifications: rock, stiff soil, deep cohesionless soil, and soft to medium
soil deposits. Based on a review of the results of the boring logs, prior nearby downholc
seismic surveys, and static laboratory tests, this site is classified as being a stiff soil site.
The peak ground acceleration is estimated to be 0.14g for MCE "A" and 0.63g for MCE "B";
the accelerations were estimated by the attenuation relationship for rock and local site
conditions developed by Seed (1987). It is conceivable that the peak ground accelerations
could be greater than these estimates, which are mean estimates. The maximum ground
accelerr t•on was estimated for each postulated MPE, and the maximum ground acceleration,
according to Seed, is about 0.62g. The MPE peak ground accelerations were computed based
on the ciosest distance from the site to a fault, which is a conservative assumption.
LCA O90072.AEO Page B-11
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anaheim General Plan, Safety Element, 1984, Planning Commission
Association of Engineering Geologists, 1973, "Geology and Earthquake Hazards,
Planners Guide to the Seismic Safety Element," Special Publication.
Bolt, B.A., 1973, "Duration of Strong Ground Motors," in Proceedings, Fifth World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
Barrows, A.G., 1974, "A Review of the Geology and Earthquake History of the
Newport -Inglewood Structural Zone, Southern California," California Division of
Mines and Geology Special Report 114.
California Department Water Resources, 1967, "Progress Report on Ground Water
Geology of the Coastal Plain of Orange County."
California Department of Water Resources, 1976, "Crustal Strain and Fault Movement
Investigation," Bulletin 116-2.
California Department of Water Resources, 1976, "Hydrologic Data: 1975."
City of Newport Beach General Plan, 1972, "Geologic -Seismic Study, Phase I," by
Woodward -McNeill and Associates.
Environmental Management Agency, County of Orange, 1987, "Orange County Safety
Element."
Federal Insurance Administration, 1989, Flood Hazard Area Maps,
Greensfclder, R.W., 1974 "Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes
in California," California Division of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet 23.
Hart, E. W., revised 1988, "Fault -Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo
Special Studies Zones Act of 1972," California Division of Mines and Geology,
Special Publication 42.
Jahns, Richard H., et al., 1954, "Geology of Southern California," California Division
of Mines & Geology, Bulletin 170.
Jennings, C.W., 1975, "Fault Map of California With I orations of Volcanoes, Thermal
Springs and Thermal Wells," California Division of Mines and Geology, Map
No.1.
LCA O90072.AEO Page B-12
Mark, R. K, 1977, "Application of Linear Statistical Models of Earthquake Magnitude
Versus Fault Length in Estimating Maximum Expectable Earthquakes," Geology,
Vol. 5, p. 464-466.
Miller, R.E., 1966, "Land Subsidence in Southern California;' A.E.G. Special
Publication, Engineering Geology in Southern California.
Miller, R.V., and Tan. S.S., 1976, "Geology and Engineering Geologic Aspects of the South
Half of the Tustin Quadrangle, Orange County, California," California Division of
Mines and Geology Special Report 126.
Morton, P.K, et al., 1973, "Geo-Environmental Maps of Orange County, California$
California Division of Mines and Geology, Preliminary Report 15.
Morton, P.R. and Miller, R.V., 1981, "Geologic Map of Orange County, California,"
California Division of Mines and Geology Bulletin 204.
Orange County General Plan, Safety Element, 1987, Environmental Management Agency
Richter, C.F., 1958, "Elementary Seismology," W.H. Freeman & Co.
Ryan, J.A. Burke, J.N., Walden, A.F..md Wieder, D.P. 1982, "Seismic Refraction
Study of the El Modeno Fault, Orange County, California," California Geology,
Vol. 35, No. 1.
Seed, H.B., and Idriss, I.M., 1982, "Ground Motions and Soil Liquefaction During
Earthquakes," Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Monograph.
Seed, H.B., 1987, "Influence of Local Soil Conditions on Ground Motior,s and Building
Damage During Earthquakes," University of California Berkeley Short Course on
Recent Advances in Earthquake -Resistant Design.
Slemmons, D.B., 1979, "Evaluation of Geomorphic Features of Active Faults for
Engineering Design and Siting Studies," Association of Engineering Geologists
Short Course.
Toppozada, T.R., et al, 1988, "Planning Scenario for a Major Earthquake on the
Newport -Inglewood Fault Zone," California Division of Mines and Geology,
Special Publication 99.
We;nousky, S.G., 1986, "Earthquakes, Quaternary Faults, and Seismic Hazard in
California," Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 91, No. B12, pp. 12,587-
12,631.
LCA O90072.AEO Page B-13
Ziony, J.I., and Yerkes, R.F., 1985, "Evaluating Earthquake and Surface Faulting
Potential," in Ziony.. J.I., edition , "Evaluating Earthquake Hazard in the Los
Angeles Region - An Earth Science Perspective," U.S. Geological Survey,
Professional Paper 1360.
Ziony, J.I., and Jones, L.M., 1989, "Map Showing Late Quaternary Faults and
Seismicity of the Los Angeles Region, California," U.S. Geological Survey,
Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-1964.
-o0o-
TABLE B-4
Page 1 of 13
LIST OF HISTORIC EARTHQUAKES OF MAGNITUDE 4.0 0R
GREATER WITHIN 100 KM OF THE SITE
(CAL TECH DATA 1932-1987)
DATE TINE LATITUDE LONGITUDE 0 D15T DEPTH MAGNITUDE
11-01-1932 04:45:00 34.00 N 117.25 W E 76 .0 4.0
03-11-1933 01:54:08 33.62 N 117.97 W A 4 .0 6.3
03-11-1933 02:04:00 33-75 N 118.08 0 C 20 -0 4.9
03-11-1933 02:05:00 33-75 N 118.08 Y C 20 .0 4-3
03-11-1933 02:09:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 5.0
03-11-1933 02:10:00 33.75 N 118.08 Y C 20 .0 4.6
03-11-1933 02:11:00 33.75 N 118.08 Y C 20 .0 4.4
03-11-1933 02:16:00 33-75 N 118.08 Y C 20 .0 4.8
03-11-1933 02:17:00 33.60 N 118.00 W E 7 .0 4-5
03-11-1933 02:22:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.0
03-11-1933 02:27:00 33.75 H 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.6
03-11-1933 02:30:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 5.1
03-11-1933 02:31:00 33,60 N 118.00 0 E 7 .0 4.4
03-11-1933 02:52:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.0
03-11-1933 02:57:00 33.75 N 118-08 Y C 20 .0 4.2
03-11-1933 02:58:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.0
03-11-1933 02:59:00 33.75 N 118.08 Y C 20 .0 4.6
03-11-1933 03:05:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.2
03-11-1933 03:09:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.4
03-11-1933 03:11:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.2
03-11-1933 03:23:00 33.75 N 118.08 Y C 20 .0 5-0
03-11-1933 03:36:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.0
03-11-1933 03:39:00 33.75 N 118.08 Y C 20 .0 4.0
03-11-1933 03:47:00 33.75 N 118.08 Y C 20 .0 4-1
03-11-1933 04:36:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.6
03-11-1933 04:39:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.9
03-11-1933 04:40:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.7
03-11-1933 05:10:22 33-70 N 118.07 Y C 16 .0 5.1
03-11-1933 05:13:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.7
03-11-1-33 05:15:00 33.75 N 118.08 Y C 2U .0 4.0
03-11-1933 05:18:04 33-57 N 1'7-98 Y C 7 .0 5-2
03-11-1933 05:21:00 33.75 N 118.08 Y C 20 .0 4.4
03-11-1933 05:24:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.2
03-11-1933 05:53:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.0
03-11-1933 05:55:00 33.75 N 118.08 Y C 20 .0 4.0
NOTE: 0 IS A FACTOR RELATING THE QUALITY OF EPICENTRAL DETERMINATION
A = SPECIALLY INVESTIGATED
8 = EPICENTER PROBABLY WITHIN 5 KM, ORIGIN TIME TO NEAREST SECOND
C = EPICENTER PROBABLY WITHIN 15 KM, ORIGIN TIME TO A FEW SECONDS
D = EPICENTER NOT KNOWN WITHIN 15 KM, ROUGH LOCATION
E = EPICENTER ROUGHLY LOCATED, AC.URACY LESS THAN "D"
P = PRELIMINARY
TABLE B-4
Page 2 of 13
DATE TIME LATITUDE LONGITUDE 0 DIST DEPTH MAGNITUDE
03-11-1933 06:11:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.4
03-11-1933 06:18:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.2
03-11-1933 06:29:00 33.85 N 118.27 W C 41 .0 4.4
03-11-1933 06:35:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.2
03-11-1933 06:58:03 33.68 N 118.05 W C 13 .0 5.5
03-11-1933 07:51:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.2
03.11-1933 07:59:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.1
03-11-1933 08:08:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.5
03-11-1933 08:32:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.2
03-11-1933 08:37:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 -0 4.0
03-11-1933 08:54:57 33.70 N 118.07 W C 16 .0 5-1
03-11-1933 09:10:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 5.1
03-11-1933 09:11:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.4
03-11-1933 09:26:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.1
03-11-1933 10:25:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.0
03-11-1933 10:45:00 33.75 '.i 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.0
03-11-1933 11:00:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.0
03-11-1933 11:04:00 33.75 N 118-13 W C 24 .0 4.6
03-11-1933 11:29:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 -0 4.0
03-11-1933 11:38:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.0
03-11-1933 11:41:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.2
03-11-1933 11:47:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.4
03-11-1933 12:50:00 33.68 N 118.05 W C 13 .0 4.4
03-11-1933 13:50:00 33.73 N 118.10 W C 20 .0 4.4
03-11-1933 13:57:00 33-75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.0
03-11-1933 14:25:00 33.85 N 118.27 W C 41 .0 5.0
03-11-1933 14:47:00 33.73 N 118.10 W C 20 .0 4.»
03-11-1933 14:57:00 33-88 N 118.32 W C 46 .0 4.9
03-11-1933 15:09:00 33-73 M 118.10 W C 20 .0 4.4
03-11-1933 15:47:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.0
03-11-1933 16:53:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.8
03-11-1933 19:44:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.0
03-11-1933 19:56:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.2
03-11-1933 22:00:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.4
03-11-1933 22:31:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.4
03-11-1933 22:32:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.1
03-11-1933 22:40:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 -0 4.4
03-51-1933 23:05:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4-2
03-12-1933 00:27:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.4
03-12-1933 00:34:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.0
03-12-1933 04:48:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.0
03-12-1933 05:46:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.4
03-12-1933 06:01:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.2
03-12-1933 06:16:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.6
03-12-1933 07:40:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.2
TABLE B-4
Page 3 of 13
DATE TINE LATITUDE LONGITUDE 0 01ST DEP1H MAGNITUDE
03-12-1933 08:35:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.2
03-12-1933 15:02:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 -0 4.2
03-12-1933 16:51:00 33.75 N 118.08 0 C 20 .0 4.0
03-12-1933 17:38:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.5
03-12-1933 -.8:25:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.1
03-12-1933 21:28:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.1
03-12-1933 23:54:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.5
03-13-1933 03:43:00 33-75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.1
03-13-1933 04:32:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.7
03-13-1933 06:17:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4-0
03-13-1933 13:18:28 33.75 N 118-08 4 C 20 .0 5.3
03-13-1933 15:32:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.1
03-13-1933 19:29:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.2
03-14-1933 00:36:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.2
03-14-1933 12:19:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4-5
03-14-1933 19:01:50 33-62 N 118-02 4 C 8 .0 5.1
03-14-1933 22:42:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.1
03-15-1933 02:08:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.1
03-15-1933 04:32:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.1
03-15-1933 05:40:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.2
03-15-1933 11:13:32 33.62 N 118.02 4 C 8 .0 4.9
03-16-1933 14:56:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.0
03-16-1933 15:29:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.2
03-16-1933 15:30:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.1
03-17-1933 16:51:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.1
03-18-1933 20:52:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.2
03-19-1933 21:23:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.2
03-20-1933 13:58:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.1
03-21-1933 03:26:00 33.75 N 118.08 W C 20 .0 4.1
03-23-1933 08:40:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.1
03-23-1933 18:31:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.1
03-25-1933 13:46:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.1
03-30-1933 12:25:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.4
03-31-1933 10:49:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.1
04-01-1933 G6:42:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.2
04-02-1933 58:00:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.0
04-02-1935 15:36:00 33.75 N 118.08 4 C 20 .0 4.0
05-16-1933 20:58:55 33.75 N 118.17 4 C 27 .0 4.0
08-04-1933 04:17:48 33.75 N 118.18 4 C 27 .0 4.0
10-02-1933 09:10:18 33.78 N 118.13 4 A 26 .0 5.4
10-02-1933 13:26:01 33.62 N 118.02 4 C 8 .0 4.0
10-25-1933 07:00:46 33.95 N 118.13 4 C 41 .0 4.3
11-13-1933 21:28:00 33.87 N 118.20 4 C 37 .0 4.0
11-20-1933 10:32:00 33.78 N 118.13 4 N 26 .0 4.0
01-09-1934 14:10:00 34.10 N 117.68 4 A 58 .0 4.5
TABLE B-4
Page 4 of 13
0'TE TIME LATITUDE LONGITUDE 0 DIST DEPTH MAGNITUDE
01-18-1934 02:14:00 34.10 N 117.68 4 A 58 .0 4.0
01-20-1934 21:17:00 33.62 N 118.12 4 8 18 .0 4.5
04-17-1934 18:33:00 33.57 N 117.98 4 C 7 .0 4.0
10-17-1934 09:38:00 33.63 N 118.40 W 8 44 .0 4.0
11-16-1934 21:26:00 33.75 N 118.00 W B 16 .0 4.0
06-07-1935 16:33:00 33.27 N 117.02 4 B 93 -0 4.0
06-19-1935 11:17:00 33.72 N 117.52 4 B 40 .0 4.0
07-13-1935 10:54:17 34.20 N 117.90 4 A 64 .0 4.7
09-03-1935 06:47:00 34.03 N 117.32 4 8 73 -0 4.5
11-04-1935 03:55:00 33.50 N 116.92 W 8 95 .0 4.5
12-25-1935 17:15:00 33.60 N 118.02 W 8 9 .0 4.5
02-23-1936 22:20:43 34.13 N 117.34 4 A 79 .0 4-5
02-26-1936 09:33:28 34.14 N 117.34 4 A 80 .0 4.0
07-29-1936 14:22:53 33.45 N 116.90 4 C 97 .0 4.0
08-22-1936 05:21:00 33.77 N 117.82 W 8 20 .0 4.0
01-15-1937 18:35:47 33.56 N 118.06 W 8 14 .0 4.0
03-19-1937 01:23:38 34.11 N 11 .43 4 A 71 .0 4.0
07-07-1937 11:12:00 33.57 N 117-98 W 0 7 .0 4.0
09-01-1937 13:48:08 34.21 N 117.53 W A 75 .0 4.5
09-01-1937 16:35:34 34.18 14 117.55 W A 71 -0 4.5
09-13-1937 22:14:40 33.04 N 118.73 W C 98 .0 4.0
05-21-1938 09:44:00 33.62 N 118.03 W B 9 .0 4.0
05-31-1938 08:34:55 33.70 N 117.51 W 8 40 -0 5.5
06-16-1938 05:59:17 33.46 N 116.90 4 8 97 .0 4.0
07-05-1938 18:06:56 33.68 N 117.55 W A 36 .0 4.5
08-06-1938 22:00:56 33.72 N 117.51 W 8 41 .0 4.0
08-31-1938 03:18:14 33.76 N 118.25 W A 34 .0 4.5
11-29-1938 19:21:16 33.90 N 118.43 W A 56 .0 4.0
12-07-1938 03:38:00 34.00 N 118.42 4 8 62 .0 4.0
12-27-1938 10:09:29 34.13 N 117.52 W 8 68 .0 4.0
04-03-1939 02:50:45 34.04 N 117.23 W A 80 .0 4.0
06-25-1939 01:49:00 32.75 N 118.20 W C 100 .0 4.5
11-04-1939 21:41:00 33.77 N 118.12 4 8 24 .0 4.0
11-07-1939 18:52:08 34.00 N 117.28 W A 74 .0 4.7
12-27-1939 19:28:49 33.78 N 118.20 4 A 31 .0 4.7
01-13-1940 07:49:07 33.78 N 118.13 4 8 26 .0 4.0
02-08-1940 16:56:17 33.70 N 118.07 4 B 16 .0 4.0
02-11-1940 19:24:10 33.98 N 118.30 W 8 53 .0 4.0
02-19-1940 12:06:56 34.02 N 117.05 4 A 93 .0 4-6
04-18 1940 18:43:44 34.03 N 117.35 4 A 70 ,0 4.4
06-05-1940 08:27:27 33.83 N 117.40 W 8 54 .0 4.0
07-20-1940 04:01:13 33.70 N 118.07 W 8 16 .0 4.0
10-11-1940 05:57:12 33.77 N 118.45 W A 51 .0 4.7
10-12-1940 00:24:00 33.78 N 118.42 W B 49 .0 4.0
10-14-1940 20:51:11 33.78 N 118.42 4 8 49 .0 4.0
TABLE B-4
Page 5 of 13
GATE TIME LATITUDE LONGITUDE 0 D15T DEPTH MAGNITUDE
11-01-1940 07:25:03 33.78 N 118.42 W B 49 .0 4-0
11-01-1940 20:00:46 33.63 N '18.20 W B 25 .0 4.0
11-02-1940 02:5 :26 33.78 N 118.42 W B 49 .0 4.0
01-30-1941 01:34:47 33.97 N 118.05 W A 40 .0 4.1
03-22-1941 08:22:40 33-52 N 118.10 W B 19 -0 4.0
03-25-1941 23:43:41 34.22 N 117.47 W 0 79 .0 4.0
04-11-1941 01:20:24 33.95 N 117.58 W B 49 .0 4.0
10-22-1941 06:57:19 33.82 N 118.22 W A 35 -0 4.9
11-14-1941 08:41:36 33.78 N 118.25 W A 35 .0 5.4
01-24-1942 21:41:48 32.80 N 117.83 W B 91 .0 4.0
04-16-1942 07:28:33 33.37 4 118.15 u C 34 .0 4.0
02-23-1943 09:21:12 32.85 N 117.48 W C 95 .0 4.0
10-24-1943 00:29:21 33.93 N 117.37 W C 62 .0 4.0
06-19-1944 00:03:33 33.87 N 118.22 W B 39 .0 4.5
06-19-1944 03:06:07 33.87 N 118.22 W C 39 .0 4.4
02-24-1946 06:07:52 34.40 N 117.80 W C 87 .0 4.1
Oi 01-1948 08:12:13 34.17 N 117-53 W 0 71 .0 4.7
10-03-1948 02:46:28 34.18 N 117.58 W A 70 .0 4.0
01.11-1950 21:41:35 33.94 N 118.20 W A 43 .0 4.1
09-22-1951 08:22:39 34.12 N 117.34 W A 78 .0 4.3
12-26-1951 00:46:54 32.82 N 118.35 W B 97 .0 5.9
02-13-1952 15:13:37 32.87 N 118.25 W C 88 .0 4.7
02-17-1952 12:36:58 34.00 N 117.27 W A 74 .0 4.5
10-26-1954 16:22:26 33.73 N 117.47 W 8 44 .0 4.1
05-15-1955 17:03:26 34.12 N 117.48 W A 69 .0 4.0
01-03-1956 00:25:49 33.72 N 117.50 W B 41 .0 4.7
06-28-1960 20:00:48 34.12 N 117.47 W A 70 .0 4.1
10-04-1961 0.'.:21:32 33.85 N 117.75 W B 30 .0 4.1
10-20-1961 19:49:51 33.65 N 117.99 W 8 6 .0 4-3
10-20-1961 20:07:14 33.66 N 117.98 W 8 6 .0 4.0
10-20-1961 21:42:41 33.67 N 117.98 W 8 7 .0 4.0
10-20-1961 22:35:34 33.67 N 118.01 W B 9 .0 4.1
11-20-1961 08:53:35 33.68 N 117.99 W B 9 .0 4.0
04-27-1962 09:12:32 33.74 N 117.19 W 8 70 .0 4.1
09-14-1963 03:51:16 33.54 N 118..4 W 8 39 .0 4.2
09-23-1963 14:41:53 33.71 N 116.92 W 8 94 .0 5.0
08-30-1964 22:57:37 34.27 N 118.44 W 8 86 .0 4.0
01-01-1965 08:04:18 34.14 N 117.52 W B 69 .0 4.4
04-15-1965 20:08:33 34.13 N 117.43 W 8 73 .0 4.5
01-08-1967 07:37:30 33.63 N 118. 47 W B 50 .0 4.0
01-08-1967 07:38:05 33.66 N 118.41 W C 45 .0 4.0
06-15-1967 04:58:06 34.00 N 117.97 W B 42 .0 4.1
05-05-1969 16:02:10 34.30 N 117.57 W B 82 .0 4.4
10-27-1969 13:16:02 33.55 N 117.81 W B 14 .0 4.5
09-12-1970 14:10:11 34.27 N 117.52 W A 82 .0 4.1
TABLE B-4
Page 6 of 13
DATE TIRE LATITUDE LONGITUDE 0 D15T DEPTH MAGNITUDE
09-12-1970 14:30:53 34.27 N 117-54 4 A 81 .0 5.4
09-13-1970 04:47:49 34.28 N 117.55 4 A 81 .0 4-4
02-09-1971 14:00:42 34.41 N 118.40 W B 98 -0 6.4
02-09-1971 14:01:08 34.41 N 118.40 W 0 98 .0 5.8
02-09-1971 14:01:33 34.41 N 118-40 1' 0 98 .0 4.2
02-09-1971 14:01:40 34.41 N 118.40 4 D 98 -0 4.1
02-09-1971 14:01:50 34.41 N 118.40 W 0 98 .0 4.5
02-09-1971 14:01:54 34.41 N 118.40 4 D 98 .0 4.2
02-09-1971 14:01:59 34.41 N 118.40 4 0 98 -0 4.1
02-09-1971 14:02:03 34.41 N 118.40 4 D 98 -0 4.1
02-09-1971 14:02:30 34.41 N 118.40 W D 98 .0 4.3
02-09-1971 14:02:31 34.41 N 118.40 W 0 98 .0 4.7
02-09-1971 14:02:44 34.41 N 118.40 W 0 98 .0 5.8
02-09-1971 14:03:25 34.41 N 116-40 4 D 98 .0 4-4
02-09-1971 14:03:46 34.41 N 118.40 W 0 98 -0 4.1
02-09-1971 14:04:07 34.41 N 118.40 W D 98 .0 4.1
02-09-1971 14:04:34 34-41 N 118.40 4 C 98 .0 4.2
02-09-1971 14:04:39 34.41 N 118.40 4 0 98 -0 4.1
02-09-1971 14:04:44 34.41 N 118.40 4 0 98 .0 4.1
02-09-1971 14:04:46 34-41 N 118.40 4 D 98 .0 4.2
02-09-1971 14:05:41 34.41 N 118.40 W D 98 -0 4.1
02-09-1971 14:05:50 34.41 N 118.40 W D 98 .0 4.1
02-09-1971 14:07:10 34.41 N 118-40 4 D 98 .0 4-0
02-09-1971 14:07:30 34.41 N 118.40 W 0 98 .0 4.0
02-09-1971 14:07:45 34.41 N 118.40 W 0 98 .0 4.5
02-09-1971 14:08:04 34.41 N 118.40 4 D 98 .0 4.0
02-09-1971 14:08:07 34.41 N 118.40 W D 98 .0 4.2
02-09-1971 14:08:38 34.41 N 118.40 4 D 98 .0 4.5
02-09-1971 14:08:53 34.41 N 118.40 4 D 98 .0 4.6
02-09-1971 14:10:21 34.36 N 118.31 4 B 89 .0 4.7
02-09-1971 14:10:28 34.41 N 118.40 W D 98 .0 5.3
02-09-1971 14:16:13 34.34 N 118.33 4 C 38 .0 4.1
02-09-1971 14:19:50 34.36 N 118.41 4 B 93 .0 4.0
02-09-1971 14:39.18 34.39 N 118.36 4 C 94 .0 4.0
02-09-1971 14:40:17 34.43 N 118.40 W C 100 .0 4.1
02-09-1971 14:43:47 34.31 N 118.45 W B 90 .0 5-2
02-09-1971 15:58:21 34-33 N 118.33 4 B 87 .0 4.8
02-10-1971 03:12:12 34.37 N 118.30 4 B 90 .0 4.0
02-10-1971 05:06:36 34.41 N 118.33 W A 95 .0 4.3
02-10-1971 11:31:35 34.38 N 118.45 W A 97 .0 4.2
02-10-1971 13:49:54 34.40 N 118-42 W A 98 .0 4.3
02-10-1971 14:35:27 34.36 N 118.49 W A 97 -0 4.2
02-10-1971 17:38:55 34.40 N 118.37 W A 96 .0 4.2
02-21-1971 05:50:53 34.40 N 118.44 W A 99 .0 4.7
02-21-1971 07:15:12 34.39 N 118.43 4 A 97 .0 4.5
TABLE B-4
Page 7 of 13
DATE TIME LATITUDE LONGITUDE 0 DIST DEPTH MAGNITUDE
03-07-1971 01:33:41 34.35 N 118.46 4 A 95 .0 4.5
03-25-1971 22:54:10 34.36 N 118.47 4 A 96 .0 4.2
03-30-1971 08:54:43 34.30 N 118.46 4 A 90 .0 4.1
03-31-1971 14:52:23 34.29 N 118.51 4 A 92 -0 4.6
04-02-1971 05:40:25 34.28 N 118.53 4 A 92 .0 4.0
04-15-1971 11:14:32 34.26 N 118.58 4 B 93 .0 4.2
04-25-1971 14:48:07 34.37 N 118.31 4 B 90 -0 4.0
06-21-1971 16:01:08 34.27 N 118.53 4 B 91 .0 4.0
06-22-1971 10:41:19 33.75 N 117.48 4 B 44 .0 4.2
03-09-1974 00:54:32 34.40 N 118.47 4 C 100 .0 4.7
08-14-1974 14:45:55 34.43 N 118.37 N A '.9 .0 4.2
01-12-1975 21:22:15 32.76 N 117.99 4 C 96 .0 4.8
01-01-1976 17:20:13 33.96 N 117.89 4 A 38 .0 4.2
10-18-1976 17:27:53 32.76 N 117-91 4 P 95 .0 4.2
08-12-1977 02:19:26 34.38 N 118.46 4 8 98 -0 4.5
01-01-1979 23:14:39 33.94 N 118.68 4 B 78 .0 5.0
10-17-1979 20:52:37 33.93 N 118-67 4 C 77 .0 4.2
10-19-1979 12:22:38 34.21 N 117.53 4 8 75 .0 4.1
05-25-1982 13:44:30 33.54 N 118.21 4 A 27 13.7 4.1
01-08-1983 07:19:30 34-14 N 117.45 4 A 73 4.6 4.1
02-22-1983 02:18:30 33.03 N 117.94 4 D 65 10.0 4.3
02-27-1984 10:18:15 33.47 N 118.06 4 C 21 6.0 4.0
09-07-1984 11:03:13 32.95 N 117.81 4 C 75 6.0 4.3
10-02-1985 23:44:12 34.02 N 117.25 4 A 77 15.2 4.8
07-13-1986 13:47:08 32-97 N 117.87 4 C 72 6.0 4-8
07-13-1986 14:01:33 32.99 N 117.85 4 C 70 6.0 4.6
07-14-1986 00:32:46 32.97 N 117.80 4 C 73 6.0 4.0
07-29-1986 08:17:42 32.94 N 117.84 4 C 76 6.0 4.3
10-01-1986 20:12:18 32.99 N 117.84 4 C 70 6.0 4.0
10-01-1987 14:42:20 34.06 N 118-08 4 A 51 9.5 5.9
10-01-1987 14:45:41 34.05 N 118.10 4 A 50 13.6 4.7
10-01-1987 14:48:03 34.08 N 118.09 4 A 5.' 11.7 4.1
10-01-1987 14:49:06 34.06 N 118.10 4 A 51 11.7 4.7
10-01-1987 15:12:32 34.05 N 118.09 4 A 50 10.8 4.7
10-01-1987 15:59:54 34.05 N 118.09 4 A 50 10.4 4.0
10-04-1987 10:59:38 34.07 N 118.10 4 A 52 8.2 5.3
TABLE B-4
Page 8 of 13
SEARCH OF EARTHQUAKE DATA F I L E 1
SITE: Hoag Memorial Hospital, 090072.AE0
COORDINATES OF SITE 33.62 N 117.93 4
DISTANCE PER DEGREE 110.9 KM-N 92.8 KM-4
MAGNITUDE LIMITS 4-0 - 8-5
TEMPORAL LIMITS 1932 - 1987
SEARCH RADIUS (KM) 100
NUMBER OF YEARS OF DATA 56
NUMBER OF EARTHQUAKES IN FILE 3079
NUMBER OF EARTHQUAKES 1N AREA 296
L e R O Y CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
TABLE B-4
Page 9 of 13
LIST OF HISTORIC EARTHQUAKES OF MAGNITUDE 6.0 OR
GREATER WITHIN 100 KM OF THE SITE
(RICHTER DATA 1906-1931)
OATE TIME LATITUDE LONGITUDE 0 D15T DEPTH MAGNITUDE
05-15-1910 15:47:00 33.70 N 117.40 W D 50 .0 6.0
04-21-1918 22:32:25 33.75 N 117.00 W D 87 .0 6.8
07-23-1923 07:30:26 34.00 N 117.25 L' D 76 .0 6.3
SEARCH OF EARTHQUAKEDATA F 1 L E 2
SITE: Hoag Memorial Hospital, 090072.AEO
COORDINATES OF SITE 33.62 N 117.93 W
DISTANCE PER DEGREE 110.9 KH-N 92.8 KM-U
MAGNITUDE LIMITS 6.0 - 8.5
TEMPORAL LIMITS 1906 - 1931
SEARCH RADIUS (KM) 100
NUMBER OF YEARS OF DATA 26
NUMBER OF EARTHQUAKES IN FILE 35
NUMBER OF EARTHQUAKES IN AREA 3
L e R O T CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
TABLE B-4
Pagc 10 of 13
LIST OF HISTORIC EARTHQUAKES OF MAGNITUDE 7.0 0R
GREATER WITHIN 100 KM OF THE SITE
(NOAA/CDHG DATA 1812-1905)
DATE TIME LATiTUOE LONGITUDE 0 DIST DEPTH MAGNITUDE
02-09-1890 04:06:00 34.00 N 117.50 W D 58 .0 7.0
SEARCH OF EARTHQUAKE DATA F I L E 3
SITE: Hoag Memorial Hospital, 090072.AEO
COORDINATES OF SITE 33.62 N 117.93 W
DISTANCE PER DEGREE 110.9 KM-N 92.8 KM-W
MAGNITUDE LIMITS 7.0 - 8.5
TEMPORAL LIMITS 1812 - 1905
SEARCH RADIUS (KM) 100
NUMBER OF YEARS OF DATA 94
NUMBER Of EARTHQUAKES IN FILE 9
HUNGER OF EARTHQUAKES IN ARP.', 1
LeROY CRANDALL AND ,SSOCIATES
TABLE B-4
Pagc 11 of 13
SUMMARY OF EARTHQUAKE SEARCH
NUMBER OF HISTORIC EARTHQUAKES WITHIN 100 KM RADIUS OF SITE
MAGNITUDE RANGE NUMBER
206
64
18
6
4
0
0
L e R O Y CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
TABLE B-4
Page 12 of 13
COMPUTATION OF RECURRENCE CURVE
LOG N = A - BM
81N MAGNITUDE RANGE N0/TR (N)
1 4.00 4.00 - 8-50 5.32
2 4.50 4.50 - 8.50 1.64
3 5.00 5.00 - 8.50 .495
4 5.50 5.50 - 8.50 .174
5 6.00 6.00 • 8.50 -667E-01
6 6.50 6.50 - 8.50 .179E-01 NU
7 7.00 7.00 - 8.50 .568E-02 NU
8 7.50 7.50 - 8.50 .D00
9 8.00 8.00 - 8.50 .000
A = 1.078 8 = .5555 (NORMALIZED)
A = 4.518 8 = .9556 SIGMA = .408E-01
LeRoy CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
TABLE B-4
Page 13 of 13
C O M P U T A T I O N OF DES I G N MAGNITUDE
RISK
CONSTANT AREA
TABLE OF DESIGN MAGNITUDES
RETURN PERIOD (YEARS) DESIGN MAGNITUDE
DESIGN LIFE (TEARS)
25 50 75 100 25 50 75 100
.01 2487 4974 7462 9949 8.06 8.23 8.30 8.35
.05 487 974 1452 1949 7.49 7.76 7.90 7.99
.10 237 474 711 949 7.19 7.48 7.64 7.75
.20 112 224 336 448 6.86 7.16 7.34 7.45
.30 70 140 210 280 6.65 6.96 7.14 7.26
.50 36 72 108 144 6.35 6.66 6.84 6.97
.70 20 41 62 83 6.10 6.42 6.60 6.73
.90 .. 10 21 32 43 .. 5.81 6.12 6.31 6.44
MMIN = 4.00 MAX = 8.50
MU = 4.96 BETA = 2.200
LeROY CRANDALL AND ASSOCIATES
DAVID
ENGINEERING
November 15, 1994
City of Newport Beach
Building Department
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915
Attention: Mr. Rick Higley
Subject: Civil Engineer's Confirmation of Line and Grade
for Street Subgrade and Curb and Gutter
Hoag Hospital -West Serv- �-�a�Improvements-Phase I
Grading Plan Check No
This is to confirm that we have reviewed the following portions of
the above referenced project for line and grade location, and find
them in substantial accordance with plans.
1. Westerly Curb and Gutter from Station 1+48.38 to 8+53.76.
2. Curb on Easterly side of road from Station 5+17.53 (including
curb return) to Station 8+33.81.
3. Street subgrade west of centerline between Station 1+48.38 and
Station 5+20 (approximate) and entire street width from
Station 5+20 (approximate) to Station 8+53.76.
Joseph L. Boyle
RCE 44497
JLB:em
H17-100-03/H17-01-03
2098 South Grand Avenue • Suites A & B • Santa Ana, California 92705 • (714) 957-8144 • Fax (714) 957-8499
la DAVID AA(
®_ c
ENGINEERING
e
November 17, 1994
City of Newport Beach
Building Department
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915
Attention: Mr. Rick Higley
430 '
30/ )15, <bi .46/
Subject: Civil Engineer's Confirmation of Line and Grade
for Aggregate Base Placement_
Hoag Hospital- West Service Road Improvements -Phase I
Grading Plan Check No. 430G-94
This is to confirm that we have reviewed the following portions of
the above referenced project for line and grade and find them in
substantial accordance with approved revision 1 of Improvement
Plans (0.33' AC over 0.90' A.B.)..sad-4#481-veneaete-ovet-07-653-t-BA-? t1/ts/1¢
1. Street Aggregate Base grade west of centerline between
Station 1+48.38 and Station 5+20 (approximate), and entire
street width from Station 5+20 (approximate) to
Station 8+53.76. EKce A-411 Conue4C tarn -My{ ;n -font-of Cvdac.
SarQf<e5 4ld:11-ien g4gdikq 624wezK sta 14-0440
Joseph L. Bo�Ie
RCE 44497
JLB:ib
H17-100-03/H17-101-03
2098 South Grand Avenue • Suitcs A & B • Santa Ana, California 92705 • (714) 957.8144 • Fax (714) 957-8499
,,AgelIDAVIDA
in
0 Fe
ENGINEERING
December 20, 1994
City of Newport Beach
Building Department
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915
Attention: Mr. Rick Higley
Subject: Civil Engineer's Confirmatkon_.etliae and Grade
for Street Subgrade
16(14s6g( sif
Hoag Hospital -West Service Road Improvements -Phase II
Grading Plan Check No. 430G-94
This is to confirm that we have reviewed the following portions of
the above referenced project for line and grade location, and find
them in substantial accordance with plans.
1. Road subgrade east of centerline between Station 1+48.42 and
Station 5+20.
ices Addition and a
41\,
NoT Comp(,&TE es of
oseph L. Bo1e
RCE 44497
JLB:em
H17-100-03/1L17-101-03
i2-Zo-q4-
2098 South Grand Avenue • Suites A & B • Santa Ana, California 92705 • (714) 957-8144 • Fax (714) 957-8499
,4911 DAVID A
rO -FG
ENGINEERING
February 13, 1995
City of Newport Beach
Building Department
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915
Attention: Rick Higley
,
Subject: Civil Engineer's Confirmation of
Line and Grade for Street Aggregate Base Placement
Hoag Hospital -West Service Road Improvements -Phase 2
Grading Plan Check No. 430G-94
This is to confirm that we have reviewed the following portion of
the above referenced project for line and grade location, and find
it in substantial accordance with plans.
1. Street aggregate base grade east of centerline from
Station 1+48.42 to Station 4+80 (approximate), including
driveways and approaches per plan.
2. Curb on easterly side of road from Station 1+48.42 to
4+41.03, including returns and pedestrian access curbs.
oseph L. Boyle
RCE 44497
JLB:em
H17-100-03
cc: Dennis Cox
Mark Company
r: E T: i
1995
2098 South Grand Avenue • Suites A & B • Santa Ana, California 92705 • (71.4) 957-8144 • Fax (714) 957-8499
8
ENGINEERING
DAVID A
February 13, 1995
City of Newport Beach
Building Department
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915
Attention: Rick Higley
Subject: Civil Engineer's Confirmation of
Line and Grade for Street Aggregate Base Placement
Hoag Hospital -West Service Road Improvements -Phase 2
Grading Plan Check No. 430G-94
This is to confirm that we have reviewed the following portion of
the above referenced project for line and grade location, and find
it in substantial accordance with plans.
1. Street aggregate base grade in the three parking spaces
South of the Cardiac Services Addition and surrounding
area as shown on the attached plan.
oseph L. Boyle
RCE 44497
JLB:ib
H17-100-03
cc: Dennis Cox
Mark Company
2098 South Grand Avenue • Suites A & 13 • Santa Ana, California 92705 • (714) 957-8144 • Fax (714) 957-8499
L_J
/
e f0
3 5BTC
63.46F
0
0
Z
0
4
CONCRETE
TTL
5 1 6 .171F5 61.23TC
43444
40• 0
EXISTING FENCE
PROTECT IN PLACE
SMH
111
CO
s c° s's. YI CC
APPR0X LOCATION 0 O
r XIST COLD JCW `a/b dJ cpq i I01 X UU ( Q
P
.Y
�0 0.77Y...
brar
` 60.E \o'4' I-CHAN�I�EL SECTION
.I 17C NUM6t iT+.'PI
0.71FS```-
EXISTING EOiE
O 10.58 :L OF CONLRETTTiii111111
lei /! b
6.
Lu
IH
e� Lu
'1
N 22'S0'42 W ! ASPHALT
6°r x -LL
JO
6(!gFS Cs ouw
iT CB .2 20
i Si2j �C or'
A/G aka
bS b2b°
i 6
6252TC
• 62.02FS.
CASE 'H' 62.64 9.5.
W=6.5' A TC-FS
624ITC
61-9IF6
0L
�II O d
so ftl D
t
J
l o
//s�/]� 24-W—_
p
Aqb E;'.�,P 60? TC 9
t.4.041 Pt
F.'' • _ — ER. EOISON ELEC. v.:
4.0 PROTECT IN PLACE
7C 00 �. ----Ere R.GPy
'p�� r I PROPERTY LINE d c-
Q, 0. ▪ =° 11 M� A 4,
/- ? ea.._ py' " • ' /J
I'�- T°? WJ > .0 A 11 0 Q
° °cp
I'IP °°�4 °�" �l `cWEST SERVICE ROAD
pi ,- -',"" c•
•
a ■ Y Aft Mat iftek Ris
al a mer-sir
,r_ 5,I5 OF OBWIt JUL I5. IN4 •
BENCH MARK:
ELEVATIONS THIS PLAN PER COUNTY
OF ORANGE. CALIF. B.M. NB 2-7-77
ALUMINUM CAP 3 3/4 INCH DIAMETER
ON. THE SOUTHERLY SIDE OF PACIFIC
COAST HIGHWAY, ABOUT 400 FEET
EASTERLY FROM BALBOA BOULEVARD
IOR SUPERIOR AVENUE) ON THE SOUTH-
WEST CORNER OF A 71E4.3-FOOT CATCH
.BASIN. THE CAP BEING 42 FEET SACK
CN.WOF.,JpSTED pa, ELEVATIO( CORD FACE. SET XY.
N...
py as_ "'3, O.LOEM _HCFG Eec ITS cOtaT
qyo - 77'
LAW/CRPuNDALL, INC.
lkpINai WINa ANC GNVIAONIEk?At SERVICii
3c i /et
November 9, 1994
Mr. Gunther M. KI;foil, A.I.A.
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
Facilities Design de ConsMictian
301 Newport Boulevard, Box 6100
Newport Beach, California 02451.6100
Subject: Asphalt Concrete Pavement
SectionAlternatives
West Road
PP.
" Mr. Dick Leach
(714) 6447741
Dear Mr. Kilfoii:
The following is Intended to clarify our structural sections recommendations for the asphalt
concrete pavement and ponland cement concrete crosswalks for construction of the new West Road
in the Hoag Hospital complex.
Asphalt Concrete Pavement
Two pavement sections are described: I - A section with cwo lifts of conventional asphalt concrete
an crushed miscellaneous base material; and, 8 - An alternate section using asphalt rubber hot mix
for the pavement surface course.
The eriteria for design and recommended structural sections for both roadway pavement sections
are:
Design Recommendations • West Roadway
Given: Subgrads R•value
Traffic Index
Minimum Cover Required (GE) Inches
17
7.0
nt76(11iECt•Wrn!MA m
a911110&4•,ReIIIMII
RECEIVED
NOV 0 91994
David A. Boyle E gr.
NQV. Eq •9 *, 09: Ozt HeeG Fec DES .3 QNST
_Mr..i ester M. ItTelt, A. LA,
Maw MewAar Magna' Pn.bymias
FF:Z
Mnrriter 9, 1994
Page 2
I. CONVENTIONAL ASPHALT CONCRETE STRUCTURAL SECTION
Actual Gravel
Thickness Equivalent
.filk. S. Course x LCifl = ft3F1ft
2 0.17 Asphalt Concrete Surface Coupe 2.14 0.36
3 0,25 Asphalt Concrete Base Count 2.14 0,54
A9_ gaol Crushed Miscellaneous Base 1.10 9.a
15 1.25 1.85
II. PAVEMENT SECTION WITH ASPHALT • RUBBER HOT MIX (ARHM) SURFACE
COURSE
Actual Gravel
Thickness Equivalent
10� .1i Course x (fit = jGFIft.
1.5 0.13 Asphalt Concrete Surface Course 3.00 0.38
2.5 0.21 Asphalt C.Att Base COMM 2.14 0.48
]a.g. QJ Crushed Mface,'aneous Ease 1,10 gal
14.0 1.17 1.77
CONCRETE THICKNESS: 7 inches (0.58 ft.)
MIX: 1 itch (maxkrtzm.) Aggregate
el 6 sack cement minimum (tc fly ash)
4000 pi! compressive strength Q8 28 days
4 inch IDIS]O1L)bl slump
AGGREGATE BASE: Minimum of 7 inches (0.58 ft.) of crushed miscellaneous base
(Section 200-2,4 of the Standard Sneci, eatinas for Public Works
C90iitnSL9ti n • Owens Edition.
REINFORCEMENT:
Smooth No. 6 steel dowels on 18 inch center in mid•slab at contraction johns. Dowels tc be 24
inches, lubricated on one end tc prevent bonding to concrete. No welded wire fabric is to be used.
e ' If allowed 28 day cure before opening to traffic. Use 7,0 sack mix if concrete is
to be open to traffic after 7 days.
• Strict enforesmem of slump limit.
NOV 091994
David A. Ecyie Engr
NOV 09 '94 C6107PH HOP1 FAC OES 3 i3OIVST
Mr. Camay AL Kktnil, A.LA.
Haag Memorial Hospital Pr`.d yre,lan
Sincerely,
LAW/CRANDALL, INC.
r
Dennis McFadden
Senior Paving Consultant
kIDIRoq H,plDMCw,
James Copley, P.E.
Senior Engineer
Manager, Materials Engineering
KP.3
November 9, 1994
Pape 3
N911 ]?_'9_. 0.:T"JSP_M.HQPG FP4 �,?E3 ;i CNST
LAW/CRANDALL, INC.
ENeiNf SAiNa AND eNN°, ?NMENtNL SERVICEi
November 9, 1994
Mr. Gunther M. Kilfoil, A.1.A.
Hoag Memdrlai Hospital Presbyterian
Facilities Design & Construction
301 Newport Boulevard, Box 6100
Newport Bosch, California 9265S-6100
Subject: Asphalt Concrete Pavenment
Section Alternatives
West Heed
PP.1
Mr. Dick Leach
(714) 646.741
Dear Mr. Kilfoll;
The following is intended to clarity our structural sections recommendations for the asphalt
concrete pavement and portland cement concrete crosswalks for construction of the new West Road
in the Hoag Hospital complex.
Asphalt Concrete Pavement
Two pavement sections are described: I - A section with two lifts of conventional asphalt concrete
an crushed miscellaneous hoe material; and, 11- An alternate section using asphalt tubber hot mix
for the pavement surface course,
The criteria for design and recommended structural sections for both roadway pavement sections
are:
Design Recommendations • West Roadway
Given: Subgrads R•value 17
Traffic index 7.0
Minimum Cover Required (GE) inches 1.35
Ill1 Nlatt.uaae06 Mint
pia taaa• Fss(1leerlael
RECEIVE*)
NOV 0 9 1994
David A. Boyle Eng.
tigy. a4 '94, 05:oEPr1 kQ G E? eE ,& CONST
fir. *wive M. MOIL /CIA,
Haag Madrid Hospital Presbyterian
I. CONVENTIONAL ASPHALT CONCRETE STRUCTURAL SECTION
PP:?
November 9, 1994
Page 2
Actual Gravel
Thickness Equivalent
ice, As Course x Sat _ (GP) ft
2 0,17 Asphalt Concrete Surface Course 2.14 0.36
1 0,25 Asphalt Concrete Bus Course 2.14 0.54
19— 2,111 Crusher; Miscellaneous Hose 1,10 flit
15 1,25 1.85
U. PAVEMENT SECTION WITH ASPHALT • RUBBER HOT MDi (ARHM) SURFACE
COURSE
Actual Gravel
Thickness Equivalent
.11,- $ Coyne x al = IGFI ft,
1.5 0.13 Asphalt Concrete S'ttfice Course 3.00 0.38
2.5 0.21 Asphalt Concrete Ease Course 2.14 0.48
1Qj al Crushed Miscellaneous Bus 1.10 QS
14.0 1,17 1,77
CONCRETE THICKNESS: 7 inches (0.58 ft.)
MDC: 1 inch (maximum) aggregate
6 sack cement minimum (no fly ash)
4000 pH compressive strength fp 28 days
4 inch ma8imllm slump
AGGREGATE BASE: Minimum of 7 inches (0,58 ft.) of crushed miscellaneous base
(Section 200-2,4 of the Scirtdartsneciflcarinns for Public Works
ConnWcrloe • Current Edition.
REINFORCEMENT:
Smooth No, 6 steel dowels on 18 inch center in mid•slab at contraction joints. Dowels to be 24
inches, lubricated on one end to prevent bonding to concrete. No welded wire fabric is to be used.
•' If allowed 28 day cure before opening to traffic. Use 7.0 sack mix if concrete is
to be open to traffic after 7 days.
+2 Strict enforcement of slump lir-'•.
NOV 091994
Davin A. Bcyie Engr
NOV 09 '94 051O7FIM HOAG PAC DES 3 CONST
Mr. Guntur M. K%'a41, A.1.A.
Haag Memmrial Heepital Predryienen
Sincerely,
LAW/CRANDALL, INC.
v
Dennis McFadden
Senior Paving Consultant
klitaliaaq HrpiDMGVev
lames Copley, P.B.
Senior Engineer
Manager, Materials Engineering
F�,70,
_
Abvember 9, 199a
Page 3
ILAW/CR:'�NDALL
ENaiNEEaINe ANG ENVIRONMENTALSFNYICEa
October 12, 1994
Mr. Gunther M. Kilfoil, A.1,A,
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
Facilities Design & Construction
301 Newport Boulevard, Box 6100
Newport Beach, California 92658-6100
Subject: Asphalt Concrete Pavement
Section Alternatives
West Road
3bi Net,J j
Deer Mr. Kilfoil:
This is in answer to your request to prepare recommendations for a pavement structural section for
construction at the new West Road in the hospital complex. Our Los Angeles office has provided
us with a subgrade soil R-value for use in the design.
A traffic index (T.I,) is also needed for the calculations. In an effort to develop a T.I„ we
contacted the receiving department at the hospital to get some idea of the number of heavy vehicles
(trucks) that deliver materials and equipment to the hospital In a typical week. We were told that
approximately 75 trucks per week use the ioading & unloading facilities facing the west road.
Using that number and assuming a mix of 2, 3, 4 & 5 axle trucks; adding 5 rubbish collection
trucks per week; and allowing for a slight increase over time, we developed a T.I. of 6.0. Because
of the imprecise methods used In arriving at the figure, and introducing a safety factor. we
arbitrarily increased the T.1, used in the design to 7.0.
We were asked to include an alternate section with an asphalt rubber hot mix surface course. Both
of the recommended structural sections are presented below. The calculations for both T.I. and
pavement section were made using the standard Caltrans design procedure.
rin ONlAAANCO..9101 ce,CAmn
Ia a tta 10. FAr al Q ttknt0
Naanrw'aewx1ed
2'd WINCH 0l Wd90:h0 176, 80 A0N
Mr. Gwuher M. Killleil, 4.1.4.
Xmmd Memmnal Um pirel Presbyremmn
Design Recommendations • West Roadway
Given: Subgrade R•value
Traffic Index
Minimum Cover Required (GE) inches
17
7,0
1.85
I. CONVENTIONAL ASPHALT CONCRETE STRUCTURAL SECTION
Actual
Thickness
in. ft
Course
Gravel
Equivalent
z �iCQ (GF)ft.
2 0.17 Asphalt Concrete Surface Course 2,14 0.36
3 0.25 Asphalt Concrete Base Course 2.14 0.54
i2 Qs Cl. 2, R Aggregate Base 1.10 Q Qf
15 1.28 1.85
°ember 1I, 19N
Page 2
II. PAVEMENT SECTION WITH ASPHALT - RUBBER HOT MIX (ARHM) SURFACE
COURSE
Actual
Thickness
ft.
Course
Gravel
Equivalent
x(gl = (GPI ft.
1.5 0.12 Asphalt Concrete Surface Course 3.00 0.36
2.5 0.25 Asphalt Concrete Base Course 2.32 0.58
7 Qs CI. 2, ii Aggregate Base Oil
1.19 1.85
j%v
Sin:erely,
LAW,NDALL, INC.
Dlrnnia McFad
Senior Paving Cofsultant
r; ldlhmogR.hor.°Mt.Jn
mes Copley, P.E.
Senior Engineer
Manager, Materials Engineering
E'd NIWOIi 31 Wdd0170 06, 80 AON
'OCT 24 '94 10:1SAM HOAG FAC DES & CONST
P.1
c/3067 9y
HOAG MEMORIAL. HOSPITAL PRESBYTEP'4N
301 NEWPORT BLVD, • BOX 0100 • NEWPORT BEACH, CA. 12601.6100
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL
Date: October 24, 1994
To: Law/Crandall
0177 Sky Park Ct.
San Diego, CA 92123
Attention: Dennis McFadden
From: Gunther Ki!loll, AIA We —
Project Manager
Facilities Desion a Construction
Subject: West Road Reconstruction
FAX: 611.276.6300
TEL: 714446.2167
FAX: 714.646.7741
Number efPapa: Two (2) Pages Including the Cover Sheet
Comments: I passed this Information along to the contractors on the reconstruction of the
West Road. I understand that the numbers have changed.
Review the following Information. It we oan use the same numbers we should.
O harwlae, It may be necessary to rebid the work.
All calculations use a traffic Index of 7.0 In the street.
1. Conventional
Thickness
In. Ft. Course GI G.E., Ft.
2 0.17 A c Surface 2.14 0.36
3 0.20 ACtlase 2.14 0.64
10 0.66 @ 1.2, 3/0 Agg. Base 1.10 0.95
Total 1 6 1.26 1.55
2, Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix (ARHM)
Thickness
In. Ft. Course at G.E., Ft.
1.5 0.12 ARHM Surface 3.00 0.36
9.d NIWON 01 WdL0:h0 k6. 80 AON
;OCT 24 '94 18:17AN HORG FRC DES & OurST P.2
4i \..i
2.6 0.26 ACBase {.14 0.64
10.3 0.86 O 1.2, 3/4' Aga. aase 1.10 0.66
Total 14 1.23 1.85
3. Concrete In street
Thickness
In. Ft. Course Gi G.E., Ft.
7 0.68 Concrete NA NA
10 0.66 tID 1.2, 3/4' Aaa. BAR 1.10 0.25
Total 17 1.42
4. Concrete sidewalk not In strait
Thickness
In. Ft. Course Gf Q.G., Ft.
6 0.42 Concrete NA NS%
Total 6 0.42
Call me back about these i6auea. They must he resolved today.
LA'JC'-NDALL, INC.
Confirmed:
Donnie McF>d•=n,
Paging Gan Cant
Date: November 8, 1994
GMIC: ak
File: 1251.92.01.02 L/C-B-LTR.
L'd NIWOU 31 Wd80:b0 P6. 80 AN
b'd
LAW/CRANDALL, INC. �3c C jy
ENCINEE RING ANC ENVIRONNENTAL SERVICES
October 14, 1994
Mr. Gunther M. Kilfoil, A.I.A.
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
Facilities Design & Construction
301 Newport Boulevard, Box 6100
Newport Beach, California 926586100
Subject: Recommendations
Portland Cement Concrete
Roadway Crossings
West Road Construction
Dear Mr. Kilfoil:
Confirming our telephone conversation of October 12, 1994 we have prepared the following
recommendations for the portland cement concrete crossing in the construction of the west
road inside the hospital complex:
CONCRETE THICKNESS: 7 inches (0.58 ft.)
MIX:
RI
RS
1 inch (maximum) aggregate
6 sack cement minimum (no fly ash)
4000 psi compressive strength @ 28 lays
4 inch Maximum slump
REINFORCEMENT:
Smooth No. 6 steel dowels on 18 inch center in mid -slab at contraction joints. Dowels to be
24 inches, lubricated on one end to prevent bonding to concrete, no welded wire fabric. If
reinforcement is desired, use No. 4 deformed bars at 18 inch center both directions,
"I If allowed 28 day cure before opening to traffic. ire.;/,0 sack mix if
concrete is to be open to traffic after 7 days.
Strict enforcement of slump limit,
1177 $KY PAIN CT, • BAN OIEGG, CA 1r1 a
0110170000,FAX jdllin4900
Oi16KMICWwII
NIWOb 01 Wd2.0:70 b6, B0 AON
Mr: Gwher M. Xiifoil,
Moog Memorial Hozp.n' •*yw4q
Sincerely,
LAW/ RANDALL, INC.
Thomas :. apman, RCE 12882
Principal E ineer
1: IllheaghorptDMCdn
O<rahn 13, 1994
Page 2
S'd NIWQIJ 01 WdL0:170 b6. 69 AON
FINAL REPORT
GEO1'ECH INSPECT1cN ¢F VICES
J
WEST SERVICE
\ 301 NEWPORT BOULEVARD
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
FOR
HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN
(2407.40401.0001)
LAW/CRANDALL, INC.
ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ONE OF THE LAW COMPANIES
November 16, 1995
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
301 Newport Boulevard, Box 6100
Newport Beach, California 92658-6100
Attention: Mr. Gunther M. Kilfoil
Project Manager
Gentlemen:
Final Report -
Geotechnical Inspection Services
West Service Road
301 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California
SCOPE
Grading Permit No. G9400220
Plan Check No. 2046-94
(2407.40401.0001)
We are pleased to provide our final report for the geotechnical inspection services
performed during the development of the west service road at Hoag Memorial Hospital
Presbyterian. This report provides:
A formal record of our observation and testing of the compacted sub -
grade soils;
A formal record of our observation and testing of the compacted asphalt
paving.
The location of the site is shown in relation to an adjacent street and structure on the
attached Plot Plan. The periodic observation work was performed during the period of
October 12,1994 through March 16, 1995. We previously performed consultation regarding
foundation design for the cardiac services addition, located immediately adjacent to the west
ip
2407.40401.0001
Page 2
service road, and submitted our recommendations in a report dated December 16, 1992
(O92072.AB). In addition, supplementary geotechnical recommendations were presented
in a letter dated February 16, 1994 (O92072.AB), also in regards to the cardiac services
addition. We also submitted clarifications for structural section recommendations in a letter
dated November 9, 1994, for paving operations at the west service road.
Our professional services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily
exercised, unde similar circumstances, by reputable geotcchnical engineers practicing in this
or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional
opinions included in this report. The scope of our services did not include either the
responsibility for job safety or the function of surveying. The soil -related work was done
to the limits and at the locations indicated by stakes and hubs set by others.
OBSERVATION AND TESTING OF COMPACTED SOUS
The earthwork for the project consisted of compacting the existing subgrade soils to grade
the site for the west service road and to provide subgrade support for adjacent walks and
for parking lot paving. Also, base cc:•rse was placed and compacted in walkway and paving
areas. The specifications required 'bat the soils be compacted to at least 90% of the
maximum dry density obtainable by the ASTM Designation D1557-78 (equivalent to UBC
70-1) method of compaction. The base course was to be compacted to at least 95% of the
maximum dry density.
The existing subgrade soils consisted of silty sand material; imported processed
miscellaneous base and crushed miscellaneous base material were utilized in the pavement
section. Compaction tests were performed on representative soil samples to establish the
maximum dry densities. The tests were performed in accordance with the specified method
of compaction, which uses a 1/30-cubic-foot mold in which each of five layers of soil is
compacted by 25 blows of a 10-pound hammer falling 18 inches. The results of the
compaction tests were used in establishing the degree of compaction achieved during the
compaction of the in -place soils and the placement of the base course.
2407.40401.0001 Page 3
The site was stripped and cleared of an existing roadway, curb and gutter sections, and
minor hardscape areas. During our periodic observation of the stripping and clearing,
underground obstructions scheduled for abandonment were removed. Next, the resultant
exposed sub -grade soils were scarified to a depth of 6 inches, brought to approximately
optimum moisture content, and compacted.
To establish the degree of compaction achieved, ASTM Designation D1556 (equivalent to
UBC 70-2) sand -cone field density tests were made when requested as the compaction of
the sub -grade soils and base course material progressed. In addition, ASTM Designation
D2922-81 (equivalent to UBC 70-5) nuclear gauge in -place density tests were performed
at times for the base course material. Where a test indicated less than the required
compaction, the soils were reworked and retested until at least the specified degree of
compaction resulted. The results of the field density tests are presented in the attached
table, Test Results; the approximate locations of the tests are shown on the Plot Plan.
OBSERVATION AND TESTING OF ASPHALT PAVING
As requested, our field technician observed the asphalt paving placed in the roadway and
parking areas. ASTM Designation D2922-81 (equivalent to UBC 70-5) nuclear gauge in-
p'ace density tests were performed on the compacted asphalt to establish the degree of
compaction achieved. The asphalt paving was to be compacted to at least 95% of the
maximum density. A 10,000-ton static roller, a dual 4-ton vibratory roller, and hand -guided
vibratory plates were utilized to compact the asphalt.
Tne data derived from the performance of the density tests are included in the table of test
results; the approximate locations of the tests are shown on the Plot Plan. The asphalt
paving consisted of a 2-'/z inch thick base course of 3/4-inch aggregate and a 1-1/2 inch thick
surface course of'/ -inch aggregate using AR 4000 asphalt cement. At the owner's request
laboratory maximums, provided by the supplier using ASTM Designation D1561, yielded
results of 147 and 148 pounds per cubic foot for the 3/4-inch base course and 142 pounds
per cubic foot for the 1/2-inch surface course.
2407.40401.0001 Page 4
CONCLUSIONS
This final report is limited to the earthwork performed through March 16, 1995, the date
of our last periodic observation and/or testing of the soil -related work for the project.
The sub -grade soils, base course, and asphalt paving, at the locations and elevations tested
by us, were compacted to at least the specified degree of compaction. In our opinion, the
geotechnical-related work was performed in general compliance with the project plans and
specifications, and the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code and is considered suitable
for the intended use.
In providing professional geotechnical observations and testing services associated with the
development of the project, we have employed accepted engineering and testing
procedures, and have made every reasonable effort to ascertain that the soil -related work
we observed was carried out in general compliance with the project plans and specifications.
We do not guarantee the contractor's work, nor do the services performed by our firm
relieve the contractor of responsibility in the event of subsequently discovered defects in
his work.
Respectfully submitted,
LAW/CRANDALL,J�INC.H
Li�
David Atkinson
Project Manager
S W 19/SW/sw
Attachments (3)
(4 copies submitted)
cc: (2)
(2)
David A. Boyle Engineering
City of Newport Beach
Attn: Mr. Richard T. Higley
Grading Engineer
Robert T. Crowley
Senior Materials Engine
Principal Materials Engineer
TEST RESULTS
Moisture Dry Maximum
Test Elevation Content Density Dry Density Percent Retest Date of
No. (ft.) (% of dry wt.) (Ibs./cu. ft.1 (lbs./cu. ft.1 Compaction No. Testing
1 63 CMB 139 140 99 10/12/94
2 62 CMB 137 140 98 10/12/94
3 58 CMB 130 140 93 10/12/94
4 621/2 PMB 136 141 96 11/01/94
5 64 14.9 113 126 90 11/01/94
6 601/2 PMB 140 141 99 11/02/94
7 60 PMB 129 141 91 11/02/94
8 601/2 9.3 126 126 100 11/02/94
9 62 7.0 107 126 85 A 12 11/03/94
10 62 11.1 118 126 94 11/03/94
11 621/2 9.9 113 126 90 11/03/94
12 62 12.4 115 126 91 11/03/94
13 60 9.2 123 126 98 11/08/94
14 591/2 11.1 120 126 95 11/08/94
15 60 10.3 119 126 94 11/08/94
16 61' 14.2 118 126 94 11/08/94
17 63 PMB 138 141 98 AA 11/17/94
18 701/2 PMB 136 141 96 AA 11/17/94
19 621/2 PMB 141 141 100 AA 11/17/94
20 61 PMB 139 141 99 an 11/17/94
21 611/2 PMB 140 141 99 AA 11/17/94
22N 621/2 AC 140 148 95 AA 11/21/94
23N 63 AC 140 148 95 es 11/21/94
24N 62 AC 140 148 95 AA 11/21/94
25N 62 AC 140 148 95 AA 11/21/94
26N 63 AC 142 148 96 AA 11/21/94
27N 632 AC 142 148 f'6 AA 11/21/94
28N 64 AC 140 148 95 AA 11/21/94
29N 641/2 AC 140 148 95 AA 11/21/94
30N 71 AC 141 148 95 AA 11/21/94
31 621/2 PMB 136 141 96 AA 11/30/94
32 63 PMB 141 141 100 AA 11/30./94
33 63 PMB 141 141 100 AA 11/30/94
34 621/2 PMB 140 141 99 AA 11/30/94
35 63 PMB 140 141 99 AA 11/30/94
36 63 PMB 138 141 98 AA 11/30/94
37 621 PMn 142 141 100 AA 11/30/94
38 62 PMB 141 141 100 AA 11/30/94
WONN/INSP/44Y140401.T04 Page l
TEST RESULTS
Moisture Dry Maximum
Test Elevation Content Density Dry Density Percent Retest Date of
No. (ft.) (% of dry wt.). (Ibs./cu. ft.) (lbs./cu. ft.). Compaction No. Testing
39 62 13.9 117 126 93 12/19/94
40 66 12.2 126 126 100 12/19/94
41 61 13.2 122 126 97 12/19/94
42 601/2 8.8 117 126 93 12/22/94
43 61 9.3 123 126 98 12/22/94
44 635 PMB 134 141 95 ee 12/22/94
45 63 PMB 138 141 98 at 12/22/94
46 63 PMB 137 141 97 PA 12/22/94
47 63 15.5 119 126 94 12/22/94
48 63 11.9 117 126 93 12/22/94
49 69 10.1 124 126 98 12/29/94
50 751/2 7.2 116 126 92 12/29/94
51 61 PMB 129 141 91 12/29/94
52 60 13.0 120 126 95 02/08/95
53 61 PMB 141 141 100 at, 02/13/95
54 601 PMB 142 141 100 LA 02/13/95
55 63' PMB 134 141 95 en 02/13/95
56 64 PMB 135 141 96 AA 02/13/95
57 601/2 PMB 137 141 97 a 32/13/95
58 72 PMB 141 141 100 AA 02/13/95
59N 60 AC 139 147 95 ee 02/17/95
60N 601/2 AC 139 147 95 ee 02/17/95
61N 631/2 AC 140 147 95 AA 02/17/95
62N 641/2 AC 144 147 98 AA 02/17/95
63N 64 AC 139 147 95 AA 02/17/95
64N 681/2 AC 139 147 95 AA 02/17/95
65 561/2 12.0 123 126 98 02/23/95
66 57 11.0 122 126 97 02/23/95
67 59 13.1 113 126 94 02/23/95
68 58'% 11.0 115 126 91 02/25/95
69 581/2 12.9 94 126 75 e 70 02/25/95
70 581/2 12.5 118 126 94 02/25/95
71 591/4 12.1 134 136 99 02/25/95
72 581/4 8.6 135 136 99 02/25/95
73 58 9.5 130 136 96 02/25/95
74 59 5.8 130 136 96 02/25/95
75 5912 11.1 120 126 95 02/29/95
/w o
Pap 2
TEST RESULTS
Moisture Dry Maximum
Test Elevation Content Density Dry Density Percent Retest Date of
No. (ft.) (% of dry wt.l fibs./cu. ft.l (lbs./cu. ft.) Comp/Wm No. Testing
76 591/2 10.1 131 136 96 02/29/95
77 58 12.9 127 136 93 02/29/95
78N 58 8.7 131 136 96 01/08/95
79N 60 8.1 133 136 98 03/08/95
80N 591/2 9.0 131 136 96 03/08/95
81N 59 8.5 133 136 98 03/08/95
82N 57 8.6 132 136 97 03/08/95
83N 57'h AC 135 142 95 AA 03/16/95
84N 581/2 AC 135 142 95 AA 03/16/95
85N 591/2 AC 137 142 96 as 03/16/95
8EN 60'h AC 138 142 97 AA 03/16/95
87N 601 AC 139 142 98 AA 03/16/95
88N 61 AC 140 142 99 AL 03/16/95
89N 611/2 AC 135 142 95 AA 03/16/95
90N 631/2 AC 136 142 96 en 03/16/95
91N 62 AC 138 142 97 AA 03/16/95
92N 60 AC 137 i42 96 AA 03/16/95
93N 62 AC 139 142 98 ad. 03/16/95
94N 611/2 AC 140 142 99 AA 03/16/95
95N 63 AC 137 142 96 AA 03/16/95
96N 64 AC 138 142 97 ea 03/16/95
97N 631/2 AC 139 142 98 AA 03/16/95
98N 691/2 AC 136 142 96 AA 03/16/95
99N 62 AC 138 142 97 AA 03/16/95
100N 63'h AC 137 142 96 AA 03/16/95
101N 64 AC 140 142 99 AA 03/16/95
102N 71 AC 136 142 96 AA 03/16/95
NOTES: Elevations refer to job datum.
e Indicates area reworked and retested.
m Indicates 95% compaction required.
AC Indicates testing of asphalt concrete.
CMB Indicates crushed miscellaneous base; wet density values used in calculations.
PMB Indicates processed miscellaneous base; wet density values used in calculations.
N Indicates testing with nuclear. gauge.
WOP W INSP/40140 W 1. Th4
COMPACTION TEST DATA
—
Soil Type
Source
Maximum
Dry Density*
fibs./cu. ft.)
.i:,um I!
Moi,a,_ Content
(% , .' dry wt.)
Silty Sand
On -Site
126
10.0
Processed
Miscellaneous Base
Import
141
**
Crushed
Miscellaneous Base
Import
136
9.0
Crushed
Miscellaneous Base
Import
140
9.0
Asphalt Concrete
Import
148
**
Asphalt Concrete
Import
147
**
Asphalt Concrete
Import
142
**
NOTES: * Maximum dry density obtainable by the ASTM D1557-78 (equivalent to UBC 70-1)
method of compaction.
**
Wet density values u: ;,t calculations for tests taken on crushed and processed
miscellaneous base, ptc.;c.ased miscellaneous base, and asphalt concrete.
2401.40401.0001l1912/SW19/5W/sw 11/17/95
MATCH LINE
25• •20
REFERENCES:
WEST SERVICE ROAD PLANS
( AS REV. 10/24/94 ) BY
DAVID A BOYI.E ENGINEERING
• 57
39 48• /
29 •
EXISTING BUILDING
CARDIAC
SERVICES
ADDITION
9 14 --".. • if 22�
24• 15
• • 99 / 21e
93 •51 91• -
s 94 23 • _s -- ''LL
60
83 • 97
16 •
•
40'•
28 • •
e CO
•
•
• 88
43
•
89 •
•
APPROX. LIMITS OF GRADING
(DASHED)
Fy
gh
I e' S! In_ •3 • I
/ 62 99 �,A� 1 —I •31, 70 J
e " e O S 8 $,
° 13 U
45 °q8 46 Al 26e • — Q
7 • 99 rr
1- 27
1 /
it---'' I I
u 1 / 74\ 52 /1 11
° •97 710 ° 75 V e 85 •66 77• 84 • ° 5 `' 82
e •
5
• 76 — 73 78
70
e87 81 t 8 -. _°�_9
A
rb
y�.
FIELD DENSITY TEST NO.
( APPROX. LOCATION )
•83
ADDRESS:
301 NEWPORT BOULEVARD
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF.
PLOT PLAN
HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN
WEST SERVICE ROAD
SCALE VI-. 50'
LAW/CRANDALL, INC /�\
ar
/1V Ca`R--%-nr=
tiL ENGINEER's CERTIFICATI07 - ORM
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Blvd
PO Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915
From: David A. Boyle Engineering
2098 South Grand Avenue, Suite i
Santa Ana, CA 92705
Date: February23
104., 1995
Attention: Grading Engineer, Building Department
GPC No.: 430G-94 Tract/Subdivision/Lot No.: N.A. Rough Final X
Proiect Names:-Hasnita_,,_Car3iac_Services Addition - Precise Grading Plan
30l N Newport Boulevard, Iwport Beach, CA 92fi58-6100
Project Addregs:
Dwner/Developer: Memor'at-v-sita1 Presbyterian
Type of Project:
• Tract • Drainage
• Commercial X • Other
• Industrial
Yardage for Project:
• .:ut - • Borrow
• Fill • Export
I hereby certify the grading for this project has been reviewed in accordance
with my responsibilities under the City Grading Code. I have reviewed the
project and hereby report that all areas exhibit positive surface flow to
public ways or City approved drainage devices. The grading has been completed
substantially: X in conformance with, X with the following changes to,
the approved grading plan.
This certification letter does not include any construction of improvements
as shown on the West Service Road - Private Street Improvement Plans.
Company:
Name:
License No.:
David A. Boyle Engineering
Joseph L. Boyle
print)
RCE 44497
SDAVIDA
ENGINEERING
February 23, 1995
City of Newport Beach
Building Department
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915
Attention: Rick Higley
Subject: Civil Engineer's Confirmation of
Line and Grade for Street Subgrade
Hoag Hospital - West Service Road Improvements - Phase 3
Grading Plan Check No. 430G-94
This is to confirm that we have reviewed
the above referenced project for line and
it in substantial accordance with plans.
1. Street subgrade from centerline
terminus of construction limits
plans.
'seph L. Boyle
RCE 44497
JLB:ib
H17-100-03
cc: Mark Company
Dennis Cox
the following portion of
grade location, and find
Station 9+00 southerly to
as shown on the attached
DJ
. EM6PPG% LOCATION �° T 1 H w
E ni COLD PIN,P"!J ,.\O !Iv X UVQ
-III I " I0 a
I/)x
wz
- °Pe / H4 61 SECT10
NUMB ITVPI
F
C6,� %SLING EO
OC011CPET 5
<6
a2�
.00{
q
tor0" o Q•
9w
o G - co
o
R-JOIN ID y Z -AFCq_
0 or .P
7- 9
WEST SERVICE ROAD (PRIVATE)
N\ r 6 p U y w
s
���ppp
r.1 I _ EA TEST-SDISLLEE VAULT
O, �Ne' -\ r▪ l _
PROTEST IH PLACE D g 177
__
CCQ'gIOr�'�
'=m \b O Tv I"3:4'; PPE ?/C� ___
N N�9I SLOor /!. -t _4* 8
_ - �+ -50' PUBLIC JTIL ITY EASEMENTPRODER
STORM GRAIN 4, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
' 'c CSEMEC� agUFFSS,{�
�qS� HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS
(��" BO`'% P PARED UNDER MY SUPERVISION'
No 1BJ59 II
E%P 6/90/9" ,.,
'rP CNI� ram/
OF CA11 '
61
oict-
cPAP
'Lye
PlLUM Or E Oi
PALM- NEMO x. ere
16a 911
er 5P' P- . O/O
8
Z 0
h ft
/' II
I. /
— -
b rAvvaORIVEACV
e�P may' G« k
'ass rw -UNq-
c,4 P^4r aq0
• ° 06° 461 26°
• = 266.00
• 31.6e'
IN
�����
e=1p1'2P20- / . UINc
R.25.00 % 14 CC
L=44.22'
T=30.5f
V
O
1-
0,6
0 J
m0
alm
33
UU
00
2w
WOO
DAVID A
LIC EXP
BOYLEg/y' C 18559
6-30-97 \
7/4 iQ
DATE
CC
to PE
�i EL
IN`.
PE
-409
ML
®O
IN`
SL
WI
A_
SA
CO
CO
1— INS
S TI
€— MA
DAVID A
eclat
ENGINEERING
February 3, 1995
City of Newport Beach
Building Department
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915
Attention: Mr. Rick Higley
Subject: Civil Engineer's Confirmation of Line and Grade
for Driveway Subgrade to Hoag Power Plant
Hoag Hospital -West Service Road Improvements -Phase I
Grading Plan Check No. 430G-94
This is to confirm that we have reviewed the following portions of
the above referenced project for line and grade location, and find
them in substantial accordance with plans.
1. Subgrade of power plant driveway from Station 1+14 to
Station. 1+83.84.
seph L. Boyle
RCE 44497
JLB: i.b
H17-100-03/H17-101-03
cc: Dennis Cox
Mark Company
2098 South Grand Avenue • Suites A & B • Santa Ana, California 92705 • (714) 957-8144 • Fax (714) 957-8499
ALAW/CRANDALL, INC.
ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
April 4, 1994
Mr. Rick Higley
City of Newport Beach
Building Department
P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, Califomia 92658-8915
Subject:
Response to Comments
Proposed Cardiac Services Addition
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
301 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California
Law/Crandall Project O92072.AB
Dear Mr. Higley:
AP Q
This letter presents our response to comments in your letter of March 15, 1994, on our
consultation report dated December 16, 1992. In addition, to the report, we submitted
supplemental letters dated February 9, 1994 and February 16, 1994.
The professional opinions presented in this letter have been developed using that degree of care and
skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants prac-
ticing in this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the
professional advice included in this letter.
Comment 1:
Provide specific recommendations for remedial grading of unsuitable existing soils
and/or uncertified fills in areas where pavements, curb and gutter, patios, etc. are
planned in addition to the subject building.
Adequate remediation must be accomplished so that the consultant can:
a. approve any existing fills to be left in place
b. be in a position to render an opinion that the site earthwork at completion is
suitable for its intended use. Caveats such as "if some potential for future
settlement of improvements is acceptable..." cannot be accepted in lieu of the
consultants approval of the existing fills and the proposed earthwork as
required by the Municipal Code.
200 CITADEL DRIVE • LOS ANGELES, CA 90040
(213) 089-5300 • FAX (213) 721-6700
0 E0P Mf LAW COMPANIES e
City of Newport each
April 4, 1994
Page 2
Response: Recommendations regarding grading within the building area are presented in our
December 16 report and February 16 letter. Our recommendations are considered
applicable to areas outside of the building area such as paving, curb and gutter,
and patio areas. The existing fill soils are not considered suitable for support of
the proposed building or for support of the improvements. The fill soils should
be excavated and replaced with properly compacted fill soils. Our prior report and
letter should be referred to for additional details on site grading.
Comment 2: Provide information about general site geology, seismicity, etc.
Response: We previously performed a preliminary geotechnical evaluation of the hospital
campus for preparation of the master plan and submitted the results in a report
dated May 20, 1991 (O89034.AEO). The report discusses site geology and
seismicity and is considered applicable to the proposed addition project. We have
included a copy of this report with this letter for your review. No faults or fault -
associated features were observed on the site of the proposed addition, and no
known active or potentially active faults pass beneath the site. Accordingly, the
possibility of surface rupture due to faulting beneath the site is considered low.
Although the site could be subject to severe ground shaking in the event of a major
earthquake, this hazard is common to Southern California and the effects of the
shaking can be minimized by proper structura: design and construction.
Continent 3: Reports to be signed by the project engineering geologist.
Response: Please refer to the signatures listed below and on our report of geotechnical
evaluation previously discussed.
In addition, we provided recommendations for shoring in our February 16 letter. At this time, we
understand that shoring will not be required. Our recommendations regarding shoring can be
disregarded.
City of Newport Beach
April 4, 1994
Page 3
We trust that this letter satisfies your current needs
require additional information.
Sincerely,
Paul R. Schade
Senior Engineer
Paul Elliott, C.E.G. 1435
Senior Engineering Geologist
a/It2/klt
(2681.20811.0001)
Enclosure
(1 copy submitted)
cc: (2) Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
Attn: Mr. Gunther Kilfoil, AIA
(1) David A. Boyle Engineering
Attn: Mr. Joseph Boyle
Please call if you have any questions or
I •
Jake Kharraz
Principal Engineer
PAUL ELLIOTT
/1435
CERTIFIED
ENGINEERING
GEOLOGIST
LAW/CRANDALL, INC.
ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
April 18, 1994
Mr. Rick Higley
City of Newport Beach
Building Department
P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, California 92658-8915
Subject:
Dear Mr. Higley:
Supplemental Recommendations
Hardc%a mrt
Pro C rdiac Services Additio
yosgagrocin es yterian
1 Nev.part Boulevard
Newport Beach, California
Law/Crandall Project No. O92072.AO
This letter confirms our recent conversation and presents supplemental recommendations for
subgrade support of hardscape areas and the need for shoring during the site excavations. %i4.
previously submitted a foundation consultation report for the subject project dated December 16,
1992. In addition to the report, we submitted supplemental letters dated February 9, February 16,
and April 4, 1994.
The professional opinions presented in this letter have been developed using that degree of care and
skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants practicing
in this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional
advice included in this letter.
In our April 4, 1994 letter, we stated that all existing fill soils within the site, including hardscape and
paving areas, should be excavated and replaced with properly compacted fill. We have subsequently
reviewed the available plans and information and conclude the only the upper subgrade soils at the
site will require removal and recompaction. After clearing the site, the upper 2 feet of subgrade soils
within paving, curb and gutter, and patio areas outside the proposed building limits should be
excavated. After excavating, the exposed soils should be observed by personnel from our firm and
any unsuitable deposits should be removed. The recommendations presented in our December 16,
1992 report regarding recompaction of fill soils are still considered applicable. In our opinion, if the
subgrade is prepared as recommended it will be suitable for its intended use.
In our February 16, 1994 letter, we provided recommendations for temporary shoring. As stated in
our April 4, 1994 letter, we currently understand that shoring will not be required. According to
personnel with Hoag Hospital, the continuous foundations of the existing structure extend well below
the anticipated depth of fill removal within the site. Therefore, any excavation within the proposed
building area may be made immediately adjacent to the existing continuous wall footings and will not
131 EAST BALL ROAD. SURE 104
ANAHEIM. CA 92805.5145
714-17E.9544
GA% 714.776.9541
1
City of Newport Beach
April 18, 1994
Page 2
require shoring. Personnel from our firm should be on site during the excavation to observe the
location and condition of the existing footings.
We trust this letter satisfies your current needs. Please call if you have any questions or require
additional information.
Sincerely,
LAW/CRANDALL, INC.
Paul R. Schade
Senior Engineer
Shahen Askari
Principal Engineer
(2681.20811.0001)
cc: Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
Attn: Mr. Gunther Kilfoil, A.I.A.
David A. Boyle Engineering
Attn: Mr. Joseph Boyle
POEE3S/04/4
3,4&HEN Asti! e
c
No.101 ccs
* Exp. 12-31-97
C
cf> 0tECHN\C
F OF cAUE��
1
1
A. ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SENVIc[5
LAW/CRANDALL, INC.
FINAL REPORT
GEOTECHNICAL INSPECTION SERVICES
HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN
EMERGENCY ROOM EXPANSION AND RENOVATION
301 WPORT BEA OULEVARD
WPOttflEACH, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN
Newport Beach, California
January 11,1996
Project No. 2681.30107.0001
LAW/CRANDALL, INC.
ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
January 11, 1996
Mr. F.W. Evins, III, A.I.A.
Vice President
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
Facilities Design and Construction
301 Newport Beach Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92658-8912
Subject: Final Report of Geotechnical Inspection Services
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
Emergency Room Expansion and Renovation
301 Newport Beach Boulevard
Newport Beach, California
Law/Crandall Project 2681.30107.0001
Dear Mr. Evins:
SUMMARY
OSHPD NO. HL 909988
G.P. G9200008
P.C. No. PC 47-92
We have completed geotechnical inspection services at the site of the subject project. This fmal
report provides:
• A formal record of our observation and testing of the compacted fill placed
to provide subgrade support for concrete and asphaltic paving, and of the
asphaltic paving placed in the newly paved areas.
• Confirmation of our observation and approval of the foundation
excavations.
The location of the site is shown in relation to existing structures en the attached Plot Plan. The
observation work was performed periodically as requested between February 1, 1993 and June 14,
1995. We performed a geotechnical investigation of the site and submitted our recommendations in
a report dated November 7, 1990 (Our Job No. 090072. AEO).
This final report is limited to the earthwork performed through June 14, 1995, the date of our last
observation and/or testing of the soil -related work for the project. The fill, at the locations and
200 CITADEL ORIVE • LOS ANGELES, CA 90040
(213) 889E300 • FAX (213) 721.0700
ouEOF,AE UVdCCMAIA1S
xsp
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian - Geatecloucal Inspection Services January 11, 1996
Law/Crandall Project 2681,30107.0001
elevations tested by us, was compacted to at least the specified degree of compaction. Also, the
foundation excavations extended into satisfactory soils.
In our opinion, the soil -related work was performed in general accordance with the project plans,
specifications, and the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code and is considered suitable for the
intended use.
Our professional services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily
exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical engineers practicing in this or
similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional opinions
included in this report. The scope of our services did not include surveying or the responsibility for
job safety. The soil -related work was performed to the limits and at the locations indicated by stakes
and hubs set by others.
4
OBSERVATION AND TESTING OF COMPACTED FILL
This section describes our observation and testing of compacted fill placed as part or the project
earthwork.
LOCATIONS
The earthwork for the project consisted of placing compacted fill to grade the site and provide
subgrade support for adjacent walks, curbs and r otters, a loading dock, and access road paving
areas. The grading work included placing compacted soils as backfill against walls below grade, in
rampways, and in trenches for utility line installations. Also, base course was placed and compacted
in areas to be paved.
2
itsb
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian - Geotechnical Inspection Services January 11, 1996
Law/Crandall Project 2681.30107.0001
FILL MATERIALS
The materials used for the required filling consisted of on -site silty sand, silty sand with some clay,
and imported Class II base materials. Crushed 3/4-inch rock was also used as backfill at selected
locations.
COMPACTION SPECIFICATIONS
The specifications required that the fill be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density
obtainable by the ASTM Designation D1557-78 (equivalent to UBC 70-1) method of compaction.
The base course was to be compacted to at least 95 % of the maximum density.
Compaction tests were performed on representative samples of the soils to establish the maximum
dry densities. The tests were performed in accordance with the specified ASTM Designation
D1557-78 method of compaction, which uses a 1/30-cubic-foot mold in which each of five layers of
soil is compacted by 25 blows of a 10-pound hammer falling 18 inches. The results of the
compaction tests were used in establishing the degree of compaction achieved during the placing of
the fill.
The soil type and source, maximum density, and optimum moisture content of the fill materials are
given in the attached Table 1, Soil Classification and Compaction Data.
PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION OF FILL
After the site was stripped and cleared, excavation up to approximately 15 feet below the existing
grade was performed within the building area for the service level. The excavation was established
in firm natural soils. Temporary unsurcharged construction slopes were made at 1:1.
Loose subgrade soils were removed in the areas to be paved with asphalt or concrete. The upper
clay soils in concrete paving areas were removed and replaced with relatively non -expansive soils.
Following excavation, the exposed soils were scarified to a depth of 6 inches, brought to near -
optimum moisture content, and rolled with heavy compaction equipment. The required fill materials
3
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian - Geotechnical Inspection Services January 11, 1996
Law/Crandall Project 2681.30107.0001
were then placed in loose lifts approximately 8 inches in thickness, t sought to near -optimum
moisture content by conditioning the materials, and compacted with a loader and a hand -guided
impact compactor.
Areas to receive backfdl were first cleared of construction debris and loose soils; the required
backfdl soils were then placed in loose lifts approximately 8 inches in thickness, brought to near -
optimum moisture content, and compacted with a hand -guided impact compactor, a sheepsfoot
roller, and a hydraulic compactor.
A subdrain system was also installed at the base of the basement walls. The installation of the
subdrain was observed and approved by others.
FIELD DENSITY TESTING
To establish the degree of compaction achieved, ASTM Designation D1556 (equivalent to UBC 70-
2) sand -cone field density tests and ASTM Designation D2922 (equivalent to UBC 70-5) nuclear
gage field density tests were made as the filling progressed. Where a test indicated less than the
required compaction, the soils were reworked and retested until at least the specified degree of
compaction resulted.
Test data are given in Table 2, Test Results. The Plot Nan shows the approximate locations of the
tests.
INTERIM REPORT
An interim report of rough grading to reach the design building elevations for the project was
issued on March 10, 1993 (2681.30107.0001).
OBSERVATION OF FOUNDATION EXCAVATIONS
The following foundation design recommendations were presented in our geotechnical investigation
report:
4
ka
kri
Hoag Memorial hospital Presbyterian - Geotedw'cal Inspection Services January 11, 1996
Law/Crandall Project 2681.30107.0001
Spread footings carried at least 1 foot into the firm undisturbed natural soils and at
least 2 feet below the adjacent grade or floor level may be designed to impose a net
dead plus live load pressure of 6,000 pounds per square foot. A one-third increase in
the bearing value may be used for wind or seismic loads. Adjacent to the existing
building, footings should extend to at least the same level as the existing footings....
Footings for minor structures (auxiliary retaining walls and free-standing walls)
may be designed to impose a net dead plus live load pressure of 1,500 pounds per
square foot at a depth of at least 1 foot below the adjacent grade. Such footings may
be established in either properly compacted fill or the natural soils.
Excavations were made for conventional spread footings to support the building and selected
retaining walls. Our field technician observed and probed the footing excavations to confirm that
the soils were properly compacted fills or undisturbed natural materials recommended for
foundation support. At the time of our observation, loose soils had been removed from the
excavations. After observations indicated satisfactory conditions, written notice of our approval was
left at the job site for the information of responsible parties.
OBSERVATION AND TESTING OF ASPHALTIC PAVING
As requested, our field technician observed the asphaltic paving placed in the newly paved areas,
and performed ASTM Designation D2922-81 (equivalent to UBC 70-5) nuclear gage in -place
density tests to establish the degree of compaction achieved. The asphaltic paving was to be
compacted to at least 95% of the maximum density.
The asphaltic concrete consisted of 1/2-inch aggregate using AR4000 asphalt cement At the time of
delivery, the temperature of the asphalt ranged from 265° to 290° Fahrenheit. A value of 146
pounds per cubic foot was used for the maximum density. The paving was compacted with 5- to 10-
ton rollers.
The nuclear gage in -place density test results are given in the attached table; the approximate
locations of the tests are shown on the Plot Plan.
4
5
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian - Ceotechnical Inspection Services
Law/Crandall Project 2681.30107. 0001
January 11, 1996
In providing professional geotechnical observation and testing services associated with the
development of the project, we have employed accepted engineering and testing procedures and
made a reasonable effort to evaluate that the soil -related work was carried out in general
compliance with the project plans and specifications. Although our observation did not reveal
obvious deficiencies, we do not guarantee the contractor's work, nor do the services performed by
our firm relieve the contractor of responsibility in the event of subsequently discovered defects in
the contractor's work.
Respectfully submitted,
LAW/CRANDALL, INC.
ireWifiere
perations Manager
ii
Arnie K. Hammock
Senior Engineer
GH/gh
Attachments (3)
(3 copies submitted)
cc: (2) City of Newport Beach
Building Department
(1) Taylor and Associates, Architects
(1) Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development
(1) Law/Crandall, Inc. (Orange County Office)
4'a
Table 1: Soil Classification and Compaction Test Data
Soil Type and Source
Optimum
Soil Moisture Maximum Dry
Classification* Content (%) Density (pcf)
Silty sand, on -site
Silty sand with some clay, on -site
SM 11.0 122
SM 10.0 126
Note: * Unified Soil Class,ucahon System (USCS) used.
2681]0107.0001 12/11195
TABLE 2: TEST RESULTS
Moisture Dry Maximum
Test Elevation Content Density Dry Density Percent Retest Test
Number (ft.) (% of Dry Wt.) (Ibs./cu. ft.) (Ibs./cu. ft.) Compaction Number Date
1 NOT USED
2 67 7.1 114 126 90
3 64 13.4 128 126 102
4 59 10.7 113 126 90
5 63 9.3 122 126 97
6 65% 10.9 115 122 94
7 67 11.3 114 122 93
8 69% 11.1 115 122 94
9 70 11.9 117 122 96
10 57 7.2 118 122 97
2/1/93
2/1/93
2/1/93
5/9/93
5/22/93
5/28/93
5/28/93
5/28/93
6/21/93
11 66% 13.0 110 122 90 7/9/93
12 67 15.5 110 122 90 7/12/93
13 62% 12.2 118 122 97 7/12/93
14 70% 12.7 106 122 87 0 15 8/5/93
15 70% 10.4 111 122 91 8/5/93
16 71 "% 11.7 113 122 93 8/5/93
17 73 10.3 111 122 91 8/6/93
18 75 9.6 116 122 95 8/6/93
19 77 8.9 115 126 95 8/6/93
20 61 11.5 114 126 90 10/13/93
21 61 9.9 119 126 94 10/14/93
22 62 9.6 120 126 95 10/15/93
23 62 10.6 121 126 96 10/15/93
24 59 10.1 121 126 96 10/15/93
25 54% 12.3 121 126 96 10/16/93
26 56% 12.2 119 126 94 10/16/93
27 59% 11.5 121 126 96 10/16/93
28 61 9.2 115 126 91 10/18/93
29 60% 12.4 119 126 94 10/18/93
30 60% 9.8 122 126 97 11/16/93
31 78 11.1 116 126 92 12/7/93
32 77 9.3 121 126 96 12/7/93
33 75% 6.7 113 126 90 12/7/93
34 67% 11.1 124 126 98 12/7/93
35 64 9.8 121 126 96 12/8/93
36 60'% 9.2 122 126 97 12/8/93
37 60% 10.7 121 126 96 12/8/93
38 60% 10.4 114 126 90 1/20/94
30107 GH.XIs 1/10/96
Page 1
TABLE 2: TEST RESULTS
Moisture Dry Maximum
Test Elevation Content Density Dry Density Percent Retest Test
Number (ft.) (% of Dry Wt.) (Ibsicu. ft.) (Ibs./cu. ft.) Compaction Number Date
39 75 8.9 116 126 92 1/20/94
40 65% 9.6 118 126 94 1/20/94
41N 61% 3.8 123 129 95 AA
42N 60% 7.3 125 129 97 AA
43N 60% 5.1 132 135 98 a0
44N 61% 7.3 125 135 97 AA
45N 64 5.6 129 135 100 AA
46N 67 5.8 130 135 102 AA
47N 70'/ 5.9 130 129 101 AA
48N 77 8.5 128 129 99 AA
49N 77% 7.5 130 129 101 AA
50N 77 AC 140 146 96 AA
1/21/94
1/21/94
1/21/94
1/21/94
1/21/94
1/21/94
1/21/94
1/21/94
1/21/94
1/21/94
51N 75'/ AC 140 146 96 AA 1/21/94
52N 73 AC 139 146 95 AA 1/21/94
53N 69 AC 139 146 95 AA 1/21/94
54N 63 AC 139 146 95 AA 1/21/94
55N 61 AC 139 146 95 AA 1/21/94
56N 61% AC 139 146 95 AA 1/21/94
57N 61 AC 144 146 99 AA 1/21/94
58N 61 AC 143 146 98 AA 1/21/94
59 78 8.9 117 126 93 9/1/94
60 74% 16.2 120 126 95 3/31/95
61 75% 13.0 123 126 98 3/31/95
62 66 11.1 126 126 100 4/20/95
63 75% 13.6 124 126 98 4/20/95
64N 76% 11.1 116 126 92 4/24/95
65N 77 12.7 115 126 91 4/24/95
66 69% 13.0 107 126 85 A 67 4/28/95
67 69'/ 12.0 123 126 98 4/28/95
68 71% 14.3 119 126 94 5/1/95
69 65'/ 14.8 113 126 90 5/1/95
70 68% 11.1 114 126 91 5/1/95
71 72% 10.7 107 126 85 a 72
72 72% 13.8 121 126 96
73 73 12.4 118 126 94
74 75'% 12.9 113 126 90
75N 65 CMB 132 139 95 AA
30107 GH.XIs 1/10/96
5/1/95
5/1/95
5/9/95
5/9/95
6/1/95
Page 2
TABLE 2: TEST RESULTS
Moisture Dry Maximum
Test Elevation Content Density Dry Density Percent Retest Test
Number (ft.) (% of Dry Wt.) (Ibs./cu. ft.) (Ibs./cu. ft.) Compaction Number Date
76N 70% CMB 133 139 96 M 6/1/95
77N 76 CMB 135 139 97 AA 6/1/95
78N 76 CMB 132 139 95 M 6/1/95
79N 78 CMB 139 139 100 M 6/1/95
80N 77 CMB 132 139 95 M 6/1/95
81N 76 AC 141 148 95 M 6/1/95
82N 76% AC 141 148 95 AA 6/1/95
83N 78 AC 142 148 96 M 6/1/95
84N 77% AC 140 148 95 M 6/1/95
85N 76% AC 144 148 97 M 6/1/95
86N 74% AC 140 148 95 M 6/1/95
87N 71 AC 140 148 95 M 6/1/95
88N 65% AC 141 148 95 M 6/1/95
89N 75% 6.7 126 126 100 6/12/95
90N 77 6.2 124 126 98 6/12/95
91N 78 11.9 118 126 94
92N 75'% 8.3 124 126 98
93N 75% 9.4 119 126 94
94N 78% CMB 114 125 91 AAA 94A
94AN 78% CMB 118 125 94 AA 948
948N 78% CMB 119 125 95 AA
95N 76% CMB 120 125 96 AA
96N 77 CMB 120 125 96 AA
97N 76 AC 140 146 96 AA
98N 77 AC 139 146 95 M
99N 78 AC 140 146 96 AA
100N 78% AC 142 146 97 AA
Notes: Elevations refer to job datum.
A Indicates area reworked and retested.
AA Indicates 95% compaction required.
N Indicates nuclear gage density test.
AC Indicates asphalt concrete paving.
CMB Indicates crushed miscellaneous base material; wet density values used in calculations.
A and B Indicates additional tests.
30107 GH.XIs 1/12/96
6/12/95
6/1/295
6/12/95
6/12/95
6/12/95
6/14/95
6/14/95
6/14/95
6/14/95
6/14/95
6/14/65
6/14/95
Page 3
A
75 • • 88
x64.7
`EXISTING
ASPHALTIC �'62.6 j
PAVING
b• 34• 69•
x65.5 1474 53 •
3• •46 5•
62 • e 76
87
x12.s 86•
47 • 52
•
EXISTING
ASPHALTIC
SEWER TRENCH
54 • • 44 \
36* 43•
I APPROACH T•
LO ING DOCK• 23
(F.F.E. = 61)
STORM DRAIN TRENCH
r _ 29 24
7 •! V
26`
O
e 57
I i
38� 201
'1
t
e58
• 30
41 • 56 i e1 31/21
•
28 X2.5
3
55
• 42
61.4
6i .6
6•
EXISTI;0
71•• 66
PAVING -----^a 1
9 33
PARTIAL BASEMENT
/ (SERVICE LEVEL)
13 •
6i.0 120.2
x60.9
FIRST LEVEL
(F.F.E. = 79)
60.6
x
REFERENCE
PRECISE GRADING AN.
TAYLOR & ASSOCIATES,
TOPOGRAPHY MAP (UM.
AND ASSOCIATES.
SITE PLAN (DATED 6/7
ARCHITECTS.
KEY'
x xi EXISTING GROUND
VG VENVILATION PLANT
. 77
x
97• 81•
92 •
FIELD DENSITY TEST
(APPROXIMATE LOCATION)
X%50. 85 16.1 63• 93 a 95•
/• 51 2 ® • STORM DRAIN
48a • 60 • j TRENCH e 98 6L•
16•
15
14
31
•
7o is
• 80
32 •
01 •
EXISTING
LOADING DOCK
(F.F.E. = 64)
49• 84e
78
99• 64•
EXISTING
EMERGENCY
ROOM
(F.F.E.= 64)
PAVING PLAN (AS REVISED 120(93) BY
•RCHITECTS.
/DATED) BY ROBERT OENN, WILLIAM FROST
H0) BY TAYLOR AND ASSOCIATES,
SURFACE ELEVATION
79 •
96
90 •
83 •
100•
DEPTH OF BACKFLL
(APPROXIMATE)
O94A
948. 94
89 •
APPROXIMATE LIMITS
OF EARTHWORK
ADDRFSS.
301 NEWPORT BEACH BOULEVARD
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
PLOT PLAN
EMERGENCY ROOM
EXPANSION AND RENOVATION
SCALE 1" = 20'
LAW/CRANDALL, INC. A
cnd1 TE':
rfw Copiet nauisd the lint day
February, May, AupIN and
November.
taand
zToo toalet ribose at eenprtnon
Tit project, or wax. Mnlq in
Connection with ale project ea
temnn.Nd for any reseon.
za
(L/C 2681.30107.0001)
lame of Hospital
(Emergency Expar.s ion and Renovation)
.agal Nano of APpilant
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
OFFICE OF STATEWIDE HEALTH PLANNING
AN7 DEVELOPMENT
VERIFIED REPORT NO. Final
This Report Includo All Construction Work to
14 Oay of June
Hoag Manorial Hospital Presbyterian
19 95
FOR OFFICE USE
Address 301 Newport Beach Blvd. FIN HI 909988
Newport Beach, California
Contract Price S •Appliatlon
noag Olen real Hospital Presbycerran
COMPLST(
•
COMPLETE
PRELIMINARY
ROOFING
GRADING AND EARTHWORK
100
PARTITIONS
PILES ANO CAISSONS
CARPENTRY — Sough.
— Foundations Fvrr avat ions
100
FINISH CARPENTRY AND CABINETS
" —Structural
FIRE CALL SYSTEM
" — Non -Structural
NURSES' CALL & COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS
GUNITE WORK
KITCHEN EQUIPMENT
, STRUCTURAL STEEL
FIXED HOSPITAL EQUIPMENT
MASONRY — Structural
RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION
— Veneer
ELEVATORS
_
PLUMBING
CONVEYORS & PNEUMATIC TUBE SYSTEMS
' FIRE SPRINKLERS
CEILING FINISH IPlester, Acoustic Tile. otharl
HEATING AND VENTILATING
FLOOR FINISHES
ELECTRICAL
PAINTING & WALL COVERINGS
WINDOWS, GLASS, GLAZING
MISC.
ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COMPLETION
See our report dated January 11, 1996 for details.
Change Order No,'t Approved:
(11 / certify for deckre) under penalty of perjury that 1 have read the above report and know the contents thereof; that all of the above
statement are true and than / bmw of my own personal knowledge that the work during the period covered by the report has been
performed and materials wed and installed conform to the duly approved plans and specifications therefor.
ha,121 and furthermore than aman,authorized official of Law/Crandall, Inc. working in the canonry of
Seniol'. Engineer _ and that !have been properly authorised by sold/Inn or corpomtion to sign this report
wa. 1 TO ea PM1u v of r ONLY ONMN MONO.
• • 4.
[SIGNED]
(Tidal
January 12, 1996
Senior Engineer
(Addrenl 200 Citadel Drive, Los Angeles Cal ifornia 9IX140
CIVIL ENGINEER's CERTIFYCA TION FORM
94
City of Newport Beach
330C Newport Blvd
PO Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915
From:
Date:
Attention: Grading Engineer, Building Department
David A. Boyle Engineering
2076 South Grand Avenue
Santa Ana, CA 92705
February 29, 1996
GPC No.: 2277-94 Tract/Subdivision/Lot No.: N.A. Rough Final X
Project Names: Hoag Hospital E.C.U. Parking Lot Precise Grading Plan
Project Address: 301 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92658-6100
Owner/Developer: Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
Type of Project:
• Tract • Drainage
• Commercial X • Other
• Industrial
Yardage for Project:
• Cut - • Borrow
• Fill • Export -••••••••- •••
I hereby certify the grading for this project has been reviewed in accordance
with my responsibilities under the City Grading Code. I have reviewed the
project and hereby report that all areas appear to exhibit positive surface
flow to public ways or City approved drainage devices. The grading has been
completed substantially: X in conformance with, with the following
changes to, the approved grading plan.
Company:
Name:
License No.:
David A. Boyle Engineering
Joseph L. Boyle
PE 44497prtntl
(RCE/LS)
sig