Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20210119_Geo Investigation_12-23-2020PA2021-006 consultants GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL ADDITIONS LOCATED AT 2034 E. OCEANFRONT NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA Presented to: NANCY HARRISON 2034 E. Oceanfront Newport Beach, CA 92661 c/o: Paul Hirezi, GC cc: Kemmerer Design Architecture, Inc. 228 Crest Avenue Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Attn: Marcus Kemmerer, AIA Prepared by: EGA CONSULTANTS, Inc. 375-C Monte Vista Avenue Costa Mesa, California 92627 ph (949) 642-9309 fax (949) 642-1290 December 23, 2020 Project No. PH275.1 engineering geotuhnilal opplirollons 375-C Monte Vista Avenue • Costa Mesa, CA 92627 • (949) 642-9309 • fAX (949) 642-1290 PA2021-006 EGA I consultants engineering geotechnical applications Site: Proposed Additions/Remodel -2034 E. Oceanfront Newport Beach, California -Significant Grading is Not Planned Executive Summary December 23, 2020 Project No. PH275.1 Based on our geotechnical study of the site, our review of available reports and literature and our experience, it is our opinion that the proposed residential improvements are feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. There appear to be no significant geotechnical constraints on-site that cannot be mitigated by proper planning, design, and utilization of sound construction practices. The engineering properties of the soil and native materials, and surface drainage offer favorable conditions for site development. The following key elements are conclusions confirmed from this investigation: A review of available geologic records indicates that no active faults cross the subject property. The site is located in the seismically active Southern California area, and within 2 kilometers of the Type B Newport-Inglewood Fault. As such, the proposed development shall be designed in accordance with seismic considerations specified in the 2019 California Building Code (CBC) and the City requirements. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS: Design Item Foundations: Recommendations Footing Bearing Pressures: Passive Lateral Resistence Perimeter/Interior Footing Widths: 1,750 psf -building, continuous 2,250 psf -building, isolated column 250 psf per foot Perimeter/Interior Footing Depths: Coefficient of Friction: min. 15 inches with two No. 5 bars top and bottom min. 30 inches below lowest adjacent grade Soil Expansion: Soil Sulfate Content: 0.30 Very Low (El = 0) Negligible Soil Maximum Density: 103.0 pcf at 9.5% Opt Moisture Building Slab -if applicable: * Concrete slabs cast against properly compacted fill materials shall be a minimum of 5 inches thicK (actual) and reinforced with No. 4 rebar at 18 inches on center in both directions. * Dowel all footings to slabs with No. 4 bars at 24 inches on center. * For a capillary break, if applicable, building slabs shall be underlain by 2 inches of washed sand, underlain by a min. 15 mil plastic membrane (e.g., Stego Wrap), with all laps sealed, and underlain by 4 inches of ¾-inch gravel. Seismic Values (Equivalent Lateral Force Method): Site Class Definition (Table 161~.5.2) Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period, s. Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 1 s Period, S1 Short Period Site Coefficient at 0.2 Period, F. Long Period Site Coefficient at 1 s Period, F v Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period, SMs Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at 1 s Period, SM1 Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period, S05 Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 1 s Period, s01 D 1.374 g 0487 g 1.2 1.8 1.649 g 0.877 g 1.099 g 0.584 g PGAm = 0.722 g 375-C Monte Vista Avenue• Costa Mesa, CA 92627 • (949) 642-9309 • FAX (949) 6 4 2-1290 PA2021-006 I EGA consultants engineering geotechnical applications NANCY HARRISON 2034 E. Oceanfront Newport Beach, CA 92661 c/o: Paul Hirezi, GC December 23, 2020 Project No. PH275.1 Subject: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL REMODEL AND ADDITIONS LOCATED AT Dear Team, 2034 EAST OCEANFRONT NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA In accordance with your request we have completed our Geotechnical Investigation of the above referenced site located in the City of Newport Beach, California. This investigation was performed to determine the site soil conditions and to provide geotechnical parameters for the proposed site additions and associated improvements. This opportunity to be of service is appreciated. If you have any questions, please call. Very truly yours, EGA Consultants, Inc. DAVID A. WORTHINGTON, CEG 2124 Principal Engineering Geologist/CEO JOHN F. EGGERS Staff Geologist Copies: (3) Addressee PAUL D Sr. Project En EX -+F~- S'ql't 375-C Monte Vista Ave nue• Costa Mesa, CA 92627 • (949) 642-9309 • FAX (949) 642-1 290 PA2021-006 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION December 23, 2020 Project No. PH275.1 FOR PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL REMODEL AND ADDITIONS LOCATED AT 2034 E. OCEANFRONT NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION In response to your request and in accordance with the City of Newport Beach Building Department requirements, we have completed a geotechnical investigation at the subject site located at 2034 E. Oceanfront, in the City of Newport Beach, California (see Site Location Map, Figure 1 ). The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the existing geotechnical conditions at the subject site and provide recommendations and geotechnical parameters for site re- development, earthwork, and foundation design for the proposed re-construction. We were also requested to evaluate the potential for on-site geotechnical hazards. This report presents the results of our findings , as well as our conclusions and recommendations. SCOPE OF STUDY The scope of our investigation included the following tasks: • Review of readily available published and unpublished reports; • Geologic reconnaissance and mapping; • Excavation and sampling of one (1) exploratory boring to a total depth of 12 feet below existing grade (b.g.); • Continuous Cone Penetration Test (CPT) sounding to a depth of 50½ feet below grade (results of the CPT sounding are included herein); • Laboratory testing of representative samples obtained from the exploratory borings; • Engineering and geologic analysis including seismicity coefficients in accordance with the 2019 CBC; • Preparation of this report presenting our findings, conclusions, and recommendations. Proposed Remodel -Harrison Residence 2034 E. Oceanfront, Newport 13each. CA -Soils Report Project No. PH275. I December 23, 2020 2 PA2021-006 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS The subject property is a 80 feet by 40 feet rectangular-shaped lot located at 2034 E. Oceanfront within the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, California (see Site Location Map, Figure 1 ). For the purpose of clarity in this report, the lot is bound by E. Oceanfront to north, public beach to the south, and by similar residential dwellings to the east and west. The lot is located near the eastern tip of the Balboa Peninsular; approximately 450 feet northeast of the Pacific Ocean (see Figure 1). Currently, the lot is occupied by a two-story, residential structure situated on a graded level pad. The residence is supported on continuous perimeter footings with slab-on-grade floors. An attached two-car garage is located in the southeast corner of the residence and is accessed by the rear alley. The site is legally described as Lot 9 of Block D, of Tract No. 518 (APN 048-262-22). The existing site layout is shown in the Plot Plan, Figure 2, herein. PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL ADDITIONS Based on our review of the preliminary plans by Kemmerer Design Architecture, Inc., the proposed additions and remodel include the extension of the existing 1-car garage, and the remodel of first and second floor living spaces. Additionally, a new roof deck is proposed. The proposed construction shall not provide new building footprint square footages (the limits of the proposed remodel are located entirely within the existing building footprint). We assume that the proposed building will consist of wood-frame and masonry block construction or building materials of similar type and load. The building foundations will consist of a combination of isolated and continuous spread footings. Loads on the footings are unknown, but are expected to be less than 2,250 and 1,750 pounds per square foot on the isolated and continuous footings, respectively. If actual loads exceed these assumed values, we should be contacted to evaluate whether revisions of this report are necessary. Based on NAVD88, the site elevation is approximately 10 ft. above MSL. Based on the preliminary plans, the proposed finish floor elevation shall be 9+ ft. above mean sea level (MSL) to conform with City and United States FEMA flood elevation requirements. Note: The precise determination, measuring, and documenting of the site elevations, hub locations, property boundaries, etc., is the responsibility of the project licensed land surveyor. Proposed Remodel -Harrison Residence 2034 E. Oceanfront, Newpon Beach, CA -Soils Rcpon Project No. PH275. I December 23, 2020 3 PA2021-006 It is our understanding that the grade of the site is not expected to vary significantly. Significant grading or retaining walls are not proposed. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Our subsurface exploration consisted of the excavation of one ( 1) exploratory borings (B-1) to a total depth of 12 feet below grade (b.g.). Prior to drilling, the underground detection and markup service (Underground Service Alert of Southern California) was ordered and completed under DigAlert. Representative bulk and relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained for laboratory testing. Geologic logs of the soil borings are included in Appendix A . The boring was continuously logged by a registered geologist from our firm who obtained soil samples forgeotechnical laboratory analysis. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2 , Plot Plan. Geotechnical soil samples were obtained using a modified California sampler filled with 23/a inch diameter, 1-inch tall brass rings. Bulk samples were obtained by collecting representative bore hole cuttings. Locations of geotechnical samples and other data are presented on the boring logs in Appendix A. The soils were visually classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System. Classifications are shown on the boring logs included in Appendix A. LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory testing was performed on representative soil samples obtained during our subsurface exploration. The following tests were performed: * * * * * Soil Classification (ASTM: D 2487) Dry Density and Moisture Content (ASTM: D 2216) Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content (ASTM: 01557) Direct Shear (ASTM 03080) Sulfate Content (CA417, ACI 318-14, Table 19.3.1.1) Proposed Remodel • Harrison Residence 2034 E. Oceanfront, Newport Beach, CA• Soils Rcporl Project No. PH275. I December 23, 2020 4 PA2021-006 All laboratory testing was performed by our sub-contractor, G3/SoilsWorks, Inc., of Costa Mesa, California. Geotechnical test results are shown in Appendix B of this report. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS The site soil and geologic conditions are as follows: Seepage_and Groundwater Seepage or surface water ponding was not noted on the subject site at the time of our study. According to the Orange County Water District (OCWD), there are no water wells located within the general vicinity of the subject property. The Pacific Ocean shoreline is approximately 450 feet southwest of the site. Channel waters of the Newport Bay are located approximately 1,000 feet to the east and northeast of the site (see Figure 1, Site Location Map herein). Depths to groundwater are influenced by tidal fluctuations. A tidal chart during the month of November is presented as Figure 4, herein. Geologic Setting According to a United States Geological Survey (USGS) Map of the Newport Beach Quadrangle the site is approximately 12 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL). Regionally, the site is located within the western boundary of the Coastal Plain of Orange County. The Coastal Plain lies within the southwest portion of the Los Angeles Basin and consists of semi-consolidated marine and non-marine deposits ranging in age from Miocene to recent. The western boundary of the Coastal Plain, in which the site is located, is referred to as the Tustin Plain. It is bound by the Santa Ana Mountains to the northeast and the San Joaquin Hills to the southeast. Based on available geologic maps the site is underlain by a thin mantle of eolian (Qe)/hydraulic sands and/or engineered fill. The shallow soil layer is underlain by Quaternary-age old paralic deposits (Qop) which are described as medium dense to very dense, oxidized, fine to medium grained, moderately to well-cemented sand and silty sand (see reference No. 2). The old paralic deposits are underlain by massive bedrock of the Monterey Formation (Tm). Roadside exposures of massive bedrock of the Monterey Formation (Tm) are visible on the inland side of side of Bayside Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway less than 1 kilometer north and northwest of the site (Dover Shores bluffs). A Geologic Map is presented as Figure 3, herein (reference: Morton, D.M., and Proposed Rcmodd -Harrison Residence 2034 E. Oc~anfront, Newport Beach, CA -Soils Report Project No. PH275. I December 23, 2020 5 PA2021-006 Miller, F.K., 2006). Based on the geologic map (Figure 3) correlation with the nearby CPT probe advanced on October 6, 2017, bedrock of the Monterey Formation (Tm) was likely encountered approximately 32 feet below grade. Faulting A review of available geologic records indicates that no active faults cross the subject property (reference No. 2). Seismicity The seismic hazards most likely to impact the subject site is ground shaking following a large earthquake on the Newport-Inglewood (onshore), Palos Verdes (offshore), San Joaquin Hills Blind Thrust, Whittier-Elsinore, or Cucamonga Faults. The site is primarily underlain by fill and beach sands with thin layers of silt/clay. For design purposes, two-thirds of the maximum anticipated bedrock acceleration may be assumed for the repeatable ground acceleration. The effects of seismic shaking can be mitigated by adhering to the 2019 California Building Code or the standards of care established by the Structural Engineers Association of California. With respect to this hazard, the site is comparable to others in this general area in similar geologic settings. The grading/building specifications outlined in this report are in part, intended to mitigate seismic shaking. Based on our review of the "Seismic Zone Map," issued by the State of California, there are no mapped earthquake landslide zones on the site. The proposed development shall be designed in accordance with seismic requirements contained in the 2019 CBC as adopted by the City of Newport Beach building codes. Based on Chapter 16 of the 2019 CBC and on Maps of Known Active Near-Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada (ASCE 7-16 Standard, Equivalent Lateral Force Method), the site shall be designed using the following seismic parameters: 2019 CBC Seismic Design Parameters (Equivalent Lateral Force Method) SITE ADDRESS 20 .... 4 E O fr N h .} cean ont, ewPort Beac , CA Site Latitude (Decimal Degrees) Site Longitude (Decimal Degrees) Site Class Definition Mapped Spectrnl Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period, s~ Proposed Remodel -Harrison Residence 2034 E. Oceanfront, Newport Beach, CA -Soils Report Project No. PH275. I Oeccmber 23, 2020 6 33.5959571 -1 17.8856498 D 1.374 g PA2021-006 Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at Is Period, S 1 0.487 g Short Period Site Coefficient at 0.2 Period, Fa 1.2 Long Period Site Coefficient at Is Period, Fv 1.8 Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period, SMs 1.649 g Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at Is Period, SM1 0.877 g Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period, Sus 1.099 g Design Spectral Response Acceleration at Is Period S0 1 0.584 g In accordance with the USGS Design Maps, and assuming Site Class "D", the mean peak ground acceleration (PGAm) per USGS is 0.722 g. The stated PGAm is based on a 2% probability of exceedance in a 50 year span. A copy of the site USGS Design Map Summary report provided in Appendix C, herein. · FINDINGS Subsurface Soils As encountered in our test borings, the site is underlain by fill and native materials as follows: Fill (Af) Fill soils were encountered in the test borings (B-1 and CPT-1) to a depth of approximately 2 feet b.g. The fill soils consist generally of light brown, dry to damp, loose, fine-grained sand with shell fragments and trace rootlets. The expansion potential of the fill soils was judged to be very low when exposed to an increase in moisture content (Expansion Index of 0). Hydraulic-Native Sands (Qe), Paralic Deposits (Qop) and Bedrock (Tm) Underlying the fill materials are hydraulic and native sands as encountered in each of the test borings. The native sands consist generally of tan brown, dry to moist, medium dense to dense, non-cemented, fine-to medium- grained sand with shell fragments. The native sands are underlain by eolian (Qe) and old paralic (Qop) deposits, which are underlain by Monterey Formation (Tm) bedrock consisting of medium dense to very dense, oxidized, fine to medium grained, moderately to well-cemented sand and siltstone. Based on the laboratory results dated December 8, 2020, the site maximum Proposed Remodel -Harrison Residence 2034 E. Oceanfront, Newport Beach, CA -Soils Report Project No. Pll275. I December 23, 2020 7 PA2021-006 dry density is 103.0 pcf at an optimum moisture content of 9.5% (per ASTM D 1557). The complete laboratory reports are presented in Appendix B, herein. LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS (Per SP117 A) Liquefaction of soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion in response to earthquakes. Both research and historical data indicate that loose, granular sandy soils are susceptible to liquefaction, while the stability of rock, gravels, clays, and silts are not significantly affected by vibratory motion. Liquefaction is generally known to occur only in saturated or near saturated granular soils. The site is underlain by fill/eolian sands, old paralic deposits, and bedrock of the Monterey Formation. It is our understanding that the current City policy, has assigned a seismic settlement potential of one (1 .0) inch in the upper ten feet, and three (3.0) inches for soil depths of ten to fifty feet. In the event settlement values exceed these threshold values, then additional analysis and/or additional mitigation is required. The CPT testing was performed in accordance with the "Standard Test Method for Performing Electronic Friction Cone and Piezocone Penetration Testing of Soils," (ASTM D5778-12). The seismically induced settlement for the proposed structure was evaluated based on the "Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes" by I.M. Idriss and R.W. Boulanger, dated September 8, 2008 as well as the "CPT and SPT Based Liquefaction Triggering Procedures" by R.W. Boulanger and I.M. Idriss, dated April 2014. The analysis was provided by one 12-foot deep 4 " diameter hand-auger boring, and a 50½ foot deep 1.7" diameter CPT probe advanced on October 6, 2017. The exploratory borings and probe locations are shown in the Plot Plan, Figure 2, herein. The soil borings were continuously logged by a certified engineering geologist of our fi rm. The CPT test consists of a sounding to the specified depth using an integrated cone system manufactured by Vertek. The cone penetrometer was pushed using a 30-ton CPT rig, with samples taken approximately every 2.5 cm, or 0.98 inches. The following parameters are measured: Cone Resistance (qc), Sleeve Friction (fs), Dynamic Pore Pressure (u), Inclination, and Penetration Speed. The parameters were recorded using a laptop computer, and compared with baseline readings to adjust for temperature or zero load offsets. The Ishihara and Yoshimine 1992 paper titled "Evaluation of Settlements in Sand Deposits Following Liquefaction During Earthquakes" was reviewed. The paper discusses that if given'the factor of safety and the density in each layer of a sand Proposed Remodel -Harrison Residence 2034 E. Ocean front, Newport Beach. CA -Soils Report Project No. PH275. I December 23, 2020 8 PA2021-006 deposit at a given site, the volumetric strain can be calculated, and then by integrating the volume changes through the depth, the amount of settlement at the ground surface can be estimated. The liquefaction analysis is based on the accepted document of Idriss and Boulanger (2014), which integrates the findings established by Ishihara and Yoshimine (1992). The total value for seismic induced settlement due to liquefaction is calculated in the last three columns of the spreadsheet in Appendix E herein. The computations and results of our Liquefaction Analysis, based on CPT blow counts of Boring CPT-1 (Appendix E). The seismically induced settlement analysis was evaluated based on methods published in the references Nos. "a" through "I" (see "Associated References", herein). The liquefaction and seismic settlement calculations indicate seismic settlement (includes dry and saturated sands) in the upper 50½ feet is less than 3.0 inches, and in the upper 10 feet is less than 1.0 inch (post soil cement treatment -see page 5 of Plate A) and hence shallow mitigation methods for liquefaction may be implemented per City Code Policy (No. CBC 1803.5.11-2 last revised 7/3/2014). Based on our liquefaction analysis, and in accordance with the City of Newport Beach Policy No. CBC 1803.5.11 -12 (NBMC, Chapter 15), we recommend the following mitigative methods to minimize the effects of shallow liquefaction: 1. Tie all pad footings with grade beams. 2. All footings should be a minimum of 24 inches deep, below grade. 3. Continuous footings should be reinforced with two No. 5 rebar (two at the top and two at the bottom). 4. Concrete slabs cast against properly compacted fill materials shall be a minimum of 5 inches thick (actual) and reinforced with No. 4 rebar at 12 inches on center in both directions. The reinforcement shall be supported on chairs to insure positioning of the reinforcement at mid-center in the slab. 5. Dowel all footings to slabs with No. 4 bars at 24 inches on center. 6. Additionally, to further reduce the effects of the thin shallow zones of potentially liquefiabl,e soils, the building slab shall include 15" w by 24" d interior grade beams ("cross beams") to be reinforced with two No. 5 rebars (two at the top and two at the bottom). 7. Additionally, for cohesion treatment of the site sand fills; soil-cement shall be used in the upper 3 feet. To achieve this, during grading -dry bags of Portland Cement shall be mixed in the scarified over-excavation bottoms and into each of the overlying fill lifts. Water via a 2-inch hose shall be vigorously induced during the pad grading operations. The foundation specifications outlined above will act to decrease the potential settlement due to liquefaction and/or seismically induced lateral deformation to tolerable amounts. The above specifications eliminate the use of piles and Proposed Remodel -Harrison Residence 2034 E. OC<!anfronl, Newport Beach, CA -Soils Report Project No. PH275. I December 23, 2020 9 PA2021-006 associated construction vibrations and groundwater displacement induced by caisson drilling or pile-driving . If the above specifications are incorporated, the proposed structure shall be stable and adequate for the intended uses and the proposed construction will not adversely impact the subject or adjacent properties. Remedial grading reduces the calculated seismic settlement to less than 1.0 inch in the upper 10 feet (see Appendix E, page 5 of Plate A, herein). Other Geologic Hazards Other geologic hazards such as landsliding, or expansive soils, do not appear to be evident at the subject site. CONCLUSIONS Based on our geotechnical study of the site, our review of available reports and literature and our experience, it is our opinion that the proposed improvements at the site are feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. There appear to be no significant geotechnical constraints on-site that cannot be mitigated by proper planning, design, and utilization of sound construction practices. The engineering properties of the soil and native materials, and the surface drainage offer favorable conditions for site re-development. RECOMMENDATIONS The following sections discuss the principle geotechnical concerns which should be considered for the proposed additions. Significant grading, nor expansion of the existing building footprint, is not proposed. Site Preparation Prior to earthwork or construction operations, the areas of the proposed site additions should be cleared of surface structures and subsurface obstructions and stripped of any vegetation in the areas proposed for development. Removed vegetation and debris should then be disposed of off-site. Building Additions/Remodel To eliminate the over-excavation requirements, we recommend the following for the proposed building addition/remodel construction: * * All proposed footings may be deepened as follows: a minimum 30 inches deep, below lowest adjacent grade. All footing trenches shall be inspected by representatives of EGA Consultants. Proposed Remodel -Harrison Residence 2034 E. Oceanfront, Newport Beach, C/1. • Soils Report Project No. PH275. I December 23, 2020 I 0 PA2021-006 If applicable, we recommend a minimum 10 inches of soil beneath the floor slabs be removed and re-compacted to a minimum 90% relative compaction. This method will eliminate removal and re-compaction of the upper 2½ feet. All footing bottoms shall be embedded in competent material inspected/approved by the geotechnical consultant. Fills -if applicable The on-site soils are suitable for reuse as compacted fill, provided they are free of organic materials, debris, and materials larger than four (4) inches in diameter. After removal of any loose, compressible soils, all areas to receive fill and/or other surface improvements should be scarified to a minimum depth of 12 inches, brought to at least 2 percent over optimum moisture conditions and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM: D1557). If necessary, import soils for near-surface fills should be predominately granular, possess a low or very low expansion potential, and be approved by the geotechnical engineer. Significant grading is not proposed for the proposed additions/remodel. However, if applicable, lift thicknesses of fill should be placed in uniform lifts not exceeding 5 inches. Placement and compaction of fill should be in accordance with local grading ordinances under the observation and testing of the geotechnical consultant. We recommend that fill soils be placed at moisture contents at least 2 percent over optimum (based on ASTM: D1557). We recommend that oversize materials (materials over 4 inches) should they be encountered, be stockpiled and removed from the site. Trench Backfill -if applicable The on-site soils may be used as trench backfill provided they are screened of rock sizes over 6 inches in dimension and organic matter. Trench backfill should be compacted in uniform lifts (not exceeding 8 inches in compacted thickness) by mechanical means to at least 90 percent relative compaction (ASTM: D1557). GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS The following Geotechnical parameters may used in the design of the proposed remodel structural elements: Foundation Design Structures on properly compacted fill may be supported by conventional, continuous or isolated spread footings. All footings should be a minimum of 30 inches deep (measured in the field below lowest adjacent grade). Interior and perimeter footing Proposed Remodel -Harrison Residence 2034 C. Oceanfront, Newport Beach, CA -Soils Repurl Project No. PH275. l December 23, 2020 11 PA2021-006 widths shall be an minimum 15 inches for the perimeter footings. At these depths, footings founded in fill materials may be designed for an allowable bearing value of 1,750 and 2,250 psf (for dead-plus-live load) for continuous wall and isolated spread footings, respectively. These values may be increased by one- third for loads of short duration, including wind or seismic forces. Reinforcement requirements may be increased if recommended by the project structural engineer. In no case should they be decreased from the previous recommendations. The actual design of the foundation and slabs should be completed by the structural engineer. Cement Type for Concrete in Contact with On-Site Earth Materials Concrete mix design should be based on sulfate testing with Section 1904.2 of the 2019 CBC. Preliminary laboratory testing indicates the site soils possess negligible sulfate exposure. In the event import soils are used, the soils shall be tested for sulfate content and the associated recommendation shall be implemented as follows: ACI 318 BUILDING CODE -Table 19.3.1 .1 REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCRETE EXPOSED TO SULFATE-CONTAINING SOLUTIONS Sulfate Water soluble Sulfate (SO,) in Cement Type Maximum water-Minimum fc', Exposure sulfate (SO, ) in soil water, ppm cementitious material normal-weight percent by weight ratio. by weight. normal and light weight weight concrete concrete, psi Negligible [SO] 0.00 , so,< 0.10 0 5; so, <150 ---------------- Moderate 0.10 <so,< 0.20 150 < so,< 1500 II,IP(MS), 0.50 4000 [S1] IS(MS),P(MS) l(PM)(MS), l(SM)(MS) Severe 0.20 ~ s o,< 2.00 1500 <so,< V 0.45 4500 [S2] 10,000 Very Severe SO,> 2.00 SO,> 10,000 V plus 0.45 4500 [S3] pozzalan As a conservative approach, we recommend cement with a minimum strength f'c of 3,000 psi be used for concrete in contact with on-site earth materials. Lateral Load Resistance Footings founded in fill materials may be designed for a passive lateral bearing pressure of 250 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. A coefficient of friction against sliding between concrete and soil of 0.30 may be assumed. Proposed Remodel -Harrison Residence 2034 E. Oceanfront, Newport Beach, CA -Soils Report Project No. PH275. l December 23, 2020 12 PA2021-006 Settlement Utilizing the design recommendations presented herein, we anticipate that the majority of any post-construction settlement will occur during construction activities. We estimate that the total settlement for the proposed structure will be on the order of 1 inch. Differential settlement is not expected to exceed½ inch in 20 feet. Differential settlement between the new and proposed structures is not expected to exceed ½ -inch. These settlement values are expected to be within tolerable limits for properly designed and constructed foundations. To minimize the potential differential movement we recommend No. 4 bars at 24 inches on- center be doweled to tie7in the existing and new foundations. Interior Slabs-on-grade -if applicable Concrete slabs cast against properly compacted fill materials shall be a minimum of 5 inches thick (actual) and reinforced with No. 4 rebar at 18 inches on center in both directions. The slabs shall be doweled into the footings using No. 4 bars at 24 inches on center. The reinforcement shall be supported on chairs to insure positioning of the reinforcement at mid-center in the slab. Interior slabs shall be underlain by 2 inches of clean sand over a 15 mil visqueen vapor barrier, with all laps sealed, over 4 inches of low or non-expansive materials (See "Capillary Break" section below). Some slab cracking due to shrinkage should be anticipated. The potential for the slab cracking may be reduced by careful control of water/cement ratios. The contractor should take appropriate curing precautions during the pouring of concrete in hot weather to minimize cracking of slabs. We recommend that a slipsheet (or equivalent) be utilized if crack-sensitive flooring is planned directly on concrete slabs. All slab,s should be designed in accordance with structural considerations. · · Pour-Over Slabs -if applicable If applicable, prior to pouring new slabs over existing, the existing slab should be tool-scored or grinded and cleaned (free of fragment particles etc.). This will provide improved adherence along the new-over-old slab contact. The geotechnical consultant should be called to confirm the pour-over slab preparation. Minimum design thicknesses are imperative. In the event of subgrade "high" spots; chipping of pre-existing concrete may be required to achieve slab design specifications. Proposed Remodel -Harrison Residence 2034 E. Oceanfront. Newport Beach, CA -Soils Report Project No. PH275. I December 23, 2020 13 PA2021-006 Capillary Break Below Interior Slabs -if applicable If applicable (based on ratio of new slabs, if any) for new slabs over subgrade, and in accordance with the 2019 California Green Building Standards Code Section 4.505.2.1, we provide the following building specification for the subject site: Concrete build ing slabs shall be directly underlain by a min. 2 inches of clean/washed sand, underlain by a min.15 mil-thick vapor barrier (e.g. "Stego Wrap"), with all laps sealed, underlain by 4 inches of ¾-inch gravel. Note: we do not recommend placing sand directly over the gravel section due to vertical migration of the fines. The above specification meets or exceeds the Section 4.505.2.1 requirement. Exterior Slabs-on-grade (Hardscape) Concrete slabs cast against properly compacted fill materials shall be a minimum of 4 inches thick (actual) and reinforced with No. 3 rebar at 18 inches on center in both directions. The reinforcement shall be supported on chairs to insure positioning of the reinforcement at mid-center in the slab. Control joints should be provided at a maximum spacing of 8 feet on center in two directions for slabs an<;l at 6 feet on center for sidewalks. Control joints are intended to direct cracking. Expansion or felt joints should be used at the interface of exterior slabs on grade and any fixed structures to permit relative movement. Some slab cracking due to shrinkage should be anticipated. The potential for the slab cracking may be reduced by careful control of water/cement ratios. The contractor should take appropriate curing precautions during the pouring of concrete in hot weather to minimize cracking of slabs. Temporary Excavations Based on our review of the building plans, the proposed remodel/additions will be sufficiently setback from all property boundaries and hence, temporary shoring will not be required. The geotechnical consultant should be present during the excavation phase of the project to observe the soil conditions and make additional recommendations if necessary. Review of Plans The specifications and parameters outlined in this report shall be considered minimum requirements and incorporated into the Foundation Plans. This office Proposed Remodel - I larrison Residence 2034 E. Oceanfront, Newport Beach, CA -Soils Report Project No. Pl-1275.1 December 23, 2020 14 PA2021-006 should review the Foundation Plans when available. Surface Drainage Surface drainage shall be controlled at all times. Positive surface drainage should be provided to direct surface water away from structures and toward the street or suitable drainage facilities. Ponding of water should be avoided adjacent to the structures. Recommended minimum gradient is 2 percent for unpaved areas and one percent for concrete/paved areas. Roof gutter discharge should be directed away from the building areas through solid PVC pipes to suitable discharge points. Area drains should be provided for planter areas and drainage shall be directed away from the top of slopes. GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATIO.N AND TESTING DURING CONSTRUCTION We recommend that a qualified geotechnical consultant be retained to provide geotechnical engineering services, including geotechnical observation/testing, during the construction phase of the project. This is to verify the compliance with the design, specifications and or recommendations, and to allow design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated. Geotechnical observations/testing should be performed at the following stages: • During ANY grading operations, including excavation, removal, filling, compaction, and backfilling, etc. • After excavations for footings (or thickened edges) and/or grade beams verify the adequacy of underlying materials. • After pre-soaking of new slab sub-grade earth materials and placement of capillary break, plastic membrane, prior to pouring concrete. • After scoring (tool scouring) of interior slabs prior to pour-over slabs. • During backfill of drainage and utility line trenches, to verify proper compaction. • When/if any unusual geotechnical conditions are encountered. • Prior to slab pours to ensure proper subgrade compaction and moisture barriers. Please schedule an inspection with the geotechnical consultant prior to the pouring of ALL interior and exterior slabs. LIMITATIONS The geotechnical services described herein have been conducted in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the geotechnical engineering profession practicing contemporaneously under similar conditions in the subject locality. Under no circumstance is any warranty, expressed or implied, made in connection with the providing of services described herein. Data, interpretations, and recommendations presented herein are based solely on information available to this Proposed Remodel - I larrison Residence 2034 E. Oceanfront, Newport 13each, CA -Soils Report' Project No. PH275. I Dcc~mb~r 23, 2020 15 PA2021-006 office at the time work was performed EGA Consultants will not be responsible for other parties' interpretations or use of the information developed in this report. The interpolated subsurface conditions should be checked in the field during construction by a representative of EGA Consultants. We recommend that all foundation excavations and grading operations be observed by a representative of this firm to ensure that construction is performed in accordance with the specifications outlined in this report. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for the safety of others. The contractor should notify the owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. Proposed Remodel -Harrison Residence 2034 E. Oceanfront, Newport Beach, CA -Soils Report Project No PH275.1 December 23, 2020 16 PA2021-006 REFERENCES 1. "USGS Topographic Map, 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, Newport Beach, California Quadrangle," dated September 7, 2018. 2. "Geologic Map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30' X 60' Quadrangles, California," Version 1.0, compiled by Douglas M. Morton and Fred K Miller, dated 2006 3. "Geologic Map of California, Santa Ana Sheet," Compilation by Thomas H. Rogers, 1965, fifth printing 1985. 4. "Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes in California," by Roger W. Reensfelder, dated 1974. 5. "Earthquake Hazards Associated with Faults in the Greater Los Angeles Metropolitan Area, Los Angeles County, California, Including Faults in the Santa Monica-Raymond, Verdugo-Eagle Rock, and Benedict Canyon Fault Zones, DMG Open-file Report 79-16," published by the California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, dated 1979. 6. "Maps of Known Active Fault Near-Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada," prepared by California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology, published by International Conference of Building Officials, dated February, 1998. 7. "Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction," by American Concrete Institute, AC I 302.1 R- 04, dated 2004. 8. "California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2," by California Building Standards Commission, 2019. 9. "Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Newport Beach 7.5-Minute Quadrangles, Orange County, California," by the California Department of Conservation, 1997. 10. "International Building Code, 2015," by the International Code Council, dated June 5, 2014. Proposed Remodel • Harrison Residence 2034 I::. Oceanfront, Newport Beach, CA • Soils Report Project No. PH275. I December 23, 2020 17 PA2021-006 I I BALBOA ;4VE PARK AVE Source: Corona delMar USGS US Topo 7.5-minute map for Newport Beach OE S, CA, dated September 7, 2018. EGA SITE LOCATION MAP Project No: PH275.1 Consultants 2034 E. OCEANFRONT engineering geotechnical applications NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA Date: DEC 2020 Figure No: 1 PA2021-006 - w u z w 0 vi w a::: I-z w u <( 0 <( (!) z j::: Vl x w - Reference: o I 00 _j 0.: I CPT-1 -0- E. OCEANFRONT 40' ~ B-1 - EXISTING RESIDENTIAL FOOTPRINT _J- o.: w u z w 0 vi w a::: I-z w u lo <( 0 00 I <( (!) z j::: Vl x w .___ \ w LEGEND -$-GEOTECHNICAL BORING BY EGA CONSULTANTS -0 CONE PENETRATION TEST PUBLIC BEACH BY KEHOE TESTING AND ENGINEERING "Site Plan, 2034 Ocean Front E, Newport Beach, CA 92661," by Kemmer Design Architecture, Inc., dated December 7, 2020. EGA Consultants engineering gcorcchnical applications PLOT PLAN 2034 E. OCEANFRONT NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA Project No: Date: Figure No: PH275.1 DEC 2020 2 PA2021-006 l\::·=d :·:/:::::1 Eolian deposits (late Holocene)-Active or recently active _:,:-:._.:._.,,t =:-.'·:. sand dune deposits; unconsolidated. f,.\drii .... •j Marine deposits (late Holocene)-Activeor recentlyacti~ [·, ':-.. ·. '·: beach deposits; sand, unconsolidated. l._{_,_:'_-::_q~~>_. , Estuarine deposits (late Holocene)-Sand, silt, and clay; ~--'--'-'---'-' unconsolidated, containsvariableamountsoforganic matter. _Qo_p_4-, Old paralic deposits, Unit 4 (late to middle Pleistocene)- .___ __ _,_ Silt, sand and cobbles resting on34-37 m Stuart Mesa terrace. Age about 200,000-300,000 years. ~ I Old paralic deposits, Unit 3 (late to middle Pleistocene)- ~---'· Silt, sand and cobbles resting on 45-46 m Guy Fie ming terrace. Age about 320,000-340,000 years. ~--~ aorrt. I Old paralic deposits, Unit 2(1ate to middle Pleistocene)- '------" Silt, sand and cobbles resting on 55 m Parry Grove terrace. Age a bout 413,000years. Source: ~ I Old paralic deposits, Unit 1 (late to middle '----~ Pleistocene)-Silt, sand and cobbles resting on 61-63 m Golf Course terrace. Age about 450,000 years. Qop3_6 I Old paralic deposits, Units 3-6, uncivided (late to middle '----~-Pleistocene)-Silt, sand and cobbles on 45-55 m terraces. Qopf Old paralic deposits (late to middle Pleistocene) overlain by alluvial fan deposits-Old paralic deposits capped by sandy alluvial-fan deposits . Tes ~ Capistrano Formation (early Pliocene and Miocene)- ...._......_ ___ _.] Marine sandstone. Siltstone facies-Siltstoneand Tm mudstone; white to pa le gray, massive to crudely bedded, friable. Monterey Fonnation (Miocene>-Ma ri ne si It stone and sandstone; siliceous and diatomaceous. Morton, D.M., and Miller, F.K. Preliminary Geologic map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30'x 60' quadrangles, California. U.S. Geological Survey. Published 2006. 1:100,000scale. EGA Consultants engineering geotechnical applications GEOLOGIC MAP 2034 E. OCEANFRONT NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA Project No: PH275.1 Date: DEC 2020 Figure No: 3 PA2021-006 u s H A R B 0 R s I I • -■ ■ Balboa Pier, Newport Beach, CA -Nov 2020 Date High Low (. AM ft PM ft AM ft PM ft Rise Set Moon Sun 8:35 5.6 9:45 3.9 2:33 1.7 3:38 0.1 6:11 5:01 0 Mon 8:59 5.6 10:28 3.6 2:54 2.0 4:13 0.2 6:12 5:00 Tue 9:25 5.5 11:22 3.3 3:15 2.3 4:54 0.3 6:13 4:59 0 - Wed 9:54 5.3 3:35 2.6 5:42 0.4 6:14 4:59 0 Thu 12:40 3.1 10:29A 5.1 3:53 2.9 6:43 0.5 6:15 4:58 Fri 11:18 4.8 7:56 0.6 6:16 4:57 0 Sat 12:37 4.5 9:10 0.5 6:17 4:56 Sun 4:55 3.8 2:21 4.3 9:14 3.3 10:09 0.4 6:17 4:55 0 Mon 5:15 4.2 3:50 4.4 10:37 2.7 10:57 0.3 6:18 4:55 Tue 5:38 4-7 5:00 4.6 11:32 1.9 11:38 0.3 6:19 4:54 Wed 6:04 5.2 6:00 4.7 : 12:20 1.1 6:20 4:53 Thu 6:33 5.7 6:55 4.8 12:16 0.3 1:05 0.3 6:21 4:53 Fri 7:05 6.2 7:48 4.7 12:53 0.5 1:51 -0.4 6:22 4:52 Sat 7:39 6.6 8:41 4.6 1:30 0.8 2:37 -0.9 6:23 4:51 Sun 8:16 6.8 9:35 4.3 2:07 1.2 3:24 -1 .2 6:24 4 :51 • Mon 8:54 6.8 10:33 4.0 2:46 1.6 4:14 -1 .2 6:25 4 :50 Tue 9:36 6.5 11:39 3.8 3:27 2.0 5:07 -1 .0 6:26 4:50 • Wed 10:21 6.0 4:12 2.4 6:06 -0.7 6:27 4:49 Thu 12:57 3.6 11:14A 5.4 5:08 2.8 7:11 -0.3 6:28 4:49 I) Fri 2:27 3.7 12:20 4.8 6:33 3.1 8:20 0.1 6:29 4 :48 Sat 3:44 4.0 1:46 4.3 8:34 3.1 9:27 0.3 6:30 4:48 Sun 4 :38 4.2 3:19 4.0 10:17 2.7 10:24 0.5 6:30 4:47 Mon 5:16 4.5 4:36 3.9 11:24 2.2 11:09 0.7 6:31 4:47 Tue 5:46 4.8 5:38 3.9 12:11P 1.6 11:46 1.0 6:32 4:47 Wed 6:10 5.0 6:28 3.9 • 12:49 1.1 6:33 4:46 Thu 6:33 5.3 7:12 3.8 12:17 1.2 1:22 0.7 6:34 4:46 0 Fri 6:54 5.5 7:51 3.8 12:43 1.4 1:53 0.3 6:35 4:46 Sat 7:16 5.6 8:30 3.7 1:09 1.7 2:24 0.0 6:36 4:46 0 Sun 7:40 5.8 9:08 3.7 1:34 1.9 2:55 -0.2 6:37 4:46 Mon 8:06 5.8 9:49 3.6 1:59 2.0 3:29 -0.3 6:38 4:45 0 EGA TIDAL CHART Project No: PH275.1 Consultants 2034 E. OCEANFRONT Date: DEC 2020 engineering geotechnical applications NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA Figure No: 4 PA2021-006 APPENDIX A Geologic Logs PA2021-006 LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING Sheet 1 of 1 Job Number: PH275.1 Boring No: B-1 Project: 2034 E. Oceanfront, Newport Beach, CA Boring Location: See Figure 2 Harrison Residence Remodel Date Started: 11/5/2020 Rig: Mob. 4" augers Date Completed: 11/5/2020 Grnd Elev. +/-12 ft. NAVD88 Sample ,:!! 'tl Direct Type 0 X a. Shear Q) "E° 'tl <ll -~ (/) ■ThinWall [:8:12.S"Ring a. ,:, I-<ll <ll .2l ;i, E "' (/) LL a. ,:, Tube Sample C C 'iii w ~ <ll 0 ·;;; C <ll I-.!: e (.) 0 0 0 a. -.>C. C ·;;; -e-Cl:'. .c :, IZ] Bulk [D Standard Split static Water <ll a. ·o ui :i ~ ~ 0 C E l) w <ll (/) '5 en Sample Spoon Sample Table :, ra :, I 0 ui c':' a. E I-C 0 X 0 :J ·o w ·x ~ <ll CC:.nll ,~,.r ,rrn• 1·1nN ~ I FILL: Light brown, poorly graded fine sand with 1 SP shell fragments, trace rootlets and trace Opt.% X qravel loose to medium dense, drv. 4.7 100.4 103.0 31.0 60 9.5% At 2 ft.: Becomes tan brown, fine sand with shells Sulf SP CZ fragments, damp, cohesionless, medium dense. 5.4 2Bppm 5 -At 4 ft.: Dry to damp, medium dense. SP lZ At 6 ft.: Fine sand, micaceous, damp, medium 5.1 tz dense to dense. SP At 8 ft.: Poorly sorted sand, fine grained, moist, 4.9 medium dense becoming dense. 10 -~ tz At 10 ft.: Very moist to saturated, dense. 4.4 At 11.5 ft.: Groundwater encountered. 7 At 12 ft.: Saturated, dense. 28.2 Total Depth: 12.0 ft. 15 -Groundwater at 11 ft. No Caving Backfilled and Compacted 11/5/2020 20 - 25 - ;,. l,Ji' I .-'')tj .; 30 - 35 - 40 I EGA Consultants II ·;,;· I PA2021-006 Kt'!V Project: EGA Consultants, LLC Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 rich@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Location: 2036 E. Ocean Blvd Newport Beach, CA Cone resistance qt Sleeve friction 0 0 2 2 4 4 6 6 8 8 10 10 12 12 14 14 16 16 18 18 20 20 -.... '' ~ 22 J.J J.J .... .... ._, 24 '-"' 24 fj ..r: J.J Cl. 26 Cl. 26 Q) Q) 0 28 0 28 30 30 32 32 34 34 36 36 38 38 40 40 42 42 44 44 46 46 48 48 50 so 0 100 200 300 400 0 0.5 l 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Tip resistance (tsf) Frie tion (tsf) 0 Pore pressure u 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 ~ 22 d: '-"' 24 ..r: J.J Cl. 26 (I/ 0 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 so 4 -·s 0 10 15 20 Pressure (psi) CPeT-IT v.2.0.1.55 -CPTIJ dat.a presentation & interpretation software -Report created on: 10/9/2017, 12:16:12 PM Project file: C: \EGANewportBch 10-17\Site 1 \Plot Data \Plots. cpt Friction ratio 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 ~ 22 d: '-"' 24 ..r: J.J Cl. 26 Q) 0 28, 30, 32, 34-36, 38, 40, 42, 44, 46, 48, SO-I s 6 0 i 2 3 4 1 8 Rf(%) ..-._ J.J --..r: J.J Cl. Q) 0 CPT-1 Tot.al depth: 50.53 ft, Date: 10/6/2017 Cone Type: Vertek Soil Behaviour Type o,,--=-=---~S~ilty_s_~~&~s~a~nd~y~si~II' 2 4 10 u 14 ffi w w n M ~ ~ ~ ~ " m ~ 40 ~ 44 ~ • w, 0 Saoo & silty sand Sard Sand Sand & silty san:l Sand Sand & silty sand Sand Sand Sand & silty sand Sand Sard & silty sand <i 6 10 12 1◄ 16 1·e SBT (Robertson, 2010) 0 PA2021-006 Depth (ft) qc (tsf) ts (tsf) SBTn Ksbt (ft/s) SPT N60 {blows/ft) 1 72.58 0.21 6 2.34E-03 12 2 61.93 0.31 6 5.14E-04 12 3 76.65 0.31 6 7.41E-04 14 4 76.44 0.31 6 5.71E-04 15 5 59.63 0.31 6 1.90E-04 13 6 140.56 0.52 6 1.68E-03 25 7 256.37 0.94 7 5.45E-03 40 8 288.32 1.36 7 3.95E-03 46 9 336.46 1.98 7 3.08E-03 56 10 349.41 2.09 7 2.96E-03 58 11 311.4 1.88 6 2.16E-03 53 12 264.83 1.57 6 1.51E-03 47 13 262.53 1.15 6 2.49E-03 44 14 250.52 1.25 6 1.62E-03 44 15 316.41 1.15 7 4.78E-03 so 16 334.38 1.36 7 4.13E-03 54 17 320.38 1.04 7 5.36E-03 50 18 270.88 0.94 7 2.99E-03 45 19 266.6 0.84 7 3.24E-03 44 20 276.31 0.63 7 5.64E-03 43 21 263.16 0.63 7 4.35E-03 42 22 276.52 0.63 7 5.l0E-03 44 23 289.99 0.94 7 3.08E-03 48 24 279.45 1.78 6 7.l0E-04 53 25 258.77 1.78 6 4.75E-04 51 2034 E. Oceanfront Newport Beach, CA EGA Consultants, Inc. Project No.: PH275.1 Constrained Dr(%) Friction Es (tsf) Mod. (tsf) angle (0) 360.04 76 43 287.27 403.57 68 42 322 467.38 68 42 372.91 488.24 65 41 389.56 463.93 56 40 370.16 739.13 77 43 589.73 1090.17 98 45 869.81 1299.26 100 46 1036.65 1586.74 100 46 1266.01 1658.66 100 46 1323.4 1564.55 100 46 1248.31 1419.03 92 45 1132.2 1284.08 89 44 1024.53 1324.32 86 44 1056.63 1376.06 95 45 1097.92 1492.74 96 45 1191.01 1364.27 93 45 1088.51 1280.74 85 44 1021.87 1242.15 83 44 991.08 1164.47 84 44 929.1 1161.84 81 44 927 1186.22 82 44 946.45 1362.59 83 44 1087.17 1712.21 80 43 1366.13 1703.84 76 43 1359.45 CPT-1 advanced to 50.53 feet on October 6, 2017 by Kehoe Testing and Engineering PA2021-006 Depth (ft) qc (tsf) fs (tsf) SBTn Ksbt (ft/s) SPT N60 (blows/ft) 26 274.64 1.98 6 4.63E-04 54 27 289.58 1.57 6 9.27E-04 53 28 246.55 1.46 6 4.86E-04 48 29 287.8 1.98 6 4.91E·04 56 30 267.12 1.78 6 4.21E-04 53 31 297.51 1.98 6 5.19E-04 58 32 318.5 2.4 6 4.42E-04 63 33 306.28 2.19 6 4.31E-04 61 34 270.68 2.09 6 2.55E-04 56 35 257.73 2.09 6 1.92E-04 55 36 232.87 2.3 6 9.llE-05 53 37 227.13 2.09 6 9.48E-05 52 38 225.88 1.98 6 9.80E-05 51 39 242.38 2.51 6 7.74E-05 56 40 226.19 2.19 6 7.11E-05 53 41 166.35 1.98 6 1.88E·05 44 42 189.22 1.88 6 3.75E-05 47 43 183.27 1.88 6 3.03E·05 46 44 246.55 2.09 6 9.84E-05 56 45 279.34 2.4 6 l.27E-04 62 46 222.53 2.51 6 3.55E-05 56 47 287.7 2.61 6 1.lOE-04 65 48 265.98 2.51 6 7.77E-05 62 49 260.02 2.51 6 6.61E·05 61 50 243.42 0.52 6 8.76E-04 45 2 2034 E. Oceanfront Newport Beach, CA EGA Consultants, Inc. Project No.: PH275.1 Constrained Dr(%) Friction Es (tsf) Mod. (tsf) anale (0 ) 1816.91 77 43 1449.66 1689.74 79 43 1348.2 1615.1 71 42 1288.65 1882.98 76 43 1502.38 1796.2 73 43 1433.14 1927.3 76 43 1537.74 2123.71 78 43 1694.45 2050.99 76 43 1636.42 1990.38 70 42 1588.07 1993.62 67 42 1590.65 2060.08 62 41 1643.68 1993.76 61 41 1590.76 1970.18 60 41 1571.95 2207.27 61 41 1761.12 2089.92 58 40 1667.49 1947.5 48 39 1553.86 1957.35 51 39 1561.72 1968.49 50 39 1570.6 2147.76 59 41 1713.64 2327.36 63 41 1856.94 2327.5 53 40 1857.05 2458.99 62 41 1961.96 2417.51 59 40 1928.86 2432.86 57 40 1941.11 1425.15 59 41 1137.09 CPT-1 advanced to 50.53 feet on October 6, 2017 by Kehoe Testing and Engineering PA2021-006 APPENDIX B Laboratory Results PA2021-006 ~ G3 So ilWorks GEOLOGY· GEOTECH ·GROUNDWATER EGA Consultants 375-C Monte Vista Avenue Costa Mesa, California 92627 Attention: Subject: Mr. David Worthington, C.E.G. Laboratory Test Results 2034 East Oceanfront Newport Beach, California Dear Mr. Worthington: December 1, 2020 Project No. 114-650-1 O G3SoiIWorks, Inc. performed the requested laboratory tests on the soil specimens delivered to our office for the subject project. The results of these tests are included as an attachment to this report. We appreciate the opportunity of providing our services to you on this project. Should you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, G3Soi1Works, Inc. By: __.,. __.. iel J. Niorikawa, P Director of Engineering Attachment: Laboratory Test Results 350 Fischer Ave. Front • Costa Mesa, CA 92626 • P: 714 668 5600 • www.G35oi1Works.com PA2021-006 EGA Consultants Laboratory Test Results 2034 East Oceanfront Newport Beach, California LABORATORY TEST RESULTS December 1 , 2020 Project No. 114-650-10 Page 2 of 3 Summarized below are the results of requested laboratory testing on samples submitted to our office. Dry Density and Moisture Content Tabulated below are the requested results of field dry density and moisture contents of undisturbed soils samples retained in 2.42-inch inside diameter by 1-inch height rings. Moisture only results were obtained from small bulk samples. Sample Dry Density Moisture Content Identification (pcf) (%) B-1 @ 2.5' 100.4 4.7 B-1 @4.0' * 5.4 B-1 @ 6.0' * 5.1 B-1 @ 8.0' * 4.9 B-1 @ 10.0' * 4.4 B-1 @ 12.0' * 28.2 Notes: (*) Denotes small bulk sample for moisture content testing only. Soil Classification Requested soil samples were classified using ASTM D2487 as a guideline and are based on visual and textural methods only. These classifications are shown below: Sample Identification Soil Description Group Symbol B-1 @ 0-3' Poorly graded sand with shells and SP gravel -pale brown B-1@ 6' Poorly graded sand -pale brown SP 350 Fischer Ave. Front • Costa Mesa, CA 92626 • P: 714 668 5600 • www.G3Soi1Works.com PA2021-006 EGA Consultants Laboratory Test Results 2034 East Oceanfront Newport Beach, California Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content December 1, 2020 Project No. 114-650-10 Page 3 of 3 Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content test was performed on the submitted bulk soil samples in accordance with ASTM D 1557. The results are shown below: Sample Identification Maximum Dry Density Optimum Moisture (pcf) Content(%) B-1 @ 0-3' 103 9.5 Sulfate Content A selected bulk sample was tested for soluble sulfate content in accordance with Hach procedure. The test result is shown below: Sample Identification Water Soluble Sulfate in Soil Sulfate Exposure (PPM) (ACI 318-08, Table 4.2.1) B-1 @ 0-3' 28 so Direct Shear The results of direct shear testing (ASTM D3080) are plotted on Figure S-1 . Soil specimens were soaked in a confined state and sheared under varied loads ranging from 1.0 ksf to 4.0 ksf with a direct shear machine set at a controlled rate of strain of 0.01 inch per minute. 350 Fischer Ave. Front • Costa Mesa. CA 92626 • P: 714 668 5600 • www.G3Soi1Works.com PA2021-006 PA2021-006 APPENDIX C USGS Design Maps Detailed Report PA2021-006 l\TC Hazards by Location Search Information Address: Coordinates: Elevation: Timestamp: 2034 E Oceanfront, Newport Beach, CA 92661, USA 33.5959571, -117.8856498 21 ft 2020-12-03T15:26:45.827Z Seismic V ijj ijlj long Beacho Anaheim 21 ft Catalina Island Essential rish Habitat... .e Hazard Type: Reference Document: ASCE7-16 Go gle Risk Category: Site Class: II D-default Basic Parameters Name Value Ss 1.374 S1 0.487 SMS 1.649 SM1 * null Sos 1.099 So1 * null * See Section 11.4.8 Description MCER ground motion (period=0.2s} MCER ground motion (period=1.0s) Site-modified spectral acceleration value Site-modified spectral acceleration value Numeric seismic design value at 0.2s SA Numeric seismic design value at 1.0s SA •Additional Information Name Value Description soc * null Seismic design category Fa 1.2 Site amplification factor at 0.2s Fv * null Site amplification factor at 1.0s CRs 0.907 Coefficient of risk (0.2s} CR1 0.92 Coefficient of risk (1.0s} PGA 0.602 MCEG peak ground acceleration FPGA 1.2 Site amplification factor at PGA PGAM 0.722 Site modified peak ground acceleration ~- Riverside 0 "\ Temecula 0 w v,sta Cle Natior Map data ©2020 Google, INEGI PA2021-006 TL 8 SsRT 1.374 SsUH 1.516 SsD 2.624 S1RT 0.487 S1UH 0.53 S1D 0.819 PGAd 1.056 * See Section 11.4.8 Long-period transition period (s) Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion (0.2s) Factored uniform-hazard spectral acceleration (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) Factored deterministic acceleration value (0.2s) Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion (1.0s) Factored uniform-hazard spectral acceleration (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) Factored deterministic acceleration value (1.0s) Factored deterministic acceleration value (PGA) The results indicated here DO NOT reflect any state or local amendments to the values or any delineation lines made during the building code adoption process. Users should confirm any output obtained from this tool with the local Authority Having Jurisdiction before proceeding with design. Disclaimer Hazard loads are provided by the U.S. Geological Survey Seismic Design Web Services. While the information presented on this website is believed to be correct, ATC and its sponsors and contributors assume no responsibility or liability for its accuracy. The material presented in the report should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without competent examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability and applicability by engineers or other licensed professionals. ATC does not intend that the use of this information replace the sound judgment of such competent professionals, having experience and knowledge in the field of practice, nor to substitute for the standard of care required of such professionals in interpreting and applying the results of the report provided by this website. Users of the information from this website assume all liability arising from such use. Use of the output of this website does not imply approval by the governing building code bodies responsible for building code approval and interpretation for the building site described by latitude/longitude location in the report. PA2021-006 APPENDIX E LIQUEFACTION ANALYSES/SETTLEMENT COMPUTATIONS PA2021-006 2034 E. Oceanfront, Newport Beach, CA PH275.1 December 2020 lnl!ut Parameters: Peak Ground Acceleration: 0.722 Earthquake Magnitude: 7.2 Water Table Depth (m): 0.66 Average y above water table (kN/mA3): 16 Average y below water table (kN/mA3): 18 Borehole diameter (mm): 34.925 Requires correction for Sample Liners (YES/NO): NO Sample Depth Measured (N) Soil Type Flag "Clay" Fines Energy CE CB CR cs N60 oVC o-VC' CN Number (m) (USCS) "Unsaturated" Content Ratio "Unreliable" (%) (ER)% 1 0.30 12 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.75 1 9.75 4.88 · 4.88 1.70 2 0.61 12 SM 13 65 1.08 1 0.75 1 9.75 9.75· 9.75 1.70 3 0.91 14 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.75 1 11.38 15.14 12.64 1.70 4 1.22 15 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.75 1 12.19 20.63 15.14 1.70 5 1.52 13 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.8 1 11.27 26.11 17.64 1.70 6 1.83 25 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.8 1 21.67 31.60 20.13 1.70 7 2.13 40 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.8 1 34.67 37.08 22.63 1.70 8 2.44 46 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.8 1 39.87 42.~7 25.13 1.70 9 2.74 56 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.85 1 51.57 48.06 27.62 1.70 10 3.05 58 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.85 1 53.41 53.54 30.12 1.70 11 3.35 53 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.85 1 48.80 59.03 32.61 1.70 12 3.66 47 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.85 1 43.28 64.52 35.11 1.70 13 3.96 44 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.85 1 40.52 70.00 37.61 1.64 14 4.27 44 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.85 1 40.52 75.49 40.10 1.59 15 4.57 SO SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 51.46 80.98 42.60 1.54 16 4.88 54 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 55.58 86.46 45.10 1.50 17 5.18 50 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 51.46 91.95 47.59 1.46 18 5.49 45 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 46.31 97.44 50.09 1.42 19 5.79 44 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 45.28 102.92 52.58 1.39 20 6.10 43 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 44.25 108.41 55.08 1.36 21 6.40 42 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 43.23 113.89 57.58 1.33 22 6.71 44 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 45.28 119.38 60.07 1.30 23 7.01 48 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 49.40 124.87 62.57 1.27 24 7.32 53 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 54.55 130.35 65.07 1.25 25 7.62 51 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 1 52.49 135.84 67.56 1.22 engineering geotech11ical applications PLATE A consultants CPT-1 performed to 50.53 ft. on 10/6/2017 Page 1 PA2021-006 26 7.92 54 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 27 8.23 53 SP 3 65 1.08 1 0.95 28 8.53 48 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 29 8.84 56 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 30 9.14 53 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 31 9.45 58 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 32 9.75 63 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 33 10.06 61 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 34 10.36 56 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 35 10.67 55 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 36 10.97 53 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 37 11.28 52 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 38 11.58 51 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 39 11.89 56 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 40 12.19 53 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 41 12.50 44 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 42 12.80 47 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 43 13.11 46 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 44 13.41 56 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 45 13.72 62 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 46 14.02 56 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 47 14.33 65 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 48 14.63 62 SP 3 65 l.08 1 1 49 14.94 61 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 50 15.24 45 SP 3 65 1.08 1 1 Auger Diameter: 1.375 inches Hammer Weight: n.a. Drop: continuous push CPT-1 advanced to 50.53 ft by Kehoe Testing and Engineering on October 6, 2020 (CPT Data Logs attached herein) References: Idriss, l.M. and Boulanger, RW. Soil Lique{aaion During Earthquakes. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. 8 September 2008. Liu, C. and Evett, J.B. Soils and Foundations, 8th edition. 4 August 2013. 2034 E. Oceanfront, Newport Beach, CA PH275.1 December 2020 1 55.58 141.33 70.06 1.20 1 54.55 146.81 72.56 1.18 1 52.00 152.30 75.05 1.16 1 60.67 157.79 77.55 1.14 1 57.42 163.27 80.04 1.13 1 62.83 168.76 82.54 1.11 1 68.25 174.24 85.04 1.09 1 66.08 179.73 87.53 1.08 1 60.67 185.22 90.03 1.06 1 59.58 190.70 92.53 1.05 1 57.42 196.19 95.02 1.03 1 56.33 201.68 97.52 1.02 1 55.25 207.16 100.01 1.01 1 60.67 212.65 102.51 0.99 1 57.42 218.14 105.01 0.98 1 47.67 223.62 107.50 0.97 1 50.92 229.11 110.00 0.96 1 49.83 234.60 112.50 0.95 1 60.67 240.08 114.99 0.94 1 67.17 245.57 11 7.49 0.93 1 60.67 251.05 119.98 0.92 1 70.42 256.54 122.48 0.91 1 67.17 262.03 124.98 0.90 l 66.08 267.51 127.47 0.89 1 48.75 273.00 129.97 0.88 Martin, G.R and l.ew, M. Recommendations for Implementation o/DMG Special Publication 117. University of Southern California Earthquake Center. March 1999. California Department of Conservation, CGS. Special Publication 117A: Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic 1/ozards in California. Rev 11 Sept. 2008. "CPT and SPT Based Liquefaction Triggering Procedures-by R.W. Boulanger and l.M. ldriss, dated April 2014. "Evaluation of Settlements in Sand Deposits Following Liquefaction During Earthquakes," by Ishihara and Yoshimine, dated J9qz_ consultants engineering geotechnica/ applications PLATE A CPT-1 performed to 50.53 ft. on 10/6/2017 Page 2 PA2021-006 (N1)60 llN for (N1)60-CS Stress CSR MSF for sand Fines reduction Content coeff, rd 16.58 2.51 19.08 1.00 0.47 1.08 16.58 2.51 19.08 1.00 0.47 1.08 19.34 0.00 19.34 1.00 0.56 1.08 20.72 0.00 20.72 1.00 0.64 1.08 19.15 0.00 19.15 0.99 0.69 1.08 36.83 0.00 36.83 0.99 0.73 1.08 58.93 0.00 58.93 0.99 0.76 1.08 67.77 0.00 67.77 0.90 0.78 1.08 87.66 0.00 87.66 0.98 0.80 1.08 90.79 0.00 90.79 0.98 0.81 1.08 82.97 0.00 82.97 0.97 0.83 1.08 73.52 0.00 73.52 0.97 0.84 1.08 66.51 0.00 66.51 0.97 0.84 1.08 64.40 0.00 64.40 0.96 0.85 1.08 79.36 0.00 79.36 0.96 0.85 1.08 83.30 0.00 83.30 0.95 0.86 1.08 75.08 0.00 75.08 0.95 0.86 1.08 65.87 0.00 65.87 0.95 0.86 1.08 62.86 0.00 62.86 0.94 0.86 1.08 60.02 0.00 60.02 0.94 0.87 1.08 57.34 0.00 57.34 0.93 0.87 1.08 58.81 0.00 58.81 0.93 0.87 1.08 62.86 0.00 62.86 0.92 0.86 1.08 68.07 0.00 68.07 0.92 0.86 1.08 64.28 0.00 64.28 0.91 0.86 1.08 engineering geotechnical applications consultants Kcr for sand CRR for M=7.5 CRR & ,:NC'= 1 atm 1.10 0.20 1.10 0.20 1.10 0.20 1.10 0.21 1.10 0.20 1.10 1.68 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 1.10 2.00 0.23 0.23 0.24 0.26 0.23 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2034 E. Oceanfront, Newport Beach, CA PH275.1 December 2020 Factor of Limiting shear Safety strain ylim 0.49 0.18 0.49 0.18 0.42 0.17 0.40 0.15 0.34 0.17 2.00 0.02 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 PLATE A CPT-1 performed to 50.53 ft. on 10/6/2017 Page 3 PA2021-006 66.84 0.00 66.84 0.91 0.86 1.08 1.10 64.46 0.00 64.46 0.90 0.86 1.08 1.10 60.42 0.00 60.42 0.90 0.86 1.08 1.09 69.35 0.00 69.35 0.89 0.85 1.08 1.08 64.60 0.00 64.60 0.89 0.85 1.08 1.07 69.62 0.00 69.62 0.88 0.85 1.08 1.06 74.50 0.00 74.50 0.88 0.85 1.08 1.05 71.10 0.00 71.10 0.87 0.84 1.08 1.04 64.36 0.00 64.36 0.87 0.84 1.08 1.03 62.35 0.00 62.35 0.86 0.84 1.08 1.03 59.29 0.00 59.29 0.86 0.83 1.08 1.02 57.42 0.00 57.42 0.85 0.83 1.08 1.01 55.61 0.00 55.61 0.85 0.83 1.08 1.00 60.31 0.00 60.31 0.84 0.82 1.08 1.00 56.40 0.00 56.40 0.84 0.82 1.08 0.99 46.28 0.00 46.28 0.83 0.81 1.08 0.98 48.87 0.00 48.87 0.83 0.81 1.08 0.97 47.29 0.00 47.29 0.82 0.81 1.08 0.97 56.95 0.00 56.95 0.82 0.80 1.08 0.96 62.38 0.00 62.38 0.01 0.80 1.08 0.96 55.75 0.00 55.75 0.81 0.79 1.08 0.95 64.05 0.00 64.05 0.80 0.79 1.08 0.94 60.48 0.00 60.48 0.80 0.78 1.08 0.94 58.92 0.00 58.92 0.79 0.78 1.08 0.93 43.04 0.00 43.04 0.79 0.78 1.08 0.93 References: Idriss, I.M. and Boulanger, R.W. Soil liquefaction During Earthquakes. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. B September 2008. Liu, C. and Evett, j.B. Soils and Foundations, 8th Edition. 4 August 2013. 2034 E. Oceanfront, Newport Beach, CA PH275. l December 2020 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 Martin, G.R. and Lew, M. Retommendotionsfor Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117. University of Southern California Earthquake Center. March 1999. California Department of Conservation, CGS. Special Publication 117A: Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards ill California. Rev 11 SepL 2008. "CPT and SPT Based Liquefaction Triggering Procedures· by R.W. Boulanger and I.M. Idriss, dated April 2014. "Evaluation of Settlements in Sand Deposits Following Liquefaction During Earthquakes." by Ishihara and Yoshi mine, dated 1992. consultants engineering geotechnica/ applications PLATE A CPT-1 performed to 50.53 ft. on 10/6/2017 Page 4 PA2021-006 Parameter Fa Maximum llHi (m) llLD!i (m) shear strain ymax 0.57 0.18 0.30 0.05 0.57 · 0.18 0.30 0.05 0.55. 0.17 0.30 0.05 0.48 · 0.15 0.30 0.04 0.56 0.17 0.30 0.05 -0.57 0.00 0.30 0.00 -2.33 0.00 0.30 0.00 3.10 0.00 0.30 0.00 -4.90 0.00 0.30 0.00 -5.20 0.00 0.30 0.00 -4.47 0.00 0.30 0.00 -3.61 0.00 0.30 0.00 -2.99 0.00 0.30 0.00 -2.80 0.00 0.30 0.00 -4.14 0.00 0.30 0.00 -4.50 0.00 0.30 0.00 -3.75 0.00 0.30 0.00 -2.93 0.00 0.30 0.00 -2.67 0.00 0.30 0.00 -2.43 0.00 0.30 0.00 -2.20 0.00 0.30 0.00 -2.32 0.00 0.30 0.00 -2.67 0.00 0.30 0.00 -3.12 0.00 0.30 0.00 -2.79 0.00 0.30 0.00 engineering geotech11ical applications consultants Vertical t.Si (m) t.Si (ft) reconsol. Strain EV 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0,02 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o.oo 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2034 E. Oceanfront, Newport Beach, CA PH275.1 December 2020 t.Si (inches) 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.27 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ~.; o.oo I= 1.41 0.00 n=lO 0.00 PoJ.( Soil Cement (Remedial 0.00 , ... Grading): o.oo I= 0.55 0.00 n=lO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PL.ATE A CPT-1 performed to 50.53 ft. on 10/6/2017 Page 5 PA2021-006 -3.02 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.81 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.46 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.24 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.82 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.26 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.70 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.39 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.80 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.63 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.36 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.20 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.05 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.45 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.12 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.29 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.50 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.37 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.16 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.63 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.06 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.77 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.46 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.33 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.04 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Settlement: I 0.04! References: Idriss, I.M. and Boulanger, R.W. Soil Lique{actio11 During Eonhquakes. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. 8 September 2008. Liu, C. and Evett, J.B. Soils and Foundatio11s, 8th Edition. 4 August 2013. 2034 E. Oceanfront, Newport Beach, CA PH275.1 December 2020 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o.oo 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.121 1.411 Martin, G.R. and Lew, M. Recommendations for Implementation o{DMG Special Publication 117. University of Southern California Earthquake Center. March 1999. California Department of Conseivation, CGS. Spedal Publication 117A, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California. Rev 11 Sept. 2008. "CPT and SPT Based Liquefaction Triggering Procedures" by R.W. Boulanger and I.M. Idriss, dated April 2014. "Evaluation of Settlements in Sand Deposits Following Liquefaction During Earthquakes." by Ishihara and Yoshi mine, dated 1992. consultants engineering geot ec/111 ica I applications PLATE A CPT-1 performed to 50.53 ft. on 10/6/2017 Page 6