Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
X2017-3571 - Soils
X11-017-- 7_70�7t 21-107 2r 2-7-1SR( S/—� x Project Specific 11 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Project Name: Rick Zehner Single -Family Home 2407 BUCKEYE ST. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660; LOT 101 OF TRACT 4893 (MM180123) Prepared for: �� Y i ' Ric >' CFAniG� '.IT._ LC n��D f'l4 RSII' Mr. hard Zehner.; so X25 Spanish's Bay Dr. Newport Beach, CA 92660 (949) 706.2025 " '' Prepared by: RAW CivilDesign_ 6751 Gypsum Creek Dr. Eastvale, CA 92880 (951) 741.1618; department76.rw@gmail.com Initial Preparation Date: January 2, 20178 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 Project Owner's Certification Title Planning Application No. j Not Applicable I Grading Permit No. 2483.2017 ......................................;-------------- ....-...................-------- ...._....._.....i......__....__...._..._..- i Lot 101 of Tract Map ------ ....-.-......... 4893, recorded in j Not Issued Yet Tract/Parcel Map and Lot(s) No. Misc. Maps book 180, Building Permit No. Telephone # page 23 of Orange I understand my responsibility to implement the provisions of this WQMP including the ongoing operation and maintenance of the best management practices (BMPs) described herein. County.._.......-... j_.-..........-......................_..._............_......-...-.-.-.- v""'�- _._.._ ................_-.-.-.-.......-.....-..-. ......-..............._� Address of Project Site and APN -' 2407 Buckeye Street j 440.045.02 This Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) has been prepared for Richard Zehner by RAW Civil Design The WQMP is intended to comply with the requirements of the County of Orange NPDES Storm water Program requiring the preparation of this plan. The undersigned, while it owns the subject property, is responsible for the implementation of the provisions of this plan , including the ongoing operation and maintenance of all best management practices (BMPs), and will ensure that this plan is amended as appropriate to reflect up-to-date conditions on the site consistent with the current Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and the intent of the non -point source NPDES Permit for Waste Discharge Requirements for the County of Orange, Orange County Flood Control District and the incorporated Cities of Orange County within the Santa Ana Region. Once the undersigned transfers its interest in the property, its successors -in -interest shall bear the aforementioned responsibility to implement and amend the WQMP. An appropriate number of approved and signed copies of this document shall be available on the subject site in perpetuity. Owner. Richard Zehner Title Owner Company Not applicable Address 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 Email mrrzehner@aol.com Telephone # (949) 706-2025 I understand my responsibility to implement the provisions of this WQMP including the ongoing operation and maintenance of the best management practices (BMPs) described herein. Owner Signature v""'�- Dateg/�'� Richard Zehner Property Owner's Certification January 2018 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WOMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 Preparer (Engineer): Title Sole Proprietor PE Registration # 64726 Company RAW Civil Design Address 6751 Gypsum Creek Dr., Eastvale CA 92880 Email department76.r @gmail.com Telephone # (951) 741-1618 I hereby certify that this Water Quality Management Plan is in compliance with, and meets the requirements set forth in, Order No. R8-2009-0030/NPDES No. CAS618030, of the Santa Ana Regional Water QualitT CoRnlBoard. Preparer Signature _ - Date ,gP?pPFESsI, Place Stamp # No. 64726 a Here Exp. 6/30/09 ' # FOf CAL* ILL Richard Zehner Property Owner's Certification January 2018 Contents Section I Section II Section III Section IV Section V Page No. Permit(s) and Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance .......... i Project Description................................................................................. 3 SiteDescription...................................................................................... 8 BestManagement Practices(BMPs)..................................................... 10 Inspection/ Maintenance Responsibility for BMPs................................ 24 Section VI BMP Exhibit (Site Plan)......................................................................... 25 SectionVII Educational Materials........................................................................... 26 Attachments AttachmentA.............................................................................................. WQMP Exhibit AttachmentB.................................................................................. Educational Materials Richard Zehner Property Table of Contents January 2018 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 Section I Permit(s) and Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance Richard Zehner Property Section I January2018 Page 1 Project Infomation Permit/Application No. I ( Grading or Building j (If applicable) ; 2483-2017 ;Permit No. !None issued Yet (If applicable) Address of Project Site (or Tract Map and Lot 1 2407 Buckeye Street Number if no address)1 Newport Beach, CA 92660 and APN Water Quality Conditions of Approval, or Issuance i Water Quality This property resides within a hillside development, and is over 5,000 Conditions of Approval square feet, which is the reason this Priority Project WQMP is being or Issuance applied to prepared this project. _._....... _.........._................................... -..__......... ........ j-....................................._._.. ............... _............................................... ..........................._...-----------------------.-._-...-.__...--......_........:._........_......... Conceptual WQMP Was a Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan No previously approved for this project? ....... ....................................... —._.... _....... L................................................... __.---.____............... ................................................................... _..... __—.--.._...--............... ........................................ Richard Zehner Property Section I January2018 Page 1 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 Watershed -Based Plan Conditions Provide applicable f conditions from watershed - None available based plans including WIHMPs and TMDLS. Richard Zehner Property Section I January 2018 Page 2 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 Section II Project Description IIA Project Description Richard Zehner Property Section II January 2018 Page 3 Description of Proposed Project Development Category E Hillside development greater than 5,000 square feet. Hillside development is (From Model WQMP, i defined as any development which is located in an area with known erosive Table 7.11-2; or -3): i soil conditions or where the natural slope is twenty-five percent or greater. .................................................. Project Area (ft2): 10,823SF :................................................................................. .............................................. Number of Dwelling Units: 1 Units E SIC Code: 6500 ...............................................i.......................................................... ......................................................... Pervious Impervious Project Area .............................................................. ................................. :............................. Area Area Percentage i Percentage (acres or sq ft) (acres or sq ft) ...................................................?................................j........................................................................................... Pre -Project Conditions 4,972 46 5,851 54 ........................................................................................................ ................................. e............................. Post -Project Conditions5,863 54 4,960 46 ................................................... g................................ i.............................:.................................;............................. Drainage i Surface flow to small area catch basins, draining in pipe to the street, Patterns/Connections ultimately discharging into the existing curb & gutter ...................................................a.............................................................................................................................. i Demolish existing wood framed structure (1 -total) and all miscellaneous hardscape and construct one (1) new single -story wood Narrative Project c framed single-family dwelling unit (SFDU). Description: (Use as much space as necessary.) Richard Zehner Property Section II January 2018 Page 3 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 II.2 Potential Stormwater Pollutants Richard Zehner Property Section III January 2018 Page 4 Pollutants of Concern Check One for each: E=Expected to Pollutant be of concern Additional Information and Comments N=Not Expected to be of concern Suspended -Solid/ Sediment I EN I N ❑ Nutrients E ® N ❑ ................. .............................................. .._...... ............................. Heavy Metals .........-- ------ ...._ __�..._._.....__..._.........- EZ N ❑ ......... ..-..................................-------- ---- -...-..-.-.-.-.-.--....-...-.-..-..................-...-......... Pathogens (Bacteria/Virus) E ® N ❑ ............ .......... ........ ................_..._._..._ ..._.........._-....--- ..----------------------- --------- ---..__._...........--..--.-..--- .------------- . Not expected to be in high concentrations is this Pesticides I E ® ' N ❑ would normally be attributed to open space agricultural developments/ establishments --------.................................----.........._...---........__...._.._-----.-.._r....--..............................}..--------------.....L...._...---.............-.-._.--....__--------------------------------___...__.___................._.-_....._....-................... j I Oils and greases will be indirect, as the proposed Oil and Grease E ® N ❑ driveway is not long enough to allow for outside j parking 1..........._....- - -._..........L .............................._ - --- --- ._.... Toxic Organic Compounds j E ❑ N Trash and Debris I i EZ N ❑ Richard Zehner Property Section III January 2018 Page 4 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 II.3 Hydrologic Conditions of Concern Determine if streams located downstream from the project area are potentially susceptible to hydromodification impacts. Refer to Section 2.2.3.1 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for North Orange County or Section 2.2.3.2 for South Orange County. ® No - Show map ❑ Yes - Describe applicable hydrologic conditions of concern below. Refer to Section 2.2.3 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD). Richard Zehner Property Section III January 2018 Page 5 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 II.4 Post Development Drainage Characteristics The drainage for this site will generally remain consistent with the original house construction and original development pattern for this tract, with one exception; Surface drainage will be directed to several small area catch basins that will drain to the front of the property where the "initial runoff flush" will be captured by two (2) perforated trench drains. The trench drains will act as the initial treatment of the first flush of the design storm and then as water increases in volume within the infiltration trench, it will overflow into a pipe that drains to the street. II.5 Property Ownership/ Management The property will be owned and maintained by the current owner, MR. RICHARD ZEHNER Richard Zehner Property Section III January 2018 Page 6 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 Section III Site Description III.1 Physical Setting III.2 Site Characteristics Site Characteristics - —------------------ ----- - -- -------- -- ---- ..__. Precipitation Zone 0.70" Design Capture Storm Depth _...................................._......_...-.-.-.-.-.-.-..-.--.-.-.......---......__ -.,_..._--..a.- ...a-i- .......-----..-.--..e ---.-......-..--......--r._ f 2.5:1 rear yard slope that is part of the HOA maintenance (diff. from Topography top to bottom is approximately 12 -feet). The remain properly is a flat pad that drains towards Buckeye Street 11-11 ............................................_..._L.-.-.-.......-.-..------------._.....-----------...-.-.-.-.-.-..-.-.-..--------.__.........-.-..----- ..-.------ ..--..-..------------ . Drainage Patterns/Connections Surface Drainage to curb and into local storm drain i Richard Zelmer Property Section III January 2018 Page 7 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 ._...-....... .... .............................................. Soil Type, Geology, and ......... -........................................... ..-.-........_..... .........._..............................................................................------ .................. Soil Type C„ Infiltration Properties _.................. ......- Hydrogeologic (Groundwater) ................................................ ...... None found in borings to a depth of ro-feet (historical Conditions i groundwater levels not available) ................._.........._............................ .......................... _1 ........... .................. ..... ............ .........._.......__....... .... -................................................................... I The soils report does not recommend infiltration of surface Geotechnical Conditions (relevant to infiltration) runoff into the surrounding soils, especially within ro-feet of any foundation Off -Site Drainage Surface drainage in streets to local catch basins for discharge into receiving waters '---- ....................._................. --......................... ---.-.-F.-._._................_....._..._.._................................................................................................ -......... _......... _........................... _............................................. All wet/dry utilities were installed as part of the original .Utility and Infrastructure Information development for this area. No new or additional infrastructure is planned III.3 Watershed Description Receiving Waters Upper Newport Bay ............................................... . .. ......................................:.........................................................------------- .................................. ............ 303(d) Listed Impairments Chlordane, Copper, DDT, Indicator Bacteria, Nutrients, & PCB's Applicable TMDLs 1 Metals, Nutrients, Pathogens, Pesticides, Siltation Pollutants of Concern for Suspended Solids, Nutrients, Pathogens, Pesticides, Oils & the Project I Grease, Trash & Debris Environmentally Sensitive 1 Upper Newport Bay is considered an ecological reserve area tt and Special Biological 1 is managed by the State Department of Fish and Game. Significant Areas I However, this project (reconstruction of house) will not have any significant impact on this region Richard Zehner Property Section III January 2018 Page 8 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2401 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 Section IV Best Management Practices (BMPs) IV. i Project Performance Criteria (NOC Permit Area only) Is there an approved WIHMP or equivalent for the project area that includes more stringent LID feasibility criteria or if there are opportunities identified for implementing LID on regional or sub -regional basis? YES ❑ NO If yes, describe WIHMP feasibility criteria or regional/sub-regional LID Not applicable for this project opportunities. If HCOC exists, list applicable hydromodification control performance criteria (Section 7.II-2.4.2.2 in MWQMP) Project Performance Criteria A HCOC does not exist for this site since the post -development flow rates are equal to or less than the pre -development flow rates, and the downstream receiving waters are not potentially susceptible to hydromodification impacts Richard Zehner Property Section IV January 2018 Page 9 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 .........-----......-_............... _............._.......� ........--..................----..:..........----- ------------------------------ ------ - List applicable LID performance Short term (initial flush) infiltration using an infiltration trench criteria (Section ( (perforated pipe in a rock bedding) at the front of the property located at 7.I1-2.4.3 from the back of the existing sidewalk. (Overflow will be directed to the street) MWQMP) ...---_...-.............................. - -- i j....._. List applicable j treatment control BMP performance No on-site treatment control BMP's are required for this project criteria (Section 7.II-3.2.2 from MWQMP) __.... _... i j........................................................ .............---------- ------ ---------.._-..... ............................................. CV= C x d x A x 43,560(sf/ac) x 1/12(in/ft) Calculate LID Where: i design storm CV= Capture Volume, C= runoff coefficient, d= design storm, A= tributary capture volume area for Project. For this project: CV= (0.750.46+0.15) x 0.70" x 0.186ac x 43560 x 1/12 = 234 cubic feet Richard Zehner Property Section IV January 2018 Page 10 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 IV.2. Site Design and Drainage The overall site, being on a smaller lot as part of a residential subdivision constructed in the early 1960's, has restrictions on BMP type, size and placement. With that noted, the layout of the new structure allows for: Minimal direct connected impervious surfaces by leaving the non -structure areas as either landscaping (pervious ground cover) or graded bare earth • Maximizing capture of direct runoff by draining the entire property to a localized infiltration zone at the lowest point of the lot The inclusion of pervious pavers for the front entrance to the new house that will eliminate direct runoff Richard Zehner Property Section IV January 2018 Page 11 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 IV.3 LID BMP Selection and Project Conformance Analysis IV.3.1 Hydrologic Source Controls (HSCs) Name Included? Localized on -lot infiltration Impervious area dispersion (e.g. roof top disconnection) ❑ Street trees (canopy interception) ❑ Residential rain barrels (not actively managed) ❑ Green roofs/Brown roofs ❑ Blue roofs ❑ Impervious area reduction (e.g. permeable pavers, site design) Other: ❑ Other: ❑ Other: ❑ Other: ❑ Other: ❑ Other: ❑ Other: ❑ Other: ❑ Richard Zehner Property Section IV January 2018 Page 12 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 IV.3.2 Infiltration BMPs Name Included? Bioretention without underdrains ❑ Rain gardens ❑ Porous landscaping Infiltration planters ❑ Retention swales ❑ Infiltration trenches Infiltration basins ❑ Drywells ❑ Subsurface infiltration galleries ❑ French drains ❑ Permeable asphalt ❑ Permeable concrete ❑ Permeable concrete pavers Other: ❑ Other: ❑ Richard Zehner Property Section IV January 2018 Page 13 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 IV.3.3 Evapotranspiration, Rainwater Harvesting BMPs If the full Design Storm Capture Volume cannot be met with infiltration BMPs, describe any evapotranspiration and/or rainwater harvesting BMPs included. Name Included? All HSCs; See Section IV.3.1 ❑ Surface -based infiltration BMPs ❑ BiotreatmentBMPS ❑ Above -ground cisterns and basins ❑ Underground detention ❑ Other: ❑ Other: ❑ Other: ❑ Show calculations below to demonstrate if the LID Design Storm Capture Volume can be met with evapotranspiration and/or rainwater harvesting BMPs in combination with infiltration BMPs. If not, document below how much can be met with either infiltration BMPs, evapotranspiration, rainwater harvesting BMPs, or a combination, and document why it is not feasible to meet the full volume with these BMP categories. With limited space on this site, any and all evapotranspiration and/or rain water harvesting were not considered as viable options Richard Zehner Property Section IV January 2018 Page 14 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 IV.3.4 Biotreatment BMPs Name Included? Bioretention with underdrains ❑ Stormwater planter boxes with underdrains ❑ Rain gardens with underdrains ❑ Constructed wetlands ❑ Vegetated swales ❑ Vegetated filter strips - ❑ Proprietary vegetated biotreatment systems ❑ Wet extended detention basin ❑ Dry extended detention basins ❑ Other: ❑ Other: ❑ Show calculations below to demonstrate if the LID Design Storm Capture Volume can be met with infiltration, evapotranspiration, rainwater harvesting and/or biotreatment BMPs. If not, document how much can be met with either infiltration BMPs, evapotranspiration, rainwater harvesting BMPs, or a combination, and document why it is not feasible to meet the full volume with these BMP categories. Similar to SECTION IV -3-3 above, since the site has limited space both at the rear and on the sideyards, any biotreatment BMP's are not an option Richard Zehner Property Section IV January 2018 Page 15 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 IV.3.5 Hydromodification Control BMPs NO HYDROMODIFICATION BMP's ARE PROPOSED FOR THIS SITE Hydromodification Control BMPs IBMP Name BMP Description IV.3.6 Regional/Sub-Regional LID BMPs Regional/Sub-Regional LID BMPs NONE PROVIDED Richard Zehner Property Section IV January 2018 Page 16 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 IV.3.7 Treatment Control BMPs Treatment control BMPs can only be considered if the project conformance analysis indicates that it is not feasible to retain the full design capture volume with LID BMPs. Describe treatment control BMPs including sections for selection, sizing, and infeasibility, as applicable. Treatment Control BMPs BMP Name BMP Description Richard Zehner Property Section IV January2018 Page 17 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 IV.3.8 Non-structural Source Control BMPs Non -Structural Source Control BMPs Check One Identifier Name Not If not applicable, state brief Included Applicable reason N1 Education for Property Owners, ® El and Occupants .................................................................................................................................................................. N2Not ❑ ® Applicable to Residential Activity Restrictions Developements .................................................................................................................................................................. N3 Common Area Landscape ® E]Management .................................................................................................................................................................. N4Not ❑ ® Applicable to Residential BMP Maintenance Developements .................................................................................................................................................................. N5 Title 22 CCR Compliance (How ❑ ® Not Applicable to Residential development will comply) Developements .................................................................................................................................................................. N6 ❑ ® Not Applicable to Residential Local Industrial Permit Compliance Developements .................................................................................................................................................................. N7Not ❑ ® Applicable to Residential Spill Contingency Plan Developements .................................................................................................................................................................. N8 Underground Storage Tank ❑ ® Not Applicable to Residential Compliance Developements .................................................................................................................................................................. N9 Hazardous Materials Disclosure ❑ ® Not Applicable to Residential Compliance Developements .................................................................................................................................................................. N10Not ❑ ® Applicable to Residential Uniform Fire Code Implementation Developements .................................................................................................................................................................. N11 Common Area Litter Control ® ❑ .................................................................................................................................................................. N12 ❑ ® Not Applicable to Residential Employee Training Developements .................................................................................................................................................................. N13 1:1 ® Not Applicable to Residential Housekeeping of Loading Docks Developements .................................................................................................................................................................. N14 E] ® Not Applicable to Residential Common Area Catch Basin Inspection Developements .................................................................................................................................................................. N15 Street Sweeping Private Streets and ❑ ® Not Applicable to Residential Parking Lots Developements N16 Raline Outlets etil Ga so ❑ ...............................pplicable ® ..... ........................... Not A Richard Zehner Property Section IV January 2018 Page 18 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 IV.3.9 Structural Source Control BMPs Fill out structural source control check box forms or provide a brief narrative explaining if structural source controls were not used. Structural Source Control BMPs Check One Identifier Name If not applicable, state brief Not Included Applicable reason Sl Provide storm drain system stenciling ❑ ® Not Applicable to this site and signage Design and construct outdoor material - S2 storage areas to reduce pollution ❑ N Not Applicable to this site introduction Design and construct trash and waste S3 storage areas to reduce pollution ® ❑ introduction Use efficient irrigation systems & 54 landscape design, water conservation, ® ❑ smart controllers, and source control S5 Protect slopes and channels and El® Not Applicable to this site provide energy dissipation Incorporate requirements applicable to individual priority project categories ❑ N Not Applicable to this site (from SDRWQCBNPDES Permit) S6 Dock areas ❑ ® Not Applicable to this site S7 Maintenance bays ❑ N Not Applicable to this site S8 Vehicle wash areas ❑ N Not Applicable to this site S9 Outdoor processing areas ❑ N Not Applicable to this site S10 Equipment wash areas ❑ N Not Applicable to this site Sil Fueling areas ❑ N Not Applicable to this site S12 Hillside landscaping ❑ -® Not Applicable to this site S13 Wash water control for food E]® Not Applicable to this site preparation areas S14 Community car wash racks ❑ N Not Applicable to this site Richard Zehner Property Section IV January 2018 Page 19 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 IV.4 Alternative Compliance Plan (If Applicable) No alternatives are being proposed for this project. IV.4.1 Water Quality Credits Description of Proposed Project Project Types that Qualify for Water Quality Credits (Select all that apply): - - - - ----- ------ p------ -------------- g -----------0 - 8 t- - P ------P 1 ®Redevelopment E --]B- redevelopment, meanie Hi her densi develo went ro ects which projects that reduce the redevelopment, expansion, or reuse of real include two distinct categories (credits can only overall impervious I property which may be complicated by the be taken for one category): those with more footprint of the project presence or potential presence of hazardousthan seven units per acre of development. (lower site. substances, pollutants or contaminants, and I credit allowance); vertical density which have the potential to contribute to I developments, for example, those with a Floor adverse ground or surface WQ if not I to Area Ratio (FAR) of 2 or those having more redeveloped. than 18 units per acre (greater credit allowance) ❑----x--- use t, such as - —-------------------L------------------------�--------------------------= Mixed use development, such as a OT ransit-oriented developments, such as a ❑Redevelopment projects combination of residential, commercial, mixed use residential or commercial area I in an established historic industrial, office, institutional, or other land !designed to maximize access to public district, historic uses which incorporate design principles that j transportation; similar to above criterion, but preservation area, or similar can demonstrate environmental benefits that I where the development center is within one I significant city area would not be realized through single use half mile of a mass transit center (e.g. bus, rail, j including core City Center projects (e.g. reduced vehicle trip traffic with light rail or commuter train station). Such areas (to be defined through the potential to reduce sources of water or air projects would not be able to take credit for mapping). pollution). I both categories, but may have greater credit I ! assigned j --------- --------- ------ ----- ---------'---- ❑ Live -work I ❑ln-fill projects, the ❑Developments with i ❑ developments, a variety of I conversion of empty lots dedication of Developments developments designed to i and other underused spaces undeveloped portions to ❑ Developments in historic support residential and I into more beneficially used parks, preservation in a city center districts or vocational needs together - ! spaces, such as residential I area. historic similar to criteria to mixed ! or commercial areas. areas and other pervious I ! preservation uses. i areas. use development; would not ! - be able to take credit for both categories. Richard Zehner Property Section IV January2018 Page 20 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 Calculation of Water Quality Credits I Not Applicable (if applicable) IV.4.2 Alternative Compliance Plan Information Describe an alternative compliance plan (if applicable). Include alternative compliance obligations (i.e., gallons, pounds) and describe proposed alternative compliance measures. Refer to Section 7.11 3.0 in the Model WQMP. Not Applicable Richard Zehner Property Section IV January 2018 Page 21 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (NQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 Section V Inspection/ Maintenance Responsibility for BMPs BMP Inspection/ Maintenance Inspection/ Minimum Reponsible Maintenance `Frequency BMP of Party(s) Activities Activities Required N1 Owner No None N3 Owner Yes Monthly N11 Owner Yes Daily S3, S4 Owner Yes Weekly Richard Zehner Property Section V January 2018 Page 22 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 Section VI BMP Exhibit (Site Plan) VI.1 BMP Exhibit (Site Plan) REFER TO ATTACHEMENT A FOR SITE PLAN, INCLUDING WQMP REQUIREMENTS VI.2 Submittal and Recordation of Water Quality Management Plan Following approval of the Final Project -Specific WQMP, three copies of the approved WQMP (including BMP Exhibit, Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan, and Appendices) shall be submitted. In addition, these documents shall be submitted in a PDF format. Each approved WQMP (including BMP Exhibit, Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan, and Appendices) shall be recorded in the Orange County Clerk -Recorder's Office, prior to close-out of grading and/ or building permit. Educational Materials are not required to be included. Richard Zehner Property Section VI January 2018 Page 23 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2407 Buckeye St., Newport Beach, CA 92660 Section VII Educational Materials REFER TO ATTACHMENT B FOR HOMEOWNER EDUACATIONAL MATERIAL HANDOUTS Education Materials Residential Material Check If Business Material Check If (http://www.ocwatersheds.com) Applicable (http://www.ocwatersheds.com) Applicable The Ocean Begins at Your Front Door ❑ Tips for the Automotive Industry ❑ Tips for Car Wash Fund-raisers ❑ Tips for Using Concrete and Mortar ❑ Tips for the Home Mechanic ❑ Tips for the Food Service Industry ❑ Homeowners Guide for Sustainable ® Proper Maintenance Practices for Your El Use Business Household Tips ® Other Material Check If Attached Proper Disposal of Household ® Hazardous Waste Recycle at Your Local Used Oil E]❑ Collection Center (North County) Recycle at Your Local Used Oil El ❑ Collection Center (Central County) Recycle at Your Local Used Oil ® ❑ Collection Center (South County) Tips for Maintaining a Septic Tank El 1:1System Responsible Pest Control ® ❑ Sewer Spill ❑ ❑ Tips for the Home Improvement ® ElProjects Tips for Horse Care ❑ ❑ Tips for Landscaping and Gardening ® ❑ Tips for Pet Care ® ❑ Tips for Pool Maintenance ❑ ❑ Tips for Residential Pool, Landscape ❑ ❑ and Hardscape Drains Tips for Projects Using Paint El ❑ Richard Zehner Property ' Section VII January 2018 Page 24 COAST GEOTECHNICAL INC. a0020190 1200 W Commonwealth Avenue, Fullerton CA 92833 • Ph' (714) 870-121 1 •Fax• (714) 870-1222 • E-mail coasteeotec@sbcelobal.net February 21, 2018 Mr. Richard Zehner 7 Vincennes Newport Coast, CA 92657 00.1 Reference: 1. Geotechnical E1 Newport Beach, 24, 2017. Dear Mr. Zehner: i0 P�� 4�tU VV o CO W.O. 531917-01 a techh cal Report Review ew Resi ence- at 2407 7�-Buckeye Street, 917-01, dated May In accordance with the request of your8l rchitect, this response to a geotechnical report review checklist issued by the City of Newport Beach, dated Januray 29, 2018 has been prepared. The review sheet is appended and our responses are as follows: Response #1 We have reviewed the site grading and drainage plan by RAW Civil design, dated May 1, 2017. While the French drain is located along the front property line, it is opinioned to be far enough away from the structure and slope not to impose a geotechnical hazard to the site provided it is founded in anticipated well draining, non -expansive, silty sand. Response #2 The attached grading and foundation and landscape plans have been reviewed and are in general conformance with the geotechnical recommendations. This report is subject to review by the controlling authorities for this project. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. Respectfully submitted: COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. P�OFCS0y Q�� 'CFRN�\ 2T, g Chen� o� 'i e —�' �C�CRNqj 2Ez r € 9a Cqg 1 All 3p 3 p 5E �: /p Ya IpIP .11 TF7 $ lag �fya$yx� F9 11FIN 33 S s BuCKEYEg� &i ^ �E y s4 s; '� a R. -9 �a I € I��gAg W >os pp finE C gAgE 3 a H ;g Ell i 5 4 4 o y $.INo0 0000 00 a gg a e �a g Ea iia ' Hifi°$ $M ci � R' 49 � ; a�jE gp$ CO F€ € aaz s �g sus 9 in $ f gQ A g � ;$ ieNaa m "E F$�5 pp@ a e''aa�li'pf, �$g{ gg 2 £88 E@ g 9 !HD F ®®®'$999 M $E 5s a I oil 6 - - g V• - H. * 8• 9v joi _ 1111 �m•T�•22 +� ad k 8 S� 6 4 D 1 logob C s I � I q�€a@ J ®8�qp s�'s$e�iae€y Z lJ NU AA rv, �y�A,. go, MFi �K 16 r CUSTOM RESIDENCE FOR: FGROUP IRon Wikskom in eRe ZEHNEREFAMILY W 2402 BUCKEYE STREET uas.oiw NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 DESIGN aw wvm•�rom v d - e� o - I mss' 31f-=ri�kuP�;tw-T- 6 - - g V• - H. * 8• 9v joi _ 1111 �m•T�•22 +� ad k 8 S� 6 4 D 1 logob C s I � I q�€a@ J ®8�qp s�'s$e�iae€y Z lJ NU AA rv, �y�A,. go, MFi �K 16 r CUSTOM RESIDENCE FOR: FGROUP IRon Wikskom in eRe ZEHNEREFAMILY W 2402 BUCKEYE STREET uas.oiw NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 DESIGN aw wvm•�rom I" IN. DR bs� n CLP. MIN, v�v� gg Ei9 MIN. Fid a O O56FS8 Q a'MI roe zF3 'MI Ni P 9 � P am$: E� oaon c�$ Rq a 6C.j 5s @a l R b 38- MIN. �a A6a • 1B' h�9 e mpa o 6 avn y ,.M b cla. u. F SF e I" MIN. - ._I 4" MI PLEn zN ^� V • 8" R. €F € 6 mn .0 .l 9 "� 'a m k mg 5Y ti V� W EN (TJ e o ®� MIN. m m Op € W le' SF S' P P y 34'Mlx.9on ve is vee e 7--, @€@ 4' xl Mlrv. AOE n 9 p M. z IV' o P f MI P� m iv �$ E k ¢ e e Y �' YpIn 410 a ILI ° Y P PSn MIN. m'M �7 0 ^� ti 21 O ¢�86s��I`g CUSTOM RESIDENCE FOR: GROUP Ron Wilcstrom FG ZEHNEREFAMILY 2407 BUCKEYE STREET sil'n'isuw NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 DESIGN N - 2407 BUCKEYE STREET sil'n'isuw NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 DESIGN N - 1;7 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BUILDING DIVISION 100 Civic Center Drive l P.O. Box 17681 Newport Beach, CA 92658-8 91 5 www.newoortbeachca.gov 1(949)644-3200 Project Description: Title & Date of Report Project Address Permit App. Date: CY Cut/Fill: 75/500 Consultant: Applicant/Contact:. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT REVIEW CHECKLIST NEW SFR W/ATTACHED GARAGE 4460/858 SF & PATIO 329 SF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION OF PROPOSED NEW RESIDENCE AT 2407 BUCKEYE STREET DATED MAY 24, 2017 2407 BUCKEYE STREET 11106/2017 Permit Valuation: $730,000 COAST GEOTECHNICAL INC. WIKSTROM RONALD Plan Check No.: 2483-2017 Permit App. Expires: 05/05/2018 Adjusted Valuation: Phone: 714-870-1211 Phone,- Plan hone: Plan Check Engineer: SERGIO GUTIERREZ Phone: 949 844-3213 Ebgineeremail: sgutierrezAnewportbeachca.nov PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSED 1� Review: 11/29117 2nd Review: 1/29118 3" Review,- Italic comments By Appointment The project plans were reviewed for compliance with the following codes and standards: 2016 CRC; 2016 CBC; 2016 CPC; 2016 CEC; 2016 CMC; 2016 California Energy Code; 2016 California Green Building Standards Code (CG); & Chapter 15 of the Newport Beach'Muncipal Code (NEMC). The codesection references are from the 2016 CBC, unless otherwise stated. • TO EXPEDITE PROJECTAPPROVAL: Please provide a written response indicating how and where each comment was resolved on the plans. • Resubmit all previously reviewed plans, updated plans and supporting documents with each subsequent review. • AFTER 2„1 PLAN REVIEW Please call the geologist listed above to schedule a plan review appointment, to expedite project approval. • For clarification of any plan review comment, please cap the plan check engineer listed above. • Plan review status is available online at www.newoortbeachca.00v. Project status is also available using the interactive voice response system at 949-644-3255, or by speaking with a permit technician at 949-718-1888 during business hours. ConLlstslGeotechnlm[P,epoitRe'A"Checklist 01/2912018 1 PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE REPORT ATTEND TO THE ITEMS BELOW: 1. Please provide recommendation for on lot infiltration feasibility and indicate if there is a potential for a slope geologic hazard risk due to infiltration. 2- Please review the Grading, Foundation and Landscape Plans for compliance with geotechnical recommendations of this report. Limitations of Review: Our review is intended to determine ii the submitted report(s) comply with City Codes and generally accepted geotechnical practices within the local area. The scope of our services for this third party review has been limited to a brief site visit and a review of the above -referenced report and associated documents, as supplied by this City of Newport Beach. Re -analysis of reported data and/or calculations and preparation of amended construction ar design recommendations are specifically not included within our scope of services. Our review should not be considered as a cert cation, approval or acceptance previous consultants work, or is meant ad an acceptance of liability for final design or construction. CorrListsleectechnioslReportReviewChwklist 0112912018 COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Investigation of Proposed New Residence at 2407 Buckeye Street Newport Beach, California BY: Ani CO;_ U1, � COAST'G XOTECHNICAL, INC. W. O. 531917 dated May 24, 2017 pn. n FOR: R Mr. Ricard Zehner 71 Vixieennes` ,,Newport Cast, California 9265T' F' COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 1200 West Commonwealth Ave., Fullerton, CA 92833 - Ph: (714) 870-1211 . Fax (714) 870-1222 - e-mail: coastgeotec(@,sbcalobal.net May 24, 2017 Mr. Richard Zebner 7 Vincennes Newport Coast, CA 92657 Dear Mr. Zehner: W.O. 531917-01 Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Investigation of Proposed New Residence at 2407 Buckeye Street, Newport Beach, California Pursuant to your request, a geotechnical engineering investigation has been performed at the subject site. The purposes of the investigation were to determine the general engineering characteristics of the earth materials on and underlying the site, to provide recommendations for the design of foundations and underground improvements for the proposed stricture. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based upon the analyses of the data obtained from our field and laboratory testing programs and our understanding that the existing stricture will be removed and a new two-story residence constructed. This report completes our scope of geotechnical engineering services authorized by you in the executed proposal dated April 13, 2017. PURPOSE AND WORK SCOPE The purpose of this report is to evaluate geotechnical conditions of the site and to provide recommendations pertaining to site development Our work scope consisted of the following: 1. Reconnaissance of subject property and nearby environs. 2. Review of available publications by others. 3. Evaluation of data obtained. SITE DESCRIPTION The project site is located in the City of Newport Beach at 2407 Buckeye Street and is shown on 1 the Site Vicinity Map, Plate 1. The parcel is located southwest of Bison Avenue, on the western side of Buckeye Street. L Developed residential properties to the north and south, street frontage to the east and a descending slope to the west bind the site. L_ I 'L COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Mr. Richard Zehner W.O. 531917-01 Geotechnical Engineering Investigation May 24. 2017 The parcel is raised about two feet above Buckeye Street and is essentially level to the rear yard where a slope descends to Blackthore Street. The slope is about fifteen feet in height with a slope gradient of about 2:1(H:V). The parcel is developed with a one story residential structure and detached garage of typical slab on grade wood framed constriction. P1 :717.Y�—�D/ Geotechnical records of the City of Newport Beach Building Department were not avaiable for the original tract grading for the subject site. SITE OBSERVATIONS The following observations were made during the course of our site investigation. • The structure appears to be performing as intended with no significant signs of distress. • Minor cracking is evident in the hardscape areas. • Site drainage control is poor to moderate. The observed distress is typical of this era of construction. FIELD INVESTIGATION The field investigation was performed on May 12, 2017 and consisted of the excavation of two exploratory borings by hand auger equipment placed at the approximate locations shown on the attached Site Plan, Plate 4. As excavation progressed, personnel from this office visually logged the materials encountered and secured representative samples for laboratory testing. Undisturbed samples for detailed testing in our laboratory were obtained by pushing or driving a sampling spoon into the earth material. A solid -barrel type spoon was used having an inside diameter of 2.5 inches with a tapered cutting tip at the lower end and a ball valve at the upper end. The barrel is lined with thin brass rings, each one inch in length. The spoon penetrated into the soil below the depth of the boring approximately six inches. The central portion of this sample was retained for testing. All samples in their natural field condition were sealed in airtight containers and transported to the laboratory. Descriptions of the earth materials encountered are presented on the attached Boring Logs, Plates B and C. The data presented on these logs is a simplification of actual subsurface conditions encountered and applies only at the specific boring locations and on the date excavated. It is not warranted to be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times. f C OAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Mr. Richard Zehner W.O. 531917-01 Geotechnical Engineering Investigation May 24.2017 LITHOLOGY Logging of the exploratory borings indicates the presence of minor artificial fill soil, and native soil beneath the site. The artificial fill (Af) soil encountered consisted of light brown and orange brown, silty fine grained sand, generally the fill soil is medium dense to a depth of two feet. The fill thickness across the site was found to be relatively even about two feet in depth, as encountered. Areas of deeper fill soil may be present. Native Marine Terrace deposits (Qtm) were discovered below the fill soil and consisted of orange brown silty fine sand. The native soil was generally moist and dense to depths explored. Regional geology is presented on Plate 3. A site plan showing the approximate borehole locations is presented on Plate 4, with a geotechnical cross section A -A' approximating geotechnical conditions presented on Plate 6. SLOPES The slope does not exhibit morphology associated with surficial slope instabilities. The descending slope is near a 2:1(H:V) gradient and with proper slope maintenance is considered surficially stable. Slope maintenance guidelines are attached. The slope is judged to be grossly stable and demonstrates an acceptable factor of safety. Stability calculations are presented on Plates J and K. GROUNDWATER Groundwater was not encountered during our exploratory work. SEISMICITY Southern California is located in an active seismic region. Moderate to strong earthquakes can occur on munerous local faults. The United States Geological Survey, California Division of Mines and Geology, private consultants, and universities have been studying earthquakes in Southern California for several decades. Early studies were directed toward earthquake prediction and estimation of the effects of strong ground shaking. Studies indicate that earthquake prediction is not practical and not sufficiently accurate to benefit the general public. Governmental agencies are shifting their focus to earthquake resistant structures as opposed to prediction. The purpose of the code seismic design parameters is to prevent collapse during strong ground shaking. Cosmetic damage should be expected. F, COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Mr. Richard Zehner W.O. 531917-01 Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Mav 24, 2017 Within the past 46 years, Southern California and vicinity have experienced an increase in seismic activity beginning with the San Fernando earthquake in 1971. In 1987, a moderate earthquake struck the Whittier area and was located on a previously unknown fault. Ground shaking from this event caused substantial damage to the City of Whittier and surrounding cities. The January 17, 1994, Northridge earthquake was initiated along a previously unrecognized fault below the San Fernando Valley. The energy released by the earthquake propagated to the southeast, northwest, and northeast in the form of shear and compression waves, which caused the strong ground shaking in portions of the San Fernando Valley, Santa Monica Mountains, Simi Valley, City of Santa Clarita, and City of Santa Monica. Southern California faults are classified as: active, potentially active, or inactive. Faults from past geologic periods of mountain building, but do not display any evidence of recent offset, are considered "inactive" or "potentially active". Faults that have historically produced earthquakes or show evidence of movement within the past 11,000 years are known as "active faults". There are no known active faults within close vicinity of the subject property. There are no known active faults within the subject property, with the nearest being the Newport Inglewood Fault Zone and the San Joaquin Blind Thrust Fault. Newport -Inglewood Fault Zone: The Newport -Inglewood Fault Zone is a broad zone of left - stepping en echelon faults and folds striking southeastward from near Santa Monica across the Los Angeles basin to Newport Beach. Altogether these various faults constitute a system more than 150 miles long that extends into Baja California, Mexico. Faults having similar trends and projections occur offshore from San Clemente and San Diego (the Rose Canyon and La Nacion Faults). A near -shore portion of the Newport -Inglewood Fault Zone was the source of the destructive 1933 Long Beach earthquake. The reported recurrence interval for a large event along this fault zone is 1,200 to 1,300 years with an expected slip of one meter. San Joaquin Hills Blind Thrust Fault: The seismic hazards in Southern California have been further complicated with the recent realization that major earthquakes can occur on large thrust faults that are concealed at depths between 5 to 20 km, referred to as "blind thrusts." The uplift of the San Joaquin I- lls is produced by a southwest dipping blind thrust fault that extends at least 14 km from northwestern Huntington Mesa to Dana Point and comes to within 2 km of the ground surface. Work by Grant et al. (1997 and 1999) suggest that uplift of the San Joaquin Hills began in the Late Quaternary and continues during the Holocene. Uplift rates have been estimated between 0.25 and 0.5 mm/yr. If the entire length of the fault ruptured, the earthquake has been estimated to generate an Mw 6.8 event. We are of the opinion that the more active Newport Inglewood fault is the causative fault for the subject site which is about 6.5 km to the southwest of the site. The principal seismic hazard to the subject property and proposed project is strong ground shaking from earthquakes produced by local faults. It is likely that the subject property will be shaken by future earthquakes produced in Southern California. Secondary effects such as surface rapture, lurching, liquefaction, or flooding, are not considered probable. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5 Mr. Richard Zehner W.O. 531917-01 Geotechnical Engineering Investigation May 24, 2017 SEISMIC HAZARDS r Based on the Seismic Hazard Zone Map published by the State of California, Laguna Beach Quadrangle, April 1998, the project area is not mapped as being subject to earthquake induced seismic hazards. See appended Plate 2. Liquefaction induced hazards are not considered probable due to dense near -surface soils and lack of near surface groundwater. Earthquake -induced landslide zones were delineated by State of California using criteria adopted by the California State Mining and Geology Board. Under those criteria, earthquake induced landslide zones are areas meeting one or more of the following: 1. Areas known to have experience earthquake -induced slope failure during historic earthquake. 2. Areas identified as having past landslide movement, including both landslide deposits and source areas. 3. Areas where CDMG's analyses of geologic and geotechnical data indicate that the geologic materials are susceptible to earthquake -induced slope failure. It is our opinion that based on past performance of the slope and consisting of a native cut slope, the risk for seismic induced failure is minimal. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The proposed residence is considered feasible from a soils engineering and geologic standpoint, provided that the recommendations stated herein are incorporated in the design and are implemented in the field. I a V01 —6 OR 111 \ The following grading recommendations are general guidelines and are subject to revision based on actual development and review of foundation plans. GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS Earthwork for foundation support shall include the entire building pad and shall extend a minimum of five feet outside exterior footing lines. Three feet is acceptable along side property lines. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Mr. Richard Zehner W.O. 531917-01 Geotechnical Engineering Investigation May 24, 2017 Removals shall extend downward into competent native earth materials with at least 90% relative compaction or to at least one foot below proposed foundation bottoms, whichever is deeper. Average removal depth is estimated at three feet below existing grade. The exposed excavation bottom shall be observed and approved by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. prior to processing. Dependent on field observations, removals may be adjusted up or down. To provide adequate support along property lines excavations shall be sloped at a 1:1 (H:V) gradient from property line down to the excavation bottom. As fill soils are placed the grading contractor shall bench into the 1:1 construction cut to final grade, as shown on Plate 4. Subsequent to approval of the excavation bottom, the area shall be scarified six inches, moisture conditioned as needed, and compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction. Fill soils shall be placed in six to eight inch loose lifts, moisture conditioned as needed, and compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction. This process shall be utilized to finish grade. Grading for hardscape areas shall consist of removal and recompaction of soft surficial soils. Removal depths are estimated at one to two feet. Earthwork shall be performed in accordance with previously specified methods. FOUNDATIONS The proposed new two-story residence may be supported by continuous spread footings placed a minimum depth of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade, utilizing an allowable bearing value of 1,800 pounds per square foot. Footings shall be at least 15 inches wide for two-story construction. This value is for dead plus live load and may be increased 1/3 for total including seismic and wind loads where allowed by code. It is recommended that all footings be reinforced with a minimum of four No. 4 bars (2 top and 2 bottom). The structural engineer's reinforcing requirements should be followed if more stringent. Footing excavations shall be observed by a representative of COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. prior to placement of steel or concrete to verify competent soil conditions. If unacceptable soil conditions are exposed mitigation will be recommended. LATERAL DESIGN _. Lateral restraint at the base of footings and on slabs may be assumed to be the product of the dead load and a coefficient of friction of .35. Passive pressure on the face of footings may also be used i` to resist lateral forces. A passive pressure of zero at the surface of finished grade, increasing at the rate of 300 pounds per square foot of depth to a maximum value of 3,000 pounds per square foot, may be used for native soils at this site. Where passive pressure and friction are combined when r-, COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Mr. Richard Zehner W.O. 531917-01 Geotechnical Engineering Investigation May 24 2017 evaluating the lateral resistance, the value of the passive pressure should be limited to 2/3 of the values given above. SETTLEMENT The folmdation system is estimated to have a total post -construction settlement on the order of 1/2 inch. Differential settlements are expected to be on the order of 1/2 inch, measured over a distance of forty feet. EXPANSIVE SOILS Results of expansion tests indicate that the near surface soils have a very low expansion potential. The recommendation provided are minimum geotechnical guidelines considered appropriate for the site and are not intended to supersede the Structural Engineer's design criteria or those required by code. SOIL CREEP Based on the granular, non -expansive nature of the soils, creep forces are not expected to develop. Foundations placed on or within ten feet of a top of slope shall be deepened to maintain a ten foot setback and passive pressure shall be ignored in the upper two feet of the slope. SETBACK Foundations for the structure should have a horizontal setback of H/3, where H is the slope height, with the setback measured horizontally from the bottom outside footing edge to a competent slope face. For this site we recommend a setback of ten feet. SEISMIC DESIGN Based on the 2016 CBC, latitude 33.63767 longitude -117.87397 and the USGS Seismic Design Calculator the following seismic design parameters are provided. • Site Class = D • Mapped 0.2 Second Spectral Response Acceleration, Ss = 1.635g L • Mapped One Second Spectral Response Acceleration S1= 0.598g • Site Coefficient from Table 1613A.3.3(1), Fa=1.0 • Site Coefficient from Table 1613A.3.3(2), Fv =1.5 • Maximum Design Spectral Response Acceleration for short period, Sm1s = 1.635g • Maximum Design Spectral Response Acceleration for one -second period, Sm11 = 0.896g '' • 5% Design Spectral Response Acceleration for short period, SDs = 1.0909 • 5% Design Spectral Response Acceleration for one -second period, SDI = 0.598g COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Mr. Richard Zehner W.O. 531917-01 Geotechnical Engineering Investigation May 24, 2017 FLOOR SLABS The slabs shall be supported on engineered fill compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction in accordance with previous grading recommendations. Subgrade soil should be kept moist prior to casting the slab. Minimum geotechnical recommendations for on grade slab design are four inches actual thickness with #4 bars at eighteen inches on center each way. Structural design may require additional reinforcement and slab thickness or use of alternate foundation and slab systems. If the soils at grade become disturbed during constriction, they should be brought to optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction, prior to placing concrete. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. will need to verify adequate mitigation. Prior to placement of sand or visqueen COAST GEOTECHNICAL, Inc., shall test the slab subgrade soils for moisture content. If the subgrade soils do not exhibit the recommendations on Plate A they shall be moisture conditioned to the required depth and content. The capillary break material shall comply with the requirements of the local jurisdiction and shall be a minimum of four inches in thickness. Geotechnically coarse clean sand is acceptable; however, some localities require the use of 1/2 -inch or larger gravel. The gravel shall be vibrated to uniform dense condition. If gravels are used a heavy filter fabric must be placed over the gravels prior to placement of the recommended visqueen to minimize puncturing of the vapor barrier. Additionally, a vibratory compaction plate should be used on top of the rock to smooth out any sharp protuberances. In areas where a moisture sensitive floor covering will be used, a vapor barrier consisting of a plastic film (15 mil polyvinyl chloride or equivalent) should be used. The vapor barrier should be properly lapped and sealed. Since the vapor barrier will prevent moisture from draining from fresh concrete, a better concrete finish can usually be obtained if at least two inches of sand is spread over the vapor barrier prior to placement of concrete. The sand should be compacted uniformly. SOLUBLESULFATES Chemical analysis indicates a soluble sulfate content of 45 ppm, which is a negligible sulfate exposure. Type II concrete, with 2,500 psi compressive strength may be utilized. Design and placement of concrete shall be in accordance with appropriate CBC codes and Table 19-A-4. UTILITY LINE BACKFILLS All utility line backfills, both interior and exterior, shall be compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction and shall require testing at a maximum of two -foot vertical intervals. L_, r COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 9 Mr. Richard Zehner W.O. 531917-01 Geotechnical EnOneerine Investieation May 24.2017 DRAINAGE r Positive drainage should be planned for the site. Drainage should be directed away from structures via non -erodible conduits to suitable disposal areas. The structure should utilize roof gutters and downspouts tied directly to yard drainage. Drainage shall not be directed onto or over slopes. t' Unlined flowerbeds, planters, and lawns should not be constructed against the perimeter of the structure. If such landscaping (against the perimeter of a structure) is planned, it should be properly drained and lined or provided with an underground moisture barrier. Irrigation should be kept to a minimum. While the section 1804.4 of the 2016 CBC recommends 5% slope away from structures for landscape areas, 2% slope is allowable where justified. Our justification is the use roof drains tied into area drains, the use of area drains, and site grading which will mitigate the potential for r moisture problems beneath a slab on grade. Hardscape areas shall be sloped a minimum of 2% where within ten feet of the residence unless allowed otherwise by the building official. Drainage swales and pad berms shall be in accordance with City guidelines. Control and maintenance of site drainage is critical to the long-term stability of the descending slope. We do not recommend the use of bottomless trench drains to conform with infiltration best management practice (BMP) such as infiltration trenches, infiltration basins, dry wells, permeable pavements or similar systems designed primarily to percolate water into the subsurface soils within ten feet of foundations. Due to the physical characteristics of the site earth materials, infiltration of waters into the subsurface earth materials has a risk of adversely affecting slopes and building foundations. From a geotechnical viewpoint surface drainage should be directed to the street. HARDSCAPE SLABS Hardscape slab subgrade areas shall exhibit a minimum of 90% relative compaction and moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content to a depth of at least two feet. Deeper removal and recompaction may be required if unacceptable conditions are encountered. These areas require testing just prior to placing concrete. Exterior hardscape slabs will be subject to stress from volume changes in subgrade soils, which will lead to cracking. The followings recommendations will minimize cracking and offsets, but " will not eliminate concrete cracks. Minimum geotechnical recommendations for slab design are four inches actual thickness with #4 bars at eighteen inches on center each way. SCREEN WALLS The following recommendations shall be utilized in design. r' COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 10 Mr. Richard Zehner W.O. 531917-01 Geotechnical Engineering Investigation May 24.2017 • Top of slope walls shall be designed with adequate foundation setback. We recommend drilled caissons placed a minimum of seven feet below ground surface support the wall. A grade beam shall interconnect the caissons. The caissons may be designed for a 400 psf skin friction value. Passive pressure shall be ignored in the upper two feet of the slope. • Sidewalls should not be connected to top of slope walls. • All site walls shall be properly jointed and shall utilize foundations placed a minimum of 24" below grade. • Decorative walls shall be designed to accommodate potential movement. SUPPLEMENTAL CONSULTING During construction, a number of reviews by this office are recommended to verify site geotechnical conditions and conformance with the intentions of the recommendations for construction. Although not all possible geotechnical observation and testing services are required by the City, the following site reviews are advised, some of which will probably be required by the City: • Site grading • Foundation excavation review for the all structures. • Slab subgrade compaction & moisture testing • Interior and exterior trench backfill • Hardscape subgrade testing AGENCY REVIEW All soil, geologic, and structural aspects of the proposed development are subject to the review and approval of the governing agency(s). It should be recognized that the governing agency(s) can dictate the manner in which the project proceeds. They could approve or deny any aspect of the proposed improvements and/or could dictate which foundation and grading options are acceptable. Supplemental geotechnical consulting in response to agency requests for additional information could be required. ENGINEERING CONSULTATION, TESTING AND OBSERVATION We will be pleased to provide additional input with respect to foundation design once methods of construction and/or nature of imported soil has been determined. Grading and foundation plans should be reviewed by this office prior to commencement of grading so that appropriate recommendations, if needed can be made. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 11 Mr. Richard Zehner W.O. 531917-01 Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Mav 24, 2017 Areas to receive fill should be inspected when unsuitable materials have been removed and prior to placement of fill, and fill should be observed and tested for compaction as it is placed. LIMITATIONS This report presents recommendations pertaining to the subject site based on the assumption that the subsurface conditions do not deviate appreciably from those disclosed by our exploratory excavations. Our recommendations are based on the technical information, our understanding of the proposed construction, and our experience in the geotechnical field. We do not guarantee the performance of the project, only that our engineering work and judgments meet the standard of care of our profession at this time. hi view of the general conditions in the area, the possibility of different local soil conditions may exist. Any deviation or unexpected condition observed during construction should be brought to the attention of the Geotechnical Engineer. In this way, any supplemental recommendations can be made with a minimum of delay necessary to the project. If the proposed construction will differ from our present understanding of the project, the existing information and possibly new factors may have to be evaluated. Any design changes and the finished plans should be reviewed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Of particular importance would be extending development to new areas, changes in structural loading conditions, postponed development for more than a year, or changes in ownership. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative; to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are called to the attention of the Architects and Engineers for the project and incorporated into the plans and that the necessary steps are taken to see that the Contractors and Subcontractors cant' out such recommendations in the field. This report is subject to review by the controlling authorities for this project. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. Respectfully submitted: COAST GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. Ming-Tamg Chen o� RCE 54011 O No.54011 Exp. 12-31-17 it VamelHerc 2 4r -- Staff Geologist 4 COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 12 Mr. Richard Zehner W.O. 531917-01 Geotechnical Engineering Investigation May 24 2017 APPENDIX A This appendix contains a description of the field investigation, laboratory testing procedures and results, site plan, and expansive soil recommendations. . FIELD INVESTIGATION Field investigation was performed on May 12, 2017, consisting of the excavation of two exploratory borings at locations shown on the attached site plan. As the excavations progressed, personnel from this office visually classified the soils encountered, and secured representative samples for laboratory testing. Undisturbed samples for detailed testing in our laboratory were obtained by pushing or driving a sampling spoon into the material. A solid barrel -type spoon was used having an inside diameter of 2.5 inches with a tapered cutting tip at the lower end and a ball valve at the upper end. The barrel is lined with thin brass rings, each one inch in length. The spoon penetrated into the soil below the depth of the excavation approximately six inches using a 35# slide hammer with 18 inch drop. The central portion of this sample was retained for testing. All samples in their natural field condition were sealed in airtight containers and transported to the laboratory. Descriptions of the soils encountered are presented on the attached Boring Logs. The data presented on these logs is a simplification of actual subsurface conditions encountered and applies only at the specific boring location and the date excavated. It is not warranted to be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times. LABORATORY TESTING Field samples were examined in the laboratory and a testing program was then established to develop data for preliminary evaluation of geotechnical conditions. Field moisture and dry densities were calculated for each undisturbed sample. Maximum density -optimum moisture relationships were established for use in evaluation of in-situ conditions and for future use during grading operations. Direct shear tests were performed on specimens at near saturation under various normal loads. The results of tests are based on ultimate residual values and are attached. Expansion tests were performed on typical specimens of earth materials in accordance with the procedures outlined in ASTM D-4829. Consolidation tests were performed on representative samples based on ASTM:D-2435. The consolidation plots are presented on Plate D. L r COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 13 Mr. Richard Zehner W.O. 531917-01 i-, Geotechnical Ensineering Investigation May 24 2017 TEST RESULTS Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture (ASTM:D-155 n oF1TIg � u dyy"r.-Ai r>ty. °da its- ,z,�-. ,xu � t±= sh'^a ka et. °kir' tlir5!;Dens7ty; `�",� go i" a93ii r ,i& tuW d agog- � �1]QI7GL�, t' `S'5--^9P!P�.'JLi�aLw^ae„c48`9 �`�e�ath��eet � � (pa � 'T £c...,`M 1 0-5 0 - 5 110.0 10.0 Direct Shear - In-situ Samples ,�' C L hiE _g k- ��, 4 "l J N wCPhesios �� s i ii ��4ngleofnYBrsaihzetteta .' �1]QI7GL�, t' `S'5--^9P!P�.'JLi�aLw^ae„c48`9 iXy lLerlF1'k(ITC SGC x`" .:. r : jhl�p�{y'+ d W-°£`.� 'n 'T £c...,`M 1 4 300 30 1 8 350 30 1 0-5 250 30 Soluble Sulfate Analysis $o`riigNoA n -k-*— M±. -t- +- ��'�I}ep-in�;`�el,,��� -SoTubte St Yate (ppm '; . 1 0-5 45 Expansion Index -n k r ,,y, �'iw�, is ��,;�.,�3azTn��a }�M�frr„ n -k-*— M±. -t- +- ��'�I}ep-in�;`�el,,��� € SR's 1 0-5 0 I, COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. r' SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING SITE CLEARING All existing vegetation shall be stripped and hauled from the site. PREPARATION After the foundation for the fill has been cleared, plowed or scarified, it shall be disced or bladed until it is uniform and free from large clods, brought to a proper moisture content and compacted to not less than ninety percent of the maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM:D-1557 (5 layers - 25 blows per layer; 10 lb. hammer dropped 18'; 4" diameter mold). MATERIALS On-site materials maybe used for fill, or fill materials shall consist of materials approved by the Soils Engineer and may be obtained from the excavation of banks, borrow pits or any other approved source. The materials used should be free of vegetable matter and other deleterious substances and shall not contain rocks or lumps greater than six inches in maximum dimension. PLACING, SPREADINGAND COMPACTING FILL MATERIALS The selected fill material shall be placed in layers which, when compacted, shall not exceed six inches in thickness. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during the spreading to ensure uniformity of material and moisture of each layer. Where moisture of the fill material is below the limits specified by the Soils Engineer, water shall be added until the moisture content is as required to ensure thorough bonding and thorough compaction. Where moisture content of the fill material is above the limits specified by the Soils Engineer, the fill materials shall be aerated by blading or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is as specified. After each layer has been placed, mixed and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted to not less than 90 percent of the maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM:D-1557 (5 layers -25 blows per layer; 10 lbs. hammer dropped 18 inches; 4" diameter mold) or other density tests which will attain equivalent results. Compaction shall be by sheepfoot roller, multi -wheel pneumatic tire roller, track loader or other types of acceptable rollers. L_ COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING PAGE 2 Rollers shall be of such design that they will be able to compact the fill to the specified density. Rolling shall be accomplished while the fill material is at the specified moisture content. Rolling of each layer shall be continuous over the entire area and the roller shall make sufficient trips to ensure that the desired density has been obtained. The final surface of the lot areas to receive slabs on grade should be rolled to a dense, smooth surface. The outside of all fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. Compaction operations shall be continued until the outer nine inches of the slope is at least 90 percent compacted. Compacting of the slopes may be progressively in increments of three feet to five feet of fill height as the fill is brought to grade, or after the fill is brought to its total height. Field density tests shall be made by the Soils Engineer of the compaction of each layer of fill. Density tests shall be made at intervals not to exceed two feet of fill height provided all layers are tested. Where the sheepfoot rollers are used, the soil may be disturbed to a depth of several inches and density readings shall be taken in the compacted material below the disturbed surface. When these readings indicate that the density of any layer of fill or portion there is below the required 90 percent density, the particular layer or portion shall be reworked until the required density has been obtained. The grading specifications should be a part of the project specifications. The Soil Engineer shall review the grading plans prior to grading. INSPECTION The Soil Engineer shall provide continuous supervision of the site clearing and grading operation so that he can verify the grading was done in accordance with the accepted plans and specifications. SEASONAL LIMITATIONS No fill material shall be placed, spread or rolled during unfavorable weather conditions. When heavy rains interrupt work, fill operations shall not be resumed until the field tests by the Soils Engineer indicate the moisture content and density of the fill are as previously specified. EXPANSIlE SOIL CONDITIONS Whenever expansive soil conditions are encountered, the moisture content of the fill or recompacted soil shall be as recommended in the expansive soil recommendations included herewith. VICINITY MAP Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 531917-01 2407 Buckeye Street Newport Beach, California Plate No. 1 COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SEISMIC HAZARD ZONES MAP m STATE OF CALIFORNIA W-•., SEISMIC HAZARD ZONES Dolinaaled In sanctified.with ,?s: Chapter ].e, Oivclub 2 of the California Public Resources Cade Mishandle Hazards Mapping An) TUSTIN QUADRANGLE OFFICIAL REVISED MAP Effective: January 17, 2001 4 I STATE OF CALIFORNIA SEISMIC HAZARD ZONES Defrauded in compliance with - 1 Chapter 7.9, Division 2 o the California Public Resources Cod. (Seismic Hazards Mappin8 Add y LAGUNA BEACH QUADRANGLE" OFFICIAL MAP Released: April 15,1998 0 MAP EXPLANATION Zones of Required Investlgatinn: Ness hs Nature Areas where angoccuaence of liquefaction, indicate to local geological, geolechnle gouty groundwaterned such that M41te'a potenllel for permanent groes ode ncemenN such Net ld be req as deMetl In PubIIC Resources Code Section 2d93(c) would be required. Acrthquake-Induced Landslides Areas where previous occurrence of landslide movement, or Ideal toPogrephlQ geelogices, geo[echnlcal and sul audacis water condiddns Inclose a potentlubr permanent ground displacements such Nat niftudion as defined In Public Resources Code Suchen 2693(c) would be required Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 531917-01 2407 Buckeye Street Newport Beach, California Plate No. 2 COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SITE PLAN BLACKTHORN STREET --- --- --- --- -- --,tee, _ -' -- -- ---- -- — Qt — ?/ Qt BOYlIIg #I ,. c Existing Residence A. b � s g � i Bormg #2 { Af / LEGEND ,r{y}- Exploratory Locations la�d7 Geologic Gross Section %f RAW CIVIL DESIGN Ctyil Englnsers/ConsWellon Menegels Af -Artificial Fill Soil Qt - Native Soil, Terrace deposits BUCKEYE STREET Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 539117-01 2407 Buckeye Street Newport Beach, California Plate No. 4 COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC, Proposed Site Plan SL4CKTHORN STREET m F—re- J.R �-��°�`a%m..�l lJ SMI 6 BUCKEYE STREET Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 539117-01 2407 Buckeye Street Newport Beach, California Plate No. 5 COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. f" Geotechnical Cross Section ro h W a u d o 'y en q W v 5 o I a da I a t Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 539117-01 2407 Buckeye Street Newport Beach, California Plate No. 6 COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 24" 24" 24" 24" 36" 24" 24„ 24„ 24„ 36" f 24" 24" 24" 24" 36" 24" 24" 24" 24" 36" 4 #4 Bars 4 #4 Bars 4 #4 Bars 4 #5 Bars 4#5 Bars 2 Top 2 Top 2 Top 2 Top 2 Top 2 Bottom 2 Bottom 2 Bottom 2 Bottom 2 Bottom 4" Actual 4" Actual 5" Actual 5" Actual 5" Actual #3 Bars on #3 Bars on 12" #4 Bars on #4 Bars on #4 Bars on 18" Centers Both 12" 12" 12" Centers Both Ways Centers Centers Both Centers Both Ways Both Ways Ways Ways ' 15 mil 15 mil 15 mil 15 mil 15 mil Visqueen Visqueen Visqueen Visqueen Visqueen 2" Sand 2" Sand 2" Sand 2" Sand 2" Sand #4 Bars on #4 Bars on 12" #4 Bars on #4 Bars on #4 Bars on - 12" Centers Both 12" 12" Center 12" Center Centers Both Ways Centers Both Ways Both Ways Ways Both Ways Free Floating Free Floating Not Required Not Required Same as Same as Adj. Same as Adj. Adj. Ext. Ftg. Ext. Ftg. Ext. Ftg. 4" Clean 4" Clean 4" Clean 4" Clean 4" Clean t Aggregate Aggregate (1/2 Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate (1/2 inch or inch or larger) (1/2 inch or (1/2 inch or (1/2 inch or larger) larger) larger) larger) Not Required Above Opt. To 110% of 130% of Opt 130% of Opt Depth of Ftg. Opt M/C to M/C to WC to (No Testing) Depth Depth Depth Footing Footing. Footing 1. The surrounding areas should be graded so as to ensure drainage away from the building. 2. Concrete floor slab in areas to be covered with moisture sensitive coverings shall be constructed over a 15 mil plastic membrane. The plastic should be properly lapped, sealed and protected filter fabric (Mirifi 1401) and sand. 3. Two inches of sand over moisture barrier in addition to the four -inches of clean aggregate below the membrane. II UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION AND KEY TO BORING LOGS UNITED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D-2487) PRIMARY DIVISIONS SYMBOLS SECONDARY DIVISIONS VERYLOOSE 0-4 LOOSE GW WELL -GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE 10-30 GRAVEL AND CLEAN GRAVELS VERY DENSE OR NO FINES HARD GRAVELLY (LITTLE OR NO SOILS FINES) GP POORLY -GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES, COARSE LITTLE OR NO FINES GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN 50 GRAVELS WITH GM SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVELS -SAND -SILT MIXTURES OF COARSE FRACTION FINES RETAINED ON (APPRECIABLE NO.4 SIEVE AMOUNT OF FINES) GC CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVELS -SAND -CLAY MIXTURES WELL -GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO SAND AND CLEAN SAND SW FINES MORE THAN 50% SANDYSOILS (LITTLE OR NO FINES) POORLY -GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO OF MATERIAL IS SP FINES LARGER THAN NO. MORE THAN 50% 200 SIEVE SIZE OF COARSE SAND WITH SM SILTY SANDS, SAND -SILT MIXTURES FRACTION FINES PASSING NO.4 (APPRECIABLE SIEVE AMOUNT OF FINES) SC CLAYEY SANDS, SAND -CLAY MIXTURES INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, ML SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, FINE GRAINED SILTS AND LIQUID LIMIT CIL GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN SOILS CLAYS LESS THAN 50 CLAYS OL ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY MH INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE MORE THAN 50% SAND OR SILTY SOILS OF MATERIAL IS LIQUID LIMIT SILTS AND SMALLER THAN GREATER THAN CH INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAYS CLAYS NO. 200 SIEVE 50 ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, SIZEOH ORGANIC SILTS HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY COARSE GRAINED SOILS CONSISTENCY BLOWS/FT• VERYLOOSE 0-4 LOOSE 4-10 MEDIUM DENSE 10-30 DENSE 30.50 VERY DENSE OVER 50 FINE GRAINED SOILS CONSISTENCY BLOWS/PT* VERY SOFT 0.2 SOFT 2.4 FIRM 4-8 STIFF B-15 VERYSTIFF 15.30 HARD OVER 30 * BLOWS/FT FOR A 140 -POUND HAMMER FALLING 30 INCHES TO DRIVE A 2 INCH O.D., 1-3/8 INCH I.D. SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER (STANDARD PENETRATION TEST) KEY TO SAMPLE TYPE: U = UNDISTURBED SAMPLE B = BULK COHJTL7E®IGCI7IY1%.F^ , INC. f SUMMARY OF BORING NO. 1 Date: 5/12/2017 Elevation: E.G. w C U1 N Q U 0 0 o Q 0) M Q Description o o (DU o u B0 U 4" concrete Orange Medium Artificial FILL (Af): SAND --- fine- Brown Dense grained, silty, damp 11.1 95.7 SM Native; Marine Terrace deposits: (Qtm) SAND - Tan, Orange Dense fine-grained, silty, micaceous, moist Brown 7.3 97.1 SM 5 SAND --- fine-grained, silty, micaceous, moist Tan, Orange Dense Brown 9.0 94.3 SM 14.0 96.0 SM SAND --- fine grained, silty, micaceous, moist Orange Brown Dense End of boring at 9 feet 10 No groundwater No caving 15 Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 531917-01 2407 Buckeye Street Newport Beach, California Plate B COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. r, SUMMARY OF BORING NO. 2 Date: 5/12/2017 Elevation: E.G. N co v C 0 0 o Q � s Description o :2o �' '� CL U o U B O U Artificial FILL (Af): SAND ---fine- Tan -Orange Loose to grained, silty, damp Brown Medium Dense Native; Marine Terrace deposits: (Qtm) SAND - Tan, Orange Dense fine-grained, silty, micaceous, moist Brown 16.3 94.3 SM 14.4 97.1 SM 5 SAND ---fine grained, silty, micaceous, moist Orange 9 Dense Brown 14.1 96.4 SM SAND --- fine grained, silty, micaceous, moist Orange Dense Brown End of boring at 9 feet 10 No groundwater No caving 15 Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 531917-01 2407 Buckeye Street Newport Beach, California Plate C COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Boring No. 2 @ 3 Feet Pressure (Kips Per Square Foot) 0.1 1 10 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 C y 4.00 d IL c 5.00 0 y 6.00 a O U 7.00 I 8.00 9.00 10.00 Q Test Specimen at In -Situ Moisture • Test Specimen Submerged Geotechnical Engineering Investigation 2407 Buckeye Street Newport Beach, California Work Order 531917-01 Plate No. D COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SHEAR TEST RESULT Boring No.1 @ 4 Feet 5 4 3 w 2 2- 2 U) 1 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Confining Pressure (kips/sq. ft.) Native soil samples were tested at saturated conditions. The sample had a dry density of 95.7 lbs./cu.ft. and a moisture content of 27.9 %. Cohesion = 300 psf Friction Angle = 30 degrees Based on 80% peak strength or ultimate strength, whichever is lower Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 531917-01 2407 Buckeye Street Newport Beach, California Plate E COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SHEAR TEST RESULT Boring No. 1 @ 8 Feet 5 4 :T 3 o. Y N N 2 2 U) 1 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Confining Pressure (kips/sq. ft.) Native soil samples were tested at saturated conditions. The sample had a dry density of 96 lbs./cu.ft. and a moisture content of 27.7 %. Cohesion = 350 psf Friction Angle = 30 degrees Based on 80% peak strength or ultimate strength, whichever is lower Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 531917-01 2407 Buckeye Street Newport Beach, California Plate F COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SHEAR TEST RESULT Boring No. 1 @ 0 - 5 Feet 5 4 sT 3 y Q Y N y 2 2 C0 1 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Confining Pressure (kips/sq. ft.) Remolded Soil samples were tested at saturated conditions. The sample had a dry density of 99 lbs./cuft and a moisture content of 25.7 %. Cohesion = 250 psf Friction Angle = 30 degrees Based on 80% peak strength or ultimate strength, whichever is lower Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 531917-01 2407 Buckeye Street Newport Beach, California Plate G COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. ALLOWABLE BEARING CAPACITY Bearing Capacity Calculations are based on "Terzaghi's Bearing Capacity Theory" Bearing Material: Compacted fill Properties: Wet Density (y) = 110 pcf Cohesion (C) = 250 psf Angle of Friction (0) = 30 degrees Footing Depth (D) = 2 feet Footing Width (B) = 1.3 feet Factor of Safety = 3.0 Calculations - Ultimate Bearing Capacity from Table 3.1 on page 127 of "Foundation Engineering Handbook", 1975 Nc = 30.14 Nq = 18.4 Ny = 22.4 Q,= 1.3 C NC + y D Nq + 0.4 y B NY (Square Footing) = 1.3*250*30.14+110*2*18.4+0.4*110*1.25*22.4 = 9795 + 4048 + 1232 = 15075 psf Allowable Bearing Capacity for Square Footing %11= Qu/F.S. = 5025 psf Use 1800 psf Q,= 1.0 C N, + y D Nq + 0.5 y B N,, (Continuous Footing) = 1.0*250*30.14+110*2*18.4+0.5*110*1.25*22.4 = 7535 + 4048 + 1540 = 13123 psf Allowable Bearing Capacity for Continuous Footing %11= Qu/ F.S. = 4374 psf Use 1800 psf Increases: 750 psf / ft in depth over 2 feet 250 psf / ft in width over 1.25 feet Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 531917-01 2407 Buckeye Street Newport Beach, California Plate H COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. E_. r, LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE CALCULATIONS Retaining structures such as retaining walls, basement walls, and bulk -heads are commonly used in foundation engineering, and they support almost vertical slopes of earth masses. Proper design and construction of these structures require a through knowledge of the lateral forces acting between the retaining structures and the soil masses being retained. These lateral forces are due to lateral earth pressure. Properties of earth material: Wet Density (y) = 110 pcf Cohesion (C) = 250 psf Angle of Friction (0) = 30 degrees Coefficient of Friction = tan Therefore, Coefficient of Friction = tan p = tan 0 = 0.577 Use 0.35 Assumed H = 2 feet Pp=0.5yH2tan 2(45°+2)+2CHtan (45°+ 2) = 0.5*110*4*3+2*250*2*1.732 = 660 + 1732 = 2392 lbs / LF 1/2 EFP H2 = 2392 EFP: passive pressure EFP = 1196 psf / LF Allowable Passive Pressure = 300 psf / LF ( with F.S. = 3.99 ) Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 531917-01 2407 Buckeye Street Newport Beach, California Plate I COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. GROSS STABILITY ANALYSIS (For Native Slope) Reference: "Design Manual; Soil Mechanics, Foundations, and Earth Structures", NAVFAC DM -9, March 1971, Page 7-7-8. PROPERTIES C ( cohesion) = 300 psf y ( saturated density of soil) = 110 pcf H ( slope height) = 15 feet Q ( slope angle) = 27 degrees 95 ( angle of friction) = 30 degrees COMPUTATIONS: yHtan � C From Reference Figure 7-4 110*15*tan 30 300 Ncf = 15.5 Ncf C 15.5 * 300 F. S. _ _ = 2.82 y H 110 * 15 = 3.18 This factor of safety is in excess of the normally accepted minimum for stable slopes. Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 531917-01 2407 Buckeye Street Newport Beach, CA Plate J COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. --_ - — )Lod �� -,ice DEFINIT109S hj __- � VAL a OFACO y1.0 H ax zo ` 2 VALUESOFxa i 'k C FOR MID-POIN ab i Yam(,y b 0003. (BdSF)CIRCLES� o 13 0 CRITICAL TOE CIRCLE x -LO FACTOR OF SAFETY, FS= Cf rH { PARAMETER N Lon a IF A0g90 CRITICAL SLIP CIRCLE INTERSECTS TOE, W-2.0 GROUND WATER LEVEL AND TOP OF HARD STRATUM ARE BELOW CRITICAL SLIP CIRCLE, FIGURE 7.4 Stability dnalysis for Slopes With 95 and c. i 7J_a _ :•vim• rr•r►� moi/�i■�i■■t iii/WE II/I►I.II■II■■/■■�■► ON WAR FWAVA. 11111111110 NOW IVAN =a SIR --_ - — )Lod �� -,ice DEFINIT109S hj __- � VAL a OFACO y1.0 H ax zo ` 2 VALUESOFxa i 'k C FOR MID-POIN ab i Yam(,y b 0003. (BdSF)CIRCLES� o 13 0 CRITICAL TOE CIRCLE x -LO FACTOR OF SAFETY, FS= Cf rH { PARAMETER N Lon a IF A0g90 CRITICAL SLIP CIRCLE INTERSECTS TOE, W-2.0 GROUND WATER LEVEL AND TOP OF HARD STRATUM ARE BELOW CRITICAL SLIP CIRCLE, FIGURE 7.4 Stability dnalysis for Slopes With 95 and c. i 7J_a f SURFICIAL STABILITY ANALYSIS ( For Native Slope Slope) Reference: " Soil Slips, Debris Flows, and Rainstorms in the Santa Monica Mountains and Vicinity, Southern California", U. S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 851, dated 1975. CALCULATIONS: F.S.= C+(y-y,)Z(COS p)2tan 0 (y)(Z)(sin /3)(cosP) Where: F.S. is the Factor of Safety. C ( cohesion) = 300 psf y ( saturated density of soil) = 110 pcf y,N ( density of water) = 62.4 pcf Z ( depth of slide) = 4 feet ( slope angle ) = 27 degrees ( angle of friction) = 30 degrees 300+(110-62.4)(4)(0.891 )(0.891 )(0.577) FS — ( 110 ) ( 4 ) ( 0.454 ) ( 0.891 ) = 2.18 This factor of safety is in excess of the normally accepted minimum for stable slopes. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. W.O. 531917-01 Plate K 1Touch Map.com WbHeaMae .'Kc. Home » Latitude and Longitude of a Point Maps I Country - State I Places I Cities I Lat - Long To find the latitude and longitude of a point Click on the map, Drag the marker, or enter the... Address: 2407 Buckeye Street, Newport Beach, i M Mobile Version Is I Nearby Places of Interest Many points to check? Try Latl-ona Trace Latitude and Longitude of a Point ------------------------------------------- ------------- --------------- ---------- - ------ ----- © iTouchMap.com 2007-2016 F, ELM Design Maps Summary Report User—Specified Input Report Title 2407 Buckeye Street, Newport Beach, CA Fri May 19, 2017 23:58:55 UTC Building Code Reference Document ASCE 7-10 Standard (which utilizes USGS hazard data available in 2008) Site Coordinates 33.637670N, 117.87397°W Site Soil Classification Site Class D - "Stiff Soil' Risk Category I/II/III USGS—Provided Output Ss = 1.635 g S,Ns = 1.635 g So, = 1.090 g S, = 0.598 g SM3 = 0.896 g Sos = 0.598 g For information on how the SS and S1 values above have been calculated from probabilistic (risk -targeted) and deterministic ground motions in the direction of maximum horizontal response, please return to the application and select the "2009 NEHRP" building code reference document. i 1.79 t.as ass 1xEft am etar 9 0_1V MCF5i R=ipwss spm trum 1.19 WA naz 9n a64 dm to all 9Cr Design pinpws a Spec Srum Peazod,T (sec) Perl xt T (see) For PGA,„ TL, Cas, and CR, values, please view the detailed report. Although this information is a product of the U.S. Geological Survey, we provide no warranty, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy of the data contained therein. This tool is not a substitute for technical subject -matter knowledge. MUM Design Maps Detailed Report ASCE 7-10 Standard (33.637670N, 117.87397°W) Site Class D - "Stiff Soil", Risk Category I/II/III Section 11.4.1 — Mapped Acceleration Parameters Note: Ground motion values provided below are for the direction of maximum horizontal spectral response acceleration. They have been converted from corresponding geometric mean ground motions computed by the USGS by applying factors of 1.1 (to obtain Ss) and 1.3 (to obtain Sl). Maps in the 2010 ASCE-7 Standard are provided for Site Class B. Adjustments for other Site Classes are made, as needed, in Section 11.4.3. From Figure 22-1 [1] From Figure 22-2121 Section 11.4.2 — Site Class SS = 1.635 g S, = 0.598 g The authority having jurisdiction (not the USGS), site-specific geotechnical data, and/or the default has classified the site as Site Class D, based on the site soil properties in accordance with Chapter 20. Table 20.3-1 Site classification Site Class vs N or N.„ s A. Hard Rock >5,000 ft/s N/A N/A B. Rock 2,500 to 5,000 ft/s N/A N/A C. Very dense soil and soft rock 1,200 to 2,500 ft/s >50 >2,000 psf D. Stiff Soil 600 to 1,200 ft/s 15 to 5o 1,000 to 2,000 psf E. Soft clay soil <600 ft/s <15 <1,000 psf Any profile with more than 10 ft of soil having the characteristics: • Plasticity index PI > 20, • Moisture content w>_ 40%, and • Undrained shear strength s, < 500 psf F. Soils requiring site response See Section 20.3.1 analysis in accordance with Section 21.1 For SI: Ift/s = 0.3048 m/s 1lb/ft2 = 0.0479 <N/m2 Section 11.4.3 - Site Coefficients and Risk -Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake Q4CE ) f Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters Table 11.4-1: site Coefficient F. Site Class Mapped MICE , Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at Short Period Ss <- 0.25 SS = 0.50 Ss = 0.75 Ss = 1.00 SS > 1.25 A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 r B 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 C 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 D 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0 E 2.5 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.9 r 2.4 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.5 E F 2.4 See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7 See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7 Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of Ss For Site Class = D and S, = 0.595 g, F„ = 1.500 For Site Class = D and S, = 1.635 g, F, = 1.000 Table 11.4-2: Site Coefficient F, Site Class Mapped MCE a Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at 1-s Period S,:50.10 S,=0.20 S,=0.30 S,=0.40 S,>0.50 A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 B 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 r C 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 D 2.4 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.5 E 3.5 3.2 2.8 2.4 2.4 F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7 Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of S, For Site Class = D and S, = 0.595 g, F„ = 1.500 Equation (11.4-1): Sn,s = FaSs = 1.000 x 1.635 = 1.635 g Equation (11.4-2): SMI = F,SI = 1.500 x 0.598 = 0.896 g Section 11.4.4 — Design Spectral Acceleration Parameters Equation (11.4-3): SDs = % SMI = %X 1.635 = 1.090 g Equation (11.4-4): SDI= % SML = % x 0.896 = 0.598 g Section 11.4.5 — Design Response Spectrum From Figure 22-12131 TL = 8 seconds Figure 11.4-1: Design Response Spectrum T<Ta:6,=6,$(OA+OAT/T,) T.ZT5T,,:6,=6 I T04T:5TI:69=%j1T I I I I 7sTL: =%ITLITO ----------- ------------ I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I 1 1 I I i I I i I i I 1 1 1 1 1 I I i 1 I i I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I FP (ate) Section 11.4,6 — Risk -Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) Response Spectrum The VICE, Response Spectrum is determined by multiplying the design response spectrum above by 1.5. P T () Section 11.8.3 - Additional Geotechnical Investigation Report Requirements for Seismic Design Categories D through F From Figure 22-7 [41 PGA = 0.653 Equation (11.8-1): PGAM = FPIAPGA = 1.000 x 0.653 = 0.653 g Table 11.8-1: Site Coefficient F,,p Site Mapped MCE Geometric Mean Peak Ground Acceleration, PGA Class PGA 5 0.10 PGA = 0.20 PGA = 0.30 PGA = 0.40 PGA >_ 0.50 A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 B 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 C 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 D 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0 E 2.5 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.9 F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7 Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of PGA For Site Class = D and PGA = 0.653 g, FPGA = 1.000 Section 21.2.1.1 - Method 1 (from Chapter 21 - Site -Specific Ground Motion Procedures for Seismic Design) From Figure 22-17rs7 CRS = 0.930 From Figure 22-18161 CRI = 0.959 Section 11.6 — Seismic Design Category Table 11.6-1 Seismic Design Category Based on Short Period Response Acceleration Parameter VALUE OF Sos RISK CATEGORY I or II III IV Sos < 0.167g A A A 0.1678 5 Sos < 0.33g B B C O.33g <_ Sos < 0.50g C C D 0.508 5 Sos D D D For Risk Category = I and S. = 1.090 g, Seismic Design Category = D Table 11.6-2 Seismic Desion Cateoory Based on 1-S Period Resoonse Acceleration Parameter VALUE OF So, RISK CATEGORY I or II III IV So, < 0.067g A A A 0.0678 <_ Sp, < 0.1339 B B C 0.1338 <_ So, < 0.209 C C D 0.20g <_ So, D D D For Risk Category = I and Sp, = 0.595 g, Seismic Design Category = D Note: When S, is greater than or equal to 0,758, the Seismic Design Category is E for buildings in Risk Categories I, II, and III, and F for those in Risk Category IV, irrespective of the above. Seismic Design Category = "the more severe design category in accordance with Table 11,6-1 or 11.6-2" = D Note: See Section 11.6 for alternative approaches to calculating Seismic Design Category. References 1. Figure 22-1: https:Hearthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-l.pdf 2. Figure 22-2: https:Hearthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-2.pdf 3. Figure 22-12: https:HearthgLiake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-12.pdf 4. Figure 22-7: https:Hearthquake,usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-7.pdf 5. Figure 22-17: httPS:Hearthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-17.pdf 6. Figure 22-18: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-18.pdf F-, COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Wet Weather Maintenance of Hillside Home Sites Recommendations During the wet weather season, homeowners become concerned about the stability of their building sites. In general, modem design and construction practice minimizes the probability of serious slope failure. The grading codes of the local jurisdiction (cities and counties) in California concerning filled land, excavation, terracing and slope construction are among the most stringent in the country and if followed, are adequate to meet most natural occurrences. Therefore, the concern of the homeowner should be directed toward maintaining slopes, drainage provisions and facilities so that they will perform as designed. The following discussion, general recommendations and simple precautions are presented herein to help the homeowner maintain his hillside building site. The general public often regards the natural terrain as stable - "terra furca". This, of course, is and erroneous concept. Nature is always at work altering the landscape. Hills and mountains are wom down by mass wasting (erosion, sliding, creeping) and the valleys and lowlands collect these products. Thus the natural process is toward leveling the terrain. Periodically (over tens of millions of years) major land movements build mountains and erosion tends to level the terrain. In some areas these processes are very slow and in others they are more rapid. Development of hillsides for residential use is carried out, in as far as possible, to enhance the natural stability of the site and to minimize the probability of instability resulting from the grading necessary to provide home sites, streets, and yards. This has been done by the developers and designers on the basis of geologic and soil mechanics investigations. In order to be successful, the slope and drainage provisions and facilities must be maintained by the homeowner. Homeowners are accustomed to maintaining their homes. They expect to paint their houses periodically, replace wiring, clean out clogged plumbing, repair roofs, etc. Maintenance of the home site, particularly on hillsides should be considered on an even more serious basis. In most cases lot and site maintenance can be taken care of along with landscaping and can be carried out less expensively to the homeowner than repair after neglect. Most hillside lot problems are associated with water. Uncontrolled water from a broken pipe, cesspool or wet weather causes most damage. Wet weather is the largest cause of slope problems, particularly in California where rain is intermittent, but may be torrential. Therefore, drainage and erosion control are the most important aspects of home site stability. These provisions must not be altered without competent professional advice and maintenance must be carried out to assure their continued operations. We offer these procedures as a checklist to homeowners: 1. Check roof drains, gutters and down spouts to be sure they are clear. Depending on your location, if you do not have roof gutters and down spouts, you may wish to install them. Without gutters or other adequate drainage, water falls from the roof eaves and collects L against foundation and basement walls, which can be undesirable. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 2. Clear surface and terrace drainage ditches and check them frequently during the rainy season, with a shovel, if necessary. Ask your neighbors to do likewise. 3. Be sure that all drainage ditches and sub -drains have outlet drains that are open. This should be tested during dry weather. Usually this can be done simply with a hose. If blockage is evident, you may have to clear the drain mechanically. 4. Check all drains at the top of slopes to be sure that they are clear and that water will not overflow the slope itself, causing erosion. 5. Keep subsurface drain openings (weep -holes) clear of debris and other material, which could block them in a storm. 6. Check for loose fill above and below your property if you live on a slope or terrace. 7. Watch hoses and sprinklers. During the rainy season, little, if any, irrigation is required. Over -saturation of the ground is not only unnecessary and expensive, but can cause subsurface damage. 8. Watch for water backup of drains inside the house and toilets during a rainy season since this may indicate drain or sewage blockage. 9. Exercise ordinary precaution. Your house and building site was constructed to meet certain standards, which should protect against any natural occurrence, if you do your part in maintaining them. 10. Care and maintenance of hillside homes includes being sure that terrace drains and brow ditches on slopes or at the top of cuts, or fill slopes are not blocked. They are designed to carry away runoff to a place where it can be safely distributed. Generally, a little shovel work will remove any accumulation of dirt and other debris, which may clog the drain. If several homes are located on the same terrace, it is a good idea to check with your neighbors. Water backed up on their properties may eventually reach yours. Water backed up in surface drains will tend to overflow and seep into the terraces, creating less stable slopes. 11. Water should not be permitted to collect or pond on your home site. Ponded water will tend to either seep into the ground loosening fill or natural ground, or will overflow onto the slope and cause erosion. Once erosion is started, it is difficult to control and severe damage may result rather quickly. 12. Roof drains and gutters or down spouts should not be connected to subsurface drains. Rather, arrange them so that water either flows off your property in a specially designed i., pipe or it flows out onto a paved driveway or the street. The water then may be dissipated over a wide surface or preferably be carried away in a paved gutter or storm drain. Subdrains are constructed to take care of ordinary subsurface water and cannot '[ handle the overload from roofs during a heavy rain. 13. Water should not be allowed to spill over slopes, even where this may seem to be a good way to prevent ponding. This trends to cause erosion and, in the case of fill slopes, can cut away carefully designed and constructed sites. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 14. Loose soil or debris should not be left on or tossed over slopes. Loose soil soaks up water more rapidly than compacted fill. In addition, it is not compacted to the same strength as the slope itself and will tend to slide when laden with water and may even affect the soil beneath it. The sliding may clog terrace drains below or may cause additional damage in weakening the slope. If you live below a slope, try to be sure that loose fill is not dumped above your property. 15. Water should not be discharged into subsurface blanket drains close to slopes. French drains are sometimes used to get rid of excess water when other ways of disposing of water are not readily available. Overloading these drains saturates the ground and, if located close to slopes, may cause slope failure. 16. Surface water should not discharged into septic tanks or leaching fields. Not only are septic tanks constructed for a different purpose, but they will tend, because of their construction, to accumulate additional water naturally from the ground during a heavy rain. Overloading them artificially during the rainy season is bad for the same reason as subsurface subdrains, and is doubly dangerous since their overflow can pose a serious health hazard. In many areas the use of septic tanks should be discontinues as soon as sewers can be made available. 17. Slopes should not be over -irrigated. In some areas ice plant and other heavy ground cover can cause surface sloughing when saturated due to the increase in weight and weakening of the near surface soil. Planted slopes should be located, where possible, in areas where they will be adequately irrigated by rainfall. 18. Water should not be allowed to gather against foundation, retaining walls and basement walls. These walls are built to withstand the ordinary moisture in the ground and are, where necessary, accompanied by subdrains to carry of the excess moisture. If water is permitted to pond against them, it may seep through the wall causing dampness and leakage inside the basement. It also may cause the soil adjacent to the foundation to swell resulting in structural damage to walls and footings. 19. New fill placed behind walls or in trenches should not be compacted by flooding with water. Not only is flooding the least efficient way of compacting fine grained soil, but could damage the wall foundation. 20. Hoses and sprinklers should not be left running on or near a slope, particularly during the rainy season. This will enhance ground saturation which may cause damage. 21. Ditches which have been graded around your house or the lot pad should not be blocked. These shallow ditches have been put there for the purpose of quickly removing water toward the driveway, street or other positive outlet. By all means, do not let water become ponded above slopes by blocked ditches.