Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutX2019-1778 - Misc (2)COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 1200 west Commonwealth Avenue, Fullerton, CA 92833 Ph: 714-870-1211 Fax: 714-870-1222 a-maih coastgeotec@sbeglobal.net March 15, 2022 Ms. Chan Quynh Dang 2961 Cliff Drive Newport Beach, CA 92625 Dear Ms. Dang: W.O.419711-14 2q�0 GOo�- 17Y Subject: Second Final Soils Report for 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California In accordance with your request, this final soils report has been prepared to address geotechnical observations and testing performed since completion of rough grading. This report addresses requested observations and testing. Copies of our daily reports are maintained in our files. FOUNDATION EXCAVATIONS The rear site wall foundation, south of the basement area was observed on May 4, 2020. The basement mat slab foundation excavation was observed on May 13 and 19, 2020. An at -grade site wall foundation was observed on August 6, 2020. The foundation excavations were found to be acceptable at the time of our final observation. INTERIOR SLAB SUBGRADE AND TRENCH BACKFILLS The basement mat slab subgrade for the waste slab was observed on May 13 and 19, 2020. Probing and testing of the slab subgrade areas showed acceptable geotechnical conditions for support of the proposed slab. SUBDRAINS The subdrain system for the shotcrete wall was observed on May 13, 2020. The subdrain system for the basement walls was observed on July 21, 2020, consisted of a four -inch diameter SCH 40 perforated pipe, surrounded with one cubic foot, per lineal pipe foot, of 3/4-inch gravel. The gravels were wrapped in filter fabric. The subdrains appeared to be constructed per plan. BASEMENT WALL BACKFILL Backfill of the basement walls, as requested periodically by the contractor, was observed from July 23, 2020 through July 27, 2020. The basement wall was backfilled with gravels up to about two to three feet below top of the basement walls. The gravels were covered in fabric then on -site soils were used to reach finish grades. Backfill soils were placed in thin lifts; moisture conditioned as needed and mechanically compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction up to finish pad grade elevations. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Dang 2 W.0.419711-14 Final Soils Report March 1 S 2022 Equipment used for compaction of fill soils consisted of mechanical hand compactors and a hose. Earthwork was completed by Instant Landscape. HARDSCAPE Partial hardscape subgrade areas for the eastern side and front entry subgrade were observed on January 18, 2022. Hardscape subgrade areas for the rest of the front entry and side walkway were observed on February 24, and 25, 2022. Probing and testing of hardscape area subgrades indicated acceptable geotechnical conditions for support of the proposed hardscape. OPINION It is opinion of COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC, that the summarized geotechnical conditions approved by this office are in compliance with approved geotechnical reports and Newport Beach building codes. The final grades appear to conform to approved plans. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. Respectfully Submitted: COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ming-Tamg Chen RCE 54011 No. 54011 Esp. 12/31/23 COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Dang 3 W.0.419711-14 Final Soils Report March 15 If)') - REFERENCES 1. Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for Proposed Residence at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECFINICAL, INC., W.O. 419711-01, dated February 25, 2014. 2. Clarification of Natural Slope at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O.419711-02, dated August 19, 2014. 3. Response to First Geotechnical Review Checklist for 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECFINICAL, INC., W.O.419711-03, dated November 20, 2014. 4. Addendum Report for Proposed Pool at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O.419711-04, dated January 27, 2015. 5. Addendum Report for Caisson Foundation System at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O. 419711-05, dated August 14, 2015. 6. Addendum Report for Caisson Foundation System, Revised to Include Pool Foundations at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W,O. 419711-06, September 30, 2015. 7. Pool Subdrain, Proposed Pool at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O. 419711-07, October 26, 2015. 8. Compaction Report of Slope Reconstruction at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECFWICAL, INC., W.O. 419711-08, February 29, 2016. 9. Final Soils Report, New Residence at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECTINICAL, INC., W.O.419711-09, August 25, 2017. 10. Revised and Updated Geotechnical Report for Proposed Residence at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O.419711-10, June 28, 2019. 1 L Response to Third Geotechnical Review Checklist for Proposed Residence at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O. 419711-11, November 26, 2019. 12. Reduced Survey Monitoring at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O.419711-12, April 14, 2020. 13. Rough Grade Compaction Report for 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O.419711-13, May 6, 2020, COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 1200 West Commonwealth Ave Fullerton CA 92833 • Ph: (714) 870-1211 • Fax (714) 870 1222 e-mail, coasteeotecAsbcelobal net May 6, 2020 Ms. Chan Quynh Dang 2961 Cliff Drive Newport Beach, CA 92625 Dear Ms. Dang: W.O.419711-13 Subject: Rough Grade Compaction Report for Proposed New Residence at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California. Forwarded herewith is the rough grade compaction report for the subject site. The shoring and grading operation was observed and or tested by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. utilizing the referenced geotechnical reports, as a guideline. SHORING Shoring along the eastern side of the property was installed between March 26, 2020 and March 31, 2020. Shoring consisted of nine piles extending 26.5 to 29.0 feet below grade. Wood lagging was placed between piles to support the adjacent property in accordance with approved plans. Backfrll of the "H" beam and boring annulus consisted of concrete. Wood lagging was backfilled with slurry. Shoring was installed by Drilco, Inc. PLACEMENT OF FILL - BASEMENT AREA The grading operation was conducted from April 16, 2020 through April 21, 2020 utilizing the referenced geotechnical reports, as a guideline. Compacted fill material was placed on the subject site to provide adequate support for the proposed structure. Overexcavation of the basement area extended into competent earth material. The depth of overexcavation was about 1.0 to 1.5 feet below final grade. The basement excavation bottom was scarified, moisture conditioned with a water hose as needed, and compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction. Fill soils were placed in six to eight inch loose lifts, moisture conditioned as needed, and compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction by track rolling. Limits of grading are shown on the attached Plate 1. The basement excavation and laybacks are considered stable for temporary unsaturated conditions. No water seepage was noted during excavations. Equipment used for compaction of the fill soils consisted of a CAT excavator and Case rubber track loader. Earthwork was by PHD Demolition and Grading. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Dang 2 W.O. 419711-13 Rough Grade Compaction Report Mav 6 2020 Areas outside the basement area will be graded at a later time. TESTING Maximum density optimum moisture relationship determinations were performed for each soil type encountered during grading operations. Test results were as follows: Laboratory Standard: (ASTM:D-1557) 4-inch diameter mold; 1/30 ft3 volume; 5 layers at 25 blows per layer; 10 lb. hammer dropped 18 inches Soil Type Classification Optimum Moisture, % Max. Dry Density, lbs/ft3 I Tan to Yellow Brown Silty Sand 9.5 125.0 II Tan Fine to Coarse Grained Sand 10.0 112.0 Compaction tests were performed a minimum of every two feet and/or 500 cubic yards of compacted fill soils placed. These tests were performed in accordance with ASTM test method. The test results are summarized in Table 1. The approximate test locations are shown on Plate 1. FOUNDATION - RESIDENCE A mat foundation is advised within the basement in order to provide a better water proofing system. A water tight system is recommended. A mat slab foundation for the basement should be at least twelve inches thick and reinforced in accordance with the structural engineer's design. The mat slab foundation may utilize an allowable bearing value of 1,800 psf and a modulus of subgrade reaction of 100 psi in the design. This value is for dead plus live load and may be increased by 1/3 for total including seismic and wind loads where allowed by codes. Reinforcement shall be determined by the structural engineer. The mat slab subgrade soils shall be observed by a representative of COAST GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. prior to placement of steel, concrete, vapor barrier or capillary break to verify acceptable soil conditions. CONVENTIONAL FOUNDATIONS IN COMPACTED FILL Continuous and isolated foundations supported by compacted fill shall be placed a minimum of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade and may utilize an allowable bearing value of 1,800 psf. This value is for dead plus live load and may be increased by 1/3 for total including seismic and wind loads where allowed by code. Calculations are shown on Plate I. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Dang 3 W.O.419711-13 Rough Grade Compaction Report Mav 6 2020 Where isolated pads are utilized, they shall be tied in into adjacent foundations with grade beams or continuous footing. The width shall be 12-inches for single story, 15-inches for two story, and 18-inches for three story Minimum geotechnical reinforcement of foundations is four #4 bars, two top and two bottom, structural design may require additional reinforcement. Foundation excavations shall be observed and approved by the soil engineer to verify compliance with project geotechnical requirements. Dependent on conditions exposed soil engineer may require the foundation excavations to be extended deeper or to be mitigated per field recommendations. LATERAL DESIGN Lateral restraint at the base of footings and on slabs may be assumed to be the product of the dead load and a coefficient of friction of .35. Passive pressure on the face of footings may also be used to resist lateral forces. A passive pressure of zero (0) at the surface, increasing at the rate of 300 pounds per square foot of depth to a maximum value of 3,500 pounds per square foot, may be used for competent native earth and compacted fill materials. Where passive pressure and friction are combined when evaluating the lateral resistance, the value of the passive pressure should be limited to 2/3 of the values given above. SEISMIC DESIGN Based on the 2016 California Building Code, latitude 33.622338 longitude-117.926531 and the USGS Seismic Design Tool the following seismic design values may be utilized. • Site Class = D • Seismic Design Category = D • Mapped 0.2 Second Spectral Response Acceleration, Ss = 1.698g • Mapped One Second Spectral Response Acceleration St = 0.627g • Site Coefficient from Table 1613A5.3(1), Fa =1.0 • Site Coefficient from Table 1613A5.3(2), Fv = 1.5 • Maximum Design Spectral Response Acceleration for short period, SMs = 1.698g • Maximum Design Spectral Response Acceleration for one -second period, Sm, = 0.941 g • 5% Design Spectral Response Acceleration for short period, SDs = 1.132g 0 5% Design Spectral Response Acceleration for one -second period, SDI = 0.627g COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Dang 4 W.O.419711-13 Rough Grade Compaction Report Mav 6 2020 RETAINING WALL DESIGN Unrestrained retaining walls shall be founded in competent compacted fill utilizing previously stated bearing values. Walls retaining drained earth under static loading may be designed for the following: Surface Slope of Retained Material Horizontal to Vertical Equivalent Fluid Pressure Pounds per Cubic Foot Level 35.7 5 to 1 41.7 4 to 1 43.7 3 to 1 47.8 2 to 1 62.9 The point of resultant force is at H/3 above the base of the retaining wall, where H is the wall height. All retaining structures should include appropriate allowances for anticipated surcharge loading, where applicable. Retaining walls with an ascending slope condition shall include a minimum one - foot free board and concrete swale in their design. The provided design is based on the use of select very low expansive granular earth materials as backfills. The structural engineer shall designate this on his plans. Onsite earth materials that exhibit the required expansion criteria may be used as backfills. Footing excavations require observation and approval by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. BASEMENT WALL DESIGN Walls restrained from deflection by the structural frame should be designed for "at -rest' earth pressures. For level backfill conditions, an equivalent fluid pressure of 60 pounds per cubic foot. The surcharge pressure of traffic loads, adjacent buildings, and seismic loadings should be added to these soil pressures. The structural engineer shall designate on the designed for restrained or unrestrained conditions. or framing in place prior to backfill placement. foundation plans whether basement walls are Walls designed as restrained must have the deck The design values provided are based on the use of select very low expansive granular soils or gravels as backfill. The structural engineer shall designate on the plans the use of select backfill materials. Onsite earth materials that exhibit the required expansion criteria may be used as backfills. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Dang 5 W.O. 419711-13 Roueh Grade Compaction Report Mav 6 2020 Footing excavations require observation and approval by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. prior to placement of reinforcement. SEISMIC DESIGN VALUE Code requires that retaining walls with more than six feet of backfill be designed for seismic loads. For a retaining wall under earthquake loading the designed equivalent fluid pressure is sensitive to the ground motion value applied to analysis. Our understanding is that the current reviewer for the City of Newport Beach utilizes Sos for the ground motion and allows the consulting engineer to utilize his allowed reduction to determine the seismic coefficient Kh. For unrestrained conditions a Kh value of 0.226 was determined. Use of this value in a simplified analysis method allowed by the reviewer, determines that a seismic load of 20.3 pcf should be utilized by the structural engineer. For restrained conditions a Kh value of 0.385 was determined. Use of this value in a simplified analysis method, determines that a seismic load of 34.7 pcf should be utilized by the structural engineer. WATERPROOFING There is an inherent risk with moisture problems when constructing below grade rooms. The geotechnical consultant is only responsible for identification of adverse moisture conditions, which will impact below grade rooms at this site. The waterproofing for the basement floor and walls should be designed and inspected accordingly by a qualified person. We recommend that both basement walls and floor be designed watertight. SUBDRAINS Subdrain systems shall be installed behind retaining walls and at a minimum they shall consist of four -inch diameter SCH 40 or SDR 35 perforated pipe surrounded with one cubic foot, per lineal pipe foot, of 3/4-inch gravel. The gravel shall be wrapped in filter fabric. Outlet pipes shall be solid pipe of similar material. Subdrains for basement walls shall be placed below the elevation of the basement floor. Subdrain systems shall be independent of area surface drains and roof drains. Subdrain placement requires observation and approval by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. BASEMENT/ RETAINING WALL BACKFILL Retaining wall backfills shall consist of select very low expansive onsite granular earth materials, similar import materials, or gravels. Prior to placement of any backfills the area shall be cleaned of loose soils and construction debris. Coast Geotechnical, Inc shall observe and approve the area as acceptable prior to any backfill placement. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INc. Ms. Dang 6 W.O.419711-13 Rough Grade Compaction Report Is__' 2020 Retaining wall backfill shall be placed in six to eight inch loose; moisture conditioned lifts and mechanically compacted to a minimum of ninety percent relative compaction. Backfills require testing at two -foot vertical intervals during placement. If imported granular soils or gravel are used as backfill material, the backfill material shall be separated from on -site soils with filter cloth. Gravel backfill materials shall be heavily watered and compacted, at a minimum, in two foot vertical lifts. A soil cap, consisting of on -site soils or similar material, shall be placed over any granular soil or rock backfill and separated by filter cloth from the underlying material. The soil cap shall be a minimum of three feet in thickness or one foot below footing bottoms, whichever is deeper. Soil cap soils shall be placed in six to eight inch loose lifts, moisture conditioned as needed, and compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction. Compaction of backfills requires observation and approval by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. during the backfill operation. SLAB -ON -GRADE DESIGN The surface soils are non -plastic. Interior slabs shall be supported by compacted fills placed in accordance with this report. Minimum geotechnical recommendations for at grade slab on grade design are four inch actual thickness with #3 bars at twelve inches on center each way, and for basement slabs six inch actual thickness with #3 bars at twelve inches on center each way. Structural design may require additional reinforcement and slab thickness. If the soils at grade become disturbed during construction, they should be brought to 34% over optimum moisture content and rolled to a firm, unyielding condition prior to placing concrete. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. will need to verify adequate mitigation. Prior to placement of the capillary break or vapor retarder 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. A capillary break material shall comply with the requirements of the local jurisdiction and shall be a minimum of four inches in thickness. The capillary break shall consist of open graded 1/2 inch or larger gravel. The gravels shall be vibrated smooth. The gravels shall be covered with a heavy filter prior to placement of the vapor barrier to minimize puncturing of the vapor barrier. A minimum 15-mil thick vapor barrier/retarder in accordance with requirements of ASTM E:1745 and E:1643 is recommended. As an alternative to use of the filter fabric, a heavier vapor barrier resistant to puncturing could be utilized over the gravels. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Dang 7 W.O.419711-13 Roueh Grade Compaction Report Mav 6 2020 The stated vapor barrier is recommended for all slab on grade areas and shall be properly lapped and sealed in accordance with code. The vapor barrier shall be in contact with the slab bottom. From a geotechnical viewpoint where basement floors utilize a watertight waterproof system the capillary break and vapor barrier may be omitted. This is subject to approval of the local building official. EXPANSIVE SOILS Results of expansion tests indicate that the near surface soils have a very low to low expansion potential. Current practice in Southern California dictates substantial reinforcement, slab thickening, moisture barriers, and pre -saturation of subgrade soils as a method of minimizing the effects of expansive soil, not eliminating them. The design guidelines presented in the referenced reports, 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. SETTLEMENT For site improvements supported by foundations bearing in approved earth material maximum total post -constriction settlement is anticipated to be on the order of one-half inch. Differential settlements are expected to be less than one-half inch, measured between adjacent structural elements over a horizontal distance of forty feet. SOLUBLE SULFATES A chemical analysis of typical soil samples for soluble sulfates showed a sulfate content of 40 ppm and 30ppm. Based on the current ACI 318 Table 4.3.1 this is a negligible exposure to sulfate corrosion. Type II cement may be utilized. Structural requirements may dictate a higher strength concrete. 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 minimum of two -foot vertical intervals. Utility lines shall be placed at appropriate depths. Shallow pipes can be damaged by the forces imposed by compacting backfill soils. If shallow pipes are not capable of withstanding the forces of backfill compaction, slurry backfill will be recommended. Where subsurface utility lines enter building areas a concrete plug shall be placed to reduce the risk of water infiltration. DRAINAGE Positive drainage should be planned for the site. Drainage should be directed away from structures via non -erodible conduits to suitable disposal areas. The structure should utilize roof gutters and down spouts tied directly to yard drainage. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Dang 8 W.O.419711-13 Rough Grade Compaction Report Mav 6 2020 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. The current CBC recommends 5% slope away from structures for landscape areas and 2% slope away for hardscape areas, within ten feet of a residence. Minimum drainage shall be one percent for hardscape areas and two percent for landscape areas for all other areas. We do not recommend the use of infiltration best management practice (BMP) such as bottomless trenches, 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 below grade structures, building foundations and slabs, and hardscape improvements. From a geotechnical viewpoint surface drainage should be directed to the street or alley. The WQMP requirement shall be addressed by the Civil Engineer. HARDSCAPESLABS Hardscape slab subgrade areas shall exhibit a minimum of 90% relative compaction and moisture content 34% over optimum moisture content to a depth of at least one foot. 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, due to expansive soils, in subgrade soils, which will lead to cracking. The followings recommendations will minimize cracking and offsets, but will not eliminate concrete cracks. Exterior hardscape shall be underlain by engineered fill soils, and designed for very low expansive soil conditions. Minimum slab thickness shall be four inches actual and reinforced with #3 bars at 18 inches on center each way Doweling slabs to perimeter footings can mitigate movement of slabs adjacent to structures. Doweling should consist of No. 4 bars bent around exterior slabs. Doweling should be spaced no farther than 36 inches on centers. As an option to doweling, an architectural separation could be provided between the main structure and abutting appurtenance improvements. Presaturation of exterior slab areas is also desirable. At exterior edges of patios and other flatwork, a cut-off wall to the same depth and containing the same reinforcement as exterior footings is highly recommended. If no significant load is associated with the edge of the slab, the width of the cut- off wall may be limited to eight inches. Reinforcement adopted for the main structure may be applied to the appurtenances. As an alternative to rigid hardscape or brickwork, flexible pavers may be utilized. COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Dang 9 W.O. 419711-13 Rough Grade Compaction Report May 6.2020 POST -GRADING SERVICES During construction of the residence, it is recommended, and at times required by the regulatory agency, the following be observed and/or tested by the geotechnical engineer: • Excavation of foundations • Subdrain placement and backfill of basement walls. • Backfill of interior slab areas • Backfill of interior trenches • Backfill of exterior utility trenches • Hardscape subgrade • Grading of upper pad area It is the responsibility of the developer to schedule the required observations and testing. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE I hereby certify that the subject grading was observed by a representative from this office, and the work was done in full compliance with the Grading Ordinance of the City of Newport Beach and in accordance with the best accepted practices of the applicable chapter of the California Building Code. All cuts, fills or processing of original ground under the purview of this report have been completed under the observation of and with selective testing by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. and found to be in compliance with the Grading Code of the City of Newport Beach. The completed work has been observed by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. and is considered adequate for the development. Our findings were made and recommendations prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practices, and no further warranty is implied nor made. This report is subject to review by the controlling authorities for this project. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. Respectfully submitted: COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ming-Tarng Chen RCE 54011 taQ�� No. 54011 Exp. 12/31/23 R IV COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Dang 10 W.O.419711-13 Rough Grade Compaction Report Ma 6 202 COMPACTION TEST RESULTS TABLE 1 Test No. Location Below Proposed Grade $ ( ) Moisture Content ° Dry Unit Wei t (lbs/ft3) Soil T e Type Relative Compaction % Date 1 Basement 1.0-1.5 11.5 115.5 I 92.4 4/16/20 2 Basement 1.0-1.5 11.4 102.7 II 91.7 4/16/90 3 Basement 1.0-1.5 10.5 101.8 11 90.9 4/17/20 4 Basement 1.0-1.5 10.9 114.1 I 91.2 4/17/20 5 Basement F.G. 10.8 116.0 I 92.8 4/20/20 6 Basement F.G. 9.9 116.9 I 93.5 4/21/20 7 Basement F.G. 10.0 117.6 I 94.1 4/21/20 8 Basement F.G. 9.5 115.3 I 92.2 4/21/20 F.G.- Finish Grade COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ms. Dang 11 W.O. 419711-13 Rough Grade Compaction Report Ma 6 2020 REFERENCES 1. Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for Proposed Residence at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O. 419711-01, dated February 25, 2014. 2. Clarification of Natural Slope at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O.419711-02, dated August 19, 2014. 3. Response to First Geotechnical Review Checklist for 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O.419711-03, dated November 20, 2014. 4. Addendum Report for Proposed Pool at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O.419711-04, dated January 27, 2015. 5. Addendum Report for Caisson Foundation System at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O. 419711-05, dated August 14, 2015. 6. Addendum Report for Caisson Foundation System, Revised to Include Pool Foundations at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O. 419711-06, September 30, 2015. 7. Pool Subdrain, Proposed Pool at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O. 419711-07, October 26, 2015. 8. Compaction Report of Slope Reconstruction at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O.419711-08, February 29, 2016. 9. Final Soils Report, New Residence at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O. 419711-09, August 25, 2017. 10. Revised and Updated Geotechnical Report for Proposed Residence at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O.419711-10, June 28, 2019. 11, Response to Third Geotechnical Review Checklist for Proposed Residence at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O. 419711-11, November 26, 2019. 12. Reduced Survey Monitoring at 2961 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, California; by COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC., W.O. 419711-12, April 14, 2020. COMPACTION TESTS PLATE Scale: V ;z 16' Santa Ana A r�( Compaction Approximate I Test Location Limits of Grading Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Work Order 419711-13 2961 Cliff Drive Newport Beach, California Plate No. 1 COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INC.