The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutXC2022-1979 - Alternative Material & Methodsxcz= - lqF9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BUILDING DIVISION 100 Civic Center Drive I P.O. Box 1768 1 Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 www.newportbeachca.gov 1 (949) 644-3200 CASE NO.: REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION TO PROVISIONS OF TITLE 9 (FIRE CODE) OR TITLE 15 (BUILDING CODE) OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE (See Reverse for Basis for Approval) (Fee $297) REQUEST FOR ALTERNATE MATERIAL OR METHOD OF CONSTRUCTION (See Reverse for Basis for Approval) (Fee $297) For above requests, complete Sections 1, 2 & 3 below by printing in ink or typing. JOB ADDRESS: SITE ADDRESS: 3443 Pacific View Drive Owner Harbor Day School Address 3443 Pacific View Drive Newport Beach CA zip 92625 Daytime Phone (949 ) 640-1410 cOCF/�F FE6 F�F apM Mr 2,?Z0?3 4(4y"o �Z FOR STAFF USE ONLY Plan Check # 'VCZL'22-L4(v # of Stories Occupancy Classification Use of Building w # of Units Project Status Q`t� GOB Construction Type Verified by NL r— No. of Items Fee due �11 DISTRIBUTION: ❑ Owner ,Plan Check_HV Petitioner ❑ Inspector ❑ Fire ❑ Other PETITIONER: Petitioner DRS (Petitioner fo be archifect or engineer) Address 3564 Sagunto Street, Box 486 Santa Ynez. CA zip 93460 Daytime Phone (818) 402-3962 Email: drs0drs-engineerinc net " 2 REQUEST: Submit plans if necessary to illustrate request. Additional sheets or data may be attached. 11 3 JUSTIFICATION/FINDINGS OF EQUIVALENCY: CODE SECTIONS: 11 The use of the latest AC1318 code is requested because technical lot 0 1 - Lic. # C69911 2/17/23 FOR STAFF USE ONLY DEPARTMENT ACTION: In accordance with: g�CBC 104.11/CFC 104.9 f (Alternate materials & methods) ❑ Concurrence from Fire Code Official is required. ❑ Approved ❑ Disapproved By: Date Request (DOE (DOES N ssen any fire protection requirements. Request (DOE ES NO ssen the structural integrity ❑ CBC 104.10/CFC 104.8 (CBC Modification) ❑ Written Comments Attached The Request is: Granted ❑ Denied (see reverse for appeal information) ❑ Granted (Ratification required) Conditions of Approval: CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL Signature Position Print Name i u7.[ =r l th4.m Date D Z - 2:7 - Lr7 Z-S APPEAL OF DIVISION ACTION TO THE BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS (See Reverse) (Signature, statement of owner or applicant, statement of reasons for appeal and filing fees are required.) CASHIER RECEIPT NUMBER: W��' OD��% GOl''� Forms\modif 07/08/22 Permanent Micropile Caisson Wall Design Prepared For Harbor Day School 3443 Pacific View Drive Corona Del Mar CA 92625 Prepared by --- Engineering Inc. 3-364 Sagunto St. Box 486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Project No: 2019-44 January 19th 2023 D R1.s' Engineering Inc. Permanent Micro -Caisson Wall - Design Methodology The cantilever caisson wall design uses three approaches to check the minimum embedment depth of the caissons as follows: Point of Fixity Approach (Balance moments and lateral forces around a point of fixity) Free earth Methods (Balance moments about the ciasson tip) CBC Pole formula (check) The most critical pile embedment depth and shear and monents from the above three aproaches are selected for design. Active earth pressures, seismic earth pressures and surcharges are applied as pressure on the active side of the caisson. Passive resistances are simplified by assuming a right triangle pressure on the passive side of the caisson embedment depth. Shear and moments within the caissons are determined using static equilibium analysis using LRFD factors per CBC. The required embedment depth of the caisson is detemined by static analysis using ASD factors for lateral equilibium and moment equilibium and also checked using the CBC "pole formula". Caisson facing are design for the maximum factored static plus seismic earth pressures and live load that the facing will experience. DJ,Rj,SJ, Engineering Inc. Basis of Design Geotechnical Report Author: I Southern California Geotechnical Ref: 18G161-7 Date: jApril2nd 2021 WALL LOADING Active Earth Pres Cut Walls Fill Walls Seismic Earth Pressure Surcharge Load (Active Side) Lateral Wind Load at TW (from Fence) Wind Load Moment at TW (from Fence) Passive Earth Pressure Passive Pressure at Start Depth to start of passive Ultimate Passive Pressure slope Max. Ultimate Passive Pressure Soil Unit Weight SOLDIER PILE DESIGN Arching Factor for Passive Minimum Pile spacing for arching WOOD LAGGING DESIGN PRESSURE LOAD COMBINATIONS Base Loads Case 1 Eq, 16.9 H+L Case 2 Eq, 16.9 H+0.6W Case 3 Eq, 16.12 H+0.7E Case 4 Eq, 16.13 H+0.75(0.6W)+0.75L Case 5 Eq, 16.13 H+0.75(0.7E)+0.75L EFPc = 51 psf/ft EFPf= 43 psf/ft EFPEq = 24 psf/ft SchLd1= 100 psf/ft WI1= 375 Ibs/LF Wr2= 2000lb-ft/LF Pp1= 0 psf Pd1= 0 ft Ppu= 250 psf/ft Ppumax= 2500 psf/ft y = 120 pcf Af = 2.0 Pas = 2.0 x pile dia Lagp= 400 psf H psf/ft L psf E 24H W 375 51 100 psf/ft Ibs/ft 51 100 51 225 51 16.8H 51 75 1 168.8 51 75 1 16.81-1 See Appendix A for relevant sections of the soils report and determination of Wind Loading D' R S. Engineering Inc. Design Cases Case Case Caissons 1 C-4-6.5-S1 1-11,40-48 2 C-5-6.5-S1 12-39 3 F-4-6.5-S1 49-55, 75-89 4 F-6-6.5-S1 65-74 5 F-9-6-S1 56-58, 62-64 6 F-10-4-S1 59-61 Cut or Fill Wall Design Height Design Spacing Design Surcharge _. y XX-XX-XX-XX D R,.Sj. Engineering Case # Case Piles Cantilever Caisson Design Permanent Condition 1 C-4-6.5-S 1 1-11,40-48 Summary of Results Max Design Retained Height Minimum Toe below subgrade Caisson Dia Vertical bars Earth Side Vertical bars Free Side Ties Concrete Strength 4.0 ft 10.0 ft 14.0 INCHES 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www,DRS-Fngineering.net D R Sj. Engineering Cantilever Shoring Design Case 9 0 Pile Geometry Retained Height ft Pile Spacing ft Depth to Fixity ft MC Cut or Fill Surcharge Pressures Surcharge Strip Load 51 = Distance to strip load Xs = Width of strip load Ws = Depth to Strip Load ds = Shoring Rigidity Bousinesque (B) or Constant C Pressure v Depth Depth Oh (psf) 0.0 100.0 -0.4 100.0 -0.8 100.0 -1.2 100.0 -1.6 100.0 -2.0 100.0 -2.4 100.0 -2.8 100.0 -3.2 100.0 -3.6 100.0 -4.0 100.0 -4.4 100.0 -4.8 100.0 -S..21 100.0 -5.61 100.0 -6.01 100.0 Lateral Pressure psf 0 0 p o d 0 0 O r N �.n 7/ 1.0 U (1 71 _ IB s v -4.0 0 -5.0 e.o 7.0 Equivalent Rectangles for Surcharge From Depth to Depth Oh psf 0.0 -3.2 100 -3.2 -6.0 100 3564 Sagunto St. 4486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net DI Rl.sl Engineering Determine Lateral Loads and Moments About Point of Fixity Static Earth Loads: Active Earth Pressure Pa - 51.0 pcf Total lateral force from active pressure PST= 6.0 kips 1/2. Pa. (H+f)A2. sp/1000 Total moment due to active pressure MST= 11.9 kip-ft P n . (H+f) /3 Surcharge Loads Total lateral force from Surcharge PSU = 3.9 kip Oh . (H+f) . Sp Total moment due to Surcharge MSU - 11.7 kip-ft PS . (H+f)/3 Seismic Earth Loads: Seismic Earth Pressure Pa = 0.0 H Zero if H<=6ft Total lateral force from seismic pressure Peq = 0.0 kip 1/2. Poe. (H+f)A2. Sp/1000 Total moment due to seismic pressure Meq = 0.0 kip-ft Peq. (H+f)/3 Wind Loads Lateral Wind Load per LF of Wall F = 0.4 kip/LF Micropile Caisson Spacing S = 6.5 ft Lateral force on Caisson from Wind Fw_ 2.4 kip F*S Moment in Caisson from Fw Mw= 13.0 kip-ft Fw . (H+f)/3 Summary of Loading Surcharge ActiveEarth Seismic Wind Load Load Load Load L H E W Lateral Force on Caisson above Point of Fixity (kip) 3.9 6.0 0.0 2.4 Moment About Point of Fixity (kip-ft) 11.7 11.9 0.0 13.0 Factor of Safety included in Static Pressure Provided by Geotech. 1.00 Factor of Safety included in Seismic Pressure Provided by Geotech. 1.00 Unfactored Loads Surcharge Static Seismic Wind Load Load Load Load L H E W Lateral Force on Caisson above Point of Fixity (kip) 3.9 6.0 0.0 2.4 Moment About Point of Fixity (kip-ft) 11.7 11.9 0.0 13.0 3564 Sagunto St. 1#486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering. net ® Rj S. Engineering Load Combinations For Caisson Structural Design (Strength Design) Load case #1 CBC Eq. 16-2 = 1.6(L+H) Load case #2 CBC Eq 16-5 = 1.61-1 +1.OL+1.OE Load case #3 CBC Eq 16-6 = 1.OW +1.6H For Caisson Lateral Stability & Overturning Load case #4 CBC Eq. 1807.2 =1.5L + 1.5H+1.SW Load case #5 CBC Eq. 1807.2 = 1.1L+1.1H+1.1E+1.1W Factored Factored Lateral Moment Force kip kip-ft 15.8 37.8 13.4 30.8 12.0 32.1 18.5 55.0 13.5 40.3 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering. net DI I R s Engineering Embedment Depth: Passive Pressure = Pp = 250 psf/ft or 0.25 ksf/ft Ppmax= 2,500 psf or 2.50 ksf Select Caisson Diameter 14 inches Arching Width F:233ft Effective width for passive pressure spacing is taken as minimum of arching width and caisson spacing Effective Width = F 2.33 ft Trial Embedment depth dmin = 8.0 ft below point of fixity Passive resistance provided Pp =1 18.7 kips Required Lateral Resistance Prqd =1 18.51 kips Pp>=Prgd -OK Check Moment equilibrium Using Point of Fixity Passive Moment Capacity Mp= 99.6 kip ft Active Moment Ma =1 55.0 kip-ft kip-ft Mp>=Ma -OK Minimum Embedment below design subgrade I 10.00 ft based on fixed earth method Check embedment required using free earth approach Determine Embedment Depth for balance moment about pile toe Min d for Ppassive>=Mactive = 10.0 Mactive = 94773 lb-ft Ppassive= 97222 lb-ft Maximum design Moment = 32.3 kip-ft Maximum Design Shear = 6.6 kip-ft Minimum Embedment below design subgrade 10.00 ft based on free earth method Check Caisson Toe Embedment Del Pile Spacing Sp= Active pressure Pa = Passive Pressure = Pp= Effective Pile Diameter b = Retained Height H = Active Force P = Embedment Depth dmin = 0.5 A {1 Embedment Provided d = d/3 = S1= Point of Appication of P h= A Determination per CBC 2013 1807.3.2.1 pcf psf/ft to max. 4.001 ft 2652 Ibs per pile +4.36 h/A)]A0.5) 0.00 ft 3ft psf 3. where at 1/3 d 2,500 psf A=2.34P/(S1.b) Minimum Embedment Re, d mind 4.281ft d >=1.0*dmin - OK per Pole Formula 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engirieering.net D R1S1 ,. Engineering Caisson Structural Design Design Shear (kip) Design Moment (kip-ft) 15.79 37.81 Seismic Design Cat. SDC E if SDC D, E, or F, additional requirements per ACI ch. 18 Pier Diameter D 14 in Pier Radius r 7 in Steel Yield Str fy 60 ksi Steel Modulus of Elas. E 29000 ksi Concrete Strength fc 4 ksi Depth Ratio for equivalent (31 0.85 per ACI 22.2.2.4.3 Earth Side Bar Size #5 Earth Side Bundled? No Earth Side # of bars 3 Max No. Bars = 6 Free Side Bar Size #5 Free Side Bundled? No Free Side # of bars 3 Max No. Bars = 6 Tie or Spiral Reinforcement Tie Lateral Reinforcement Bar Size #3 Clear Cover (in) cc 1.5 in Area of Steel (in2) Ast 1.86 Reinforcement (%) p 1.2% Reinforcement below 1.5% Nominal Moment Wn 41 kip--ft Moment Capacity OK Max shear spacing lateral tie spacing Concrete Shear Steel Shear smin s (PVC Ovs C� Shear Capacity OK 3564 Sagunto St. 4486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net DJRJ.S:' Engineering Estimated Caisson Deflection d1 i—I d2 P1 hl Wall = EFP Height H H—� 1 L - BOHom of '� — w b1 1 — P2 h2 Exgvatron h2 II f=Depth to, T _— D —.; p2 Point of fixity �_ u Caisson Dia F14.0 inches Delection Due to Static Earth Pressure Deflection Due to Surcharge dl= W*HA3 / 15*E*I d2 = [(Pl*b1A2)*(3H-bl)/6*E*I] + [(P2*b2A2)*(3H-b2)/6*E*I)] Wall Height 4.0 feet Upper Surcharge p1 100 psf Fixity f 2.0 feet hi 3.2 feet Depth to Fixity H 6.0 feet Lower Surcharge p2 100 psf h2 2.8 feet Spacing sp 6.5 feet bl 52.8 in Active EFP EFP 51.0 pcf b2 16.80 in Active Force +W W 8.40 kip / caisson P1= 2.08 kip Inertia 1 1886 in4 P2= 1.82 kip Concrete Modulus E 3,500 ksi d static 0.03 in d surcharge 0.03 in Delection Due to Seismic Earth Pre d3= We*HA3 / 15*E*I Seismic Force Wel 0 kip / caisson d seismic I - in Total Estimated Deflection (static + surcharge) 0.06 in Total estimated deflection (static + surcharge + seismic) 0.06 in Maximum Allowable Deflection (Static conditions) Max deflection <= Allowable - OK 1.0 in 3564 Sagunto St. 4486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net D R sj. Engineering Case # Case Piles Cantilever Caisson Design Permanent Condition z C-5-6.5-S1 12-39 Summary of Results Max Design Retained Height Minimum Toe below subgrade Caisson Dia Vertical bars Earth Side Vertical bars Free Side Ties Concrete Strength 5.0 ft 15.0 ft 14.0 INCHES 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net D RJ S. Engineering Cantilever Shoring Design Case # 0 Case Piles C-5-6.5-51 12-39 Pile Geometry Retained Height 5.00 ft Pile Spacing 6.50 ft Depth to Fixity 2.00 ft Cut or Fill C Surcharge Pressures Pressure v Depth Depth Oh (psf) 0.0 100.0 -0.5 100.0 -0.9 100.0 -1.4 100.0 -1.9 100.0 -2.3 100.0 -2.8 100.0 -3.3 100.0 -3.7 100.0 -4.2 100.0 -4.7 100.0 -5.1 100.0 -5.6 100.0 -6.1j 100.0 -6.51 100.0 .7.01 100.0 Surcharge Strip Load Si = Distance to strip load Xs = Width of strip load Ws = Depth to Strip Load ds = Shoring Rigidity Bousinesque (B) or Constant C Lateral Pressure psf 0 0 o g o 0.0 -1.0 -2.0 _ -3.0 �1 -4.0 a v -5.0 -6.0 -7.0 -&0 Equivalent Rectangles for Surcharge From Depth to Depth Oh sf 0.0 -3.7 100 -3.7 -7.0 100 0 psf/ft 0 ft L] 14 X a wa Q Oh Oh=20s(b-Slab Cn2e) 19.142 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net D R 51. Engineering Determine Lateral Loads and Moments About Point of Fixity Static Earth Loads: Active Earth Pressure Pa = 51.0 pcf Total lateral force from active pressure PST= 8.1 kips Total moment due to active pressure MST= 19.0 kip-ft Surcharge Loads Total lateral force from Surcharge Psu = 4.6 kip Total moment due to Surcharge MSu = 15.9 kip-ft Seismic Earth Loads Seismic Earth Pressure Pae = Total lateral force from seismic pressure Peq = Total moment due to seismic pressure Meq = Wind Loads Lateral Wind Load per LF of Wall F = Micropile Caisson Spacing S = Lateral force on Caisson from Wind Fw= Moment in Caisson from Fw Mw= 0.0 H kip kip-ft kip/LF ft kip kip-ft 0.0 0.0 0.4 6.5 1 2.4 13.0 Summary of Loading 1/2. Pa. (H+f)A2. splso00 P,T . (H+f) / 3 Oh . (H+f) . Sp Ps, (H+f)/3 Zero if H<=6ft 1/2. Pae. (H+fl^2. Sp/1000 Peq.(H+f)/3 c *S Fw . (H+f) / 3 ActiveEarth Surcharge Seismic Wind Load Load Load Load L H E W Lateral Force on Caisson above Point of Fixity (kip) 4.6 8.1 0.0 2.4 Moment About Point of Fixity (kip-ft) 15.9 19.0 0.0 13.0 Factor of Safety included in Static Pressure Provided by Geotech. 1.00 Factor of Safety included in Seismic PressureProvided by Geotech. 1.00 Unfactored Loads Surcharge Static Seismic Wind Load Load Load Load L H E W Lateral Force on Caisson above Point of Fixity (kip) 4.6 8.1 0.0 2.4 Moment About Point of Fixitv (kip-ft) 15.9 19.0 0.0 13.0 3564 Sagunto St. ti486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 81.8 402 3952 Fax: 818 276 1922 www,DRS-EngineerinE.net DI I RI.sI. Engineering Load Combinations For Caisson Structural Design (Strength Design) Load case #1 CBC Eq. 16-2=1.6(L+H) Load case #2 CBC Eq 16-5 = 1.61-1 +1.OL+1.OE Load case #3 CBC Eq 16-6 = 1.OW +1.6H For Caisson Lateral Stability & Overturning Load case #4 CBC Eq. 1807.2 = 1.5L+ 1.5H+1.5W Load case #5 CBC Eq. 1807.2 = 1.1L+1.1H+1.1E+1.1W Factored Factored Lateral Moment Force kip kip-ft 20.3 55.8 17.5 46.2 15.4 43.3 22.7 71.8 16.6 52.7 3564 Sagunto St. 4486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www,DRS-Engineering.net I ® RJ Sl Engineering Embedment Depth: Passive Pressure = pp = 250 PSI/ft or 0.25 ksf/ft Ppmax= 2,500 psf or 2.50 ksf Select Caisson Diameter 14 inches Arching Width 2.33 ft Effective width for passive pressure spacing is taken as minimum of arching width and caisson spacing Effective Width = 2.33 ft Trial Embedment depth dmin = 9.0 ft below point of fixity Passive resistance provided Pp =1 23.6 kips Required Lateral Resistance Prqd =1 22.71 kips Pp>=Prgd -OK Check Moment equilibrium Using Point of Fixity Passive Moment Capacity Mp= 141.8 kip ft Active Moment Ma =1 71.8 kip-ft kip-ft Mp>=Ma -OK Minimum Embedment below design subgrade I 11.00 ft based on fixed earth method Check embedment required using free earth approach Determine Embedment Depth for balance moment about pile toe Min d for Ppassive>=Mactive = Mactive = Ppassive= Maximum design Moment = Maximum Design Shear = Minimum Embedment below design subgrade 15.0 lb-ft lb-ft kip-ft kip-ft ft based on free earth method 211075 218750 52.4 8.7 15.00 Check Caisson Toe Embedment De Pile Spacing Sp = Active pressure Pa = Passive Pressure = Pp= Effective Pile Diameter b = Retained Height H = Active Force P = Embedment Depth dmin = 0.5 A (1 Embedment Provided d = d/3 = S1= Point of Appication of P h= A Determination per CBC 2013 1807.3.2.1 i.50 ft 51.00 pcf 2501 psf/ft to max. 1 3 ft bs per pile h/A))A0.5) ft ft psf where at 1/3 d 2,500 psf A=2.34P/(51.b) (Minimum Embedment Re, d min=1 4.631ft d >= 1.0*dmin - OK per Pole Formula I 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net i D R Sl Engineering Caisson Structural Design Design Shear (kip) Design Moment (kip-ft) 20.27 55.80 Seismic Design Cat. SDC E if SDC D, E, or F, additional requirements per ACI ch. 18 Pier Diameter D 14 in Pier Radius r 7 in Steel Yield Str fy 60 ksi Steel Modulus of Elas. E 29000 ksi Concrete Strength fc 4 ksi Depth Ratio for equivalent P1 0.85 per ACI 22.2.2.4.3 Earth Side Bar Size #7 Earth Side Bundled? No Earth Side # of bars 3 Max No. Bars = 5 Free Side Bar Size #7 Free Side Bundled? No Free Side # of bars 3 Max No. Bars = 5 Tie or Spiral Reinforcement Tie Lateral Reinforcement Bar Size #3 Clear Cover (in) cc 1.5 in Area of Steel (in2) Ast 3.6 Reinforcement (%) p 2.3% Reinforcement Good Nominal Moment WMn 68 kip--ft Moment Capacity OK Max shear spacing smin 7 in lateral tie spacing s 7 in Concrete Shear WVc 14.9 kip Steel Shear OVs 21.1 kip Shear Capacity WVn 36.0 kip Shear Capacity OK 3564 Sagunto St. i#486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net D R Sl. Engineering Estimated Caisson Deflection di+._I d2. Wall EFP Pt h I4II.� —� Height H H 1 L b Batton,d -_- _ I PZ h2 Excavation — T dz f f = Depth to j p P2 -. _...:. Point of fixity Caisson Dia 14.0 inches Delection Due to Static Earth Pressure Deflection Due to Surcharge d1= W*HA3 / 15*E*I d2 = [(Pl*bl-2)*(3H-bl)/6*E*I] + [(P2*b2A2)*(3H-b2)/6*E*Q] Wall Height 5.0 feet Upper Surcharge p1 100 psf Fixity f 2.0 feet h1 3.7 feet Depth to Fixity H 7.0 feet Lower Surcharge p2 100 psf h2 3.3 feet Spacing sp]5ksi feet b1 61.6 in Active EFP EFPpcf b2 19.60 in Active Force +W Wkip / caisson P1= 2.43 kip Inertia 1in4 P2= 2.12 kip Concrete Modulus E in d surcharge 0.05 in Delection Due to Seismic Earth Pre d3= We*HA3 / 15*E*I Seismic Force We 0 kip / caisson d seismic I - in Total Estimated Deflection (static + surcharge) 0.11 in Total estimated deflection (static + surcharge + seismic) 0.11 in Maximum Allowable Deflection (Static conditions) 1.0 in Max deflection <= Allowable - OK 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 318 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering. net DJ,Rj.sJ. Engineering Case # Case Piles Cantilever Caisson Design Permanent Condition 3 F-4-6.5-S1 49-55, 75-89 Summary of Results Max Design Retained Height Minimum Toe below subgrade Caisson Dia Vertical bars Earth Side Vertical bars Free Side Ties Concrete Strength 4.0 ft 10.0 ft 14.0 INCHES 3 Ea #5 3.0 Ea #5 #3 @ 5 4.0 ksi 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax 818 276 1.922 www.DRS-Engineering.net D R s l 1. Engineering Cantilever Shoring Design Case # 0 Pile Geometry Retained Height 4.00 ft Pile Spacing 6.50 ft Depth to Fixity 2.00 ft Cut or Fill F Surcharge Pressures Surcharge Strip Load S1 = Distance to strip load Xs = Width of strip load Ws = Depth to Strip Load ds = Shoring Rigidity Bousinesque (B) or Constant C Pressure v Depth Depth Oh (psf) 0.0 100.0 -0.4 100.0 -0.8 100.0 -1.2 100.0 -1.6 100.0 -2.0 100.0 -2.4 100.0 -2.8 100.0 -3.2 100.0 -3.6 100.0 -4.0 100.0 -4.4 100.0 -4.8 100.0 5.2 100.0 -5.61 100.0 -6.01 100.0 Lateral Pressure psf 0 0 0 o 0 00 41 e b 2 0 kY -10 s a -4.0 0 -5.0 6.0 a.0 Equivalent Rectangles for Surcharge From Depth to Depth Oh psf 0.0 -3.2 100 -3.2 -6.0 100 e Oh Oh = 2 Oa (Pb-Slit Caa2e)! 5.142 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net D R si Engineering Determine Lateral Loads and Moments About Point of Fixity Static Earth Loads: Active Earth Pressure Pa - 43.0 pcf Total lateral force from active pressure PST=I 5.0 kips Total moment due to active pressure MST= 10.1 kip-ft Surcharge Loads Total lateral force from Surcharge PS. = 3.9 kip Total moment due to Surcharge Ms - 11.7 kip-ft Seismic Earth Loads: Seismic Earth Pressure Pae = Total lateral force from seismic pressure Peq = Total moment due to seismic pressure Meq =1 Wind Loads Lateral Wind Load per LF of Wall F = Micropile Caisson Spacing S = Lateral force on Caisson from Wind Fw= Moment in Caisson from Fw Mw= 0.0 H kip kip-ft kip/LF ft kip kip-ft 0.0 0.01 0.4 6.5 2.4 13.0 Summary of Loading 112. Po, (H+f)^2 . sp /1000 PST . (H+f)/3 Oh, (H+f) . Sp P s, . (H+f) / 3 Zero if H<=6ft 1/2. Poe, (H+f)^2. Sp/1000 Peq. (H+f)/3 F*S Fw . (H+f) / 3 ActiveEarth Surcharge Seismic Wind Load Load Load Load L H E W Lateral Force on Caisson above Point of Fixity (kip) 3.9 5.0 0.0 2.4 Moment About Point of Fixity (kip-ft) 11.7 10.1 0.0 13.0 Factor of Safety included in Static Pressure Provided by Geotech. 1.00 Factor of Safety included in Seismic Pressure Provided by Geotech. 1.00 Unfactored Loads Surcharge Static Seismic Wind Load Load Load Load L H E W lateral Force on Caisson above Point of Fixity (kip) 3.9 5.0 0.0 2.4 Moment About Point of Fixity (kip-ft) 11.7 10.1 0.0 13.0 3564 Sagunto St. ##486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 81.8 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net D R SI. Engineering Load Combinations For Caisson Structural Design (Strength Design) Load case 41 CBC Eq. 16-2 = 1.6(L+H) Load case #2 CBC Eq 16-5 = 1.61-1 +1.OL+1.OE Load case #3 CBC Eq 16-6 = 1.OW +1.6H For Caisson Lateral Stability & Overturning Load case #4 CBC Eq. 1807.2 = 1.5L+ 1.5H+1.5W Load case #5 CBC Eq. 1807.2 = 1.1L+1.1H+1.1E+1.1W Factored Factored Lateral Moment Force kip kip-ft 14.3 34.8 11.9 27.8 10.5 29.1 17.1 52.1 12.5 38.2 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net DI RI.S Engineering Embedment Depth: Passive Pressure= Pp= 250 psf/ft or 0.25 ksf/ft Ppmax= 2,500 psf or 2.50 ksf Select Caisson Diameter 14 inches Arching Width F:2.33 ft Effective width for passive pressure spacing is taken as minimum of arching width and caisson spacing Effective Width = 2.33 ft Trial Embedment depth drain = 8.0 ft below paint of fixity Passive resistance provided Pp = 18.7 kips Required Lateral Resistance Prqd =1 17.11 kips Pp>=Prgd -OK Check Moment equilibrium Using Point of Fixity Passive Moment Capacity Mp= 99.6 kip ft Active Moment Ma = 52.1 kip-ft kip-ft Oln — Ma -OK Minimum Embedment below design subgrade 10.00 1 ft based on fixed earth method Check embedment required using free earth approach Determine Embedment Depth for balance moment about pile toe Min d for Ppassive>=Mactive = Mactive = Ppassive= Maximum design Moment = Maximum Design Shear = Minimum Embedment below design subgrade 10.0 lb-ft lb-ft kip-ft kip-ft ft based on free earth method 86636 97222 29.0 6.1 10.00 Check Caisson Toe Embedment Depth Determination per CBC 2013 1807.3.2.1 Pile Spacing Sp = Active pressure Pa = Passive Pressure = Pp= Effective Pile Diameter b = Retained Height H = Active Force P = Embedment Depth dmin = 0.5 A {1+[1+4.36 Embedment Provided d = d/3 = S1 = Point of Appication of P h= A = 6.50 ft pcf psf/ft to max. 2,500 psf inches ft Ibs per pile h/A)]AO.S) where A = 2.34 P / (S1.b) ft ft psf at 1/3 d ft 43.00 250 28.0 4.00 2236 10.00 3.33 833 1.33 2.69 Minimum Embedment Rei d min= 3.74 ft d >= 1.0*dmin - OK per Pole Formula 3564 Sagunto St. 4486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 fax: 818 276 1922 www,DRS-Engineering.net D R si Engineering Caisson Structural Design Design Shear (kip) Design Moment (kip-ft) Seismic Design Cat. SDC Pier Diameter D Pier Radius r Steel Yield Str fy Steel Modulus of Elas. E Concrete Strength fc Depth Ratio for equivalent of Earth Side Bar Size Earth Side # of bars Free Side Bar Size Free Side # of bars Tie or Spiral Reinforcement Lateral Reinforcement Bar Size Clear Cover (in) cc Area of Steel (in2) Ast Reinforcement (%) p Max shear spacing smin lateral tie spacing s Concrete Shear Ovc Steel Shear Ovs 14.29 34.82 E if SDC D, E, or F, additional requirements per ACI ch. 18 14 in 7 in 60 ksi 29000 ksi 4 ksi 0.85 per ACI 22.2.2.4.3 #5 Earth Side Bundled? No 3 Max No. Bars = 6 #5 Free Side Bundled? No 3 Max No. Bars = 6 Tie #3 below 1.5% Moment Capacity OK IShear Capacity CDVnl 44.41kio Shear CaoacitvOK 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www,DRS-Engineering,net DI RJ Si. Engineering Estimated Caisson Deflection n2. . — P1 ht Wall I FP P, j Height H '; H L b1 BW ottom of - P2 h2 Excavation 7 --` ii 1 b2 --- f T -- f = Depth to _ -- O p2 Point of fixity t Caisson Dia 14.0 inches Delection Due to Static Earth Pressure Deflection Due to Surcharge dl= W*HA3 / 15*E*I d2 = [(P1*b1A2)*(3H-b1)/6*E*l] + [(P2*b2A2)*(3H-b2)/6*E*I)] Wall Height Fixity f Depth to Fixity H Spacing sp Active EFP EFP Active Force+W W Inertia 1 Concrete Modulus E 4.0 feet Upper Surcharge pl feet hl feet Lower Surcharge p2 h2 feet b1 pcf b2 kip/caisson P1= in4 P2= ksi 100 psf feet psf feet in in kip kip in 2.0 3.2 6.0 100 2.8 6.5 52.8 43.0 16.80 7.47 2.08 1886 1.82 3,500 d static 0.03 in d surcharge 0.03 Delection Due to Seismic Earth Pre d3= We*HA3 / 15*E*I Seismic Force We0 kip / caisson d seismic I - in Total Estimated Deflection (static + surcharge) Total estimated deflection (static + surcharge + seismic) Maximum Allowable Deflection (Static conditions) 0.05 in 0.05 1in 1.0 in Max deflection <= Allowable - OK 3564 Sagunto St. 4486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering net D R1.S1. Engineering Case # Case Piles Cantilever Caisson Design Permanent Condition 4 F-6-6.5-S1 65-74 Summary of Results Max Design Retained Height Minimum Toe below subgrade Caisson Dia Vertical bars Earth Side Vertical bars Free Side Ties Concrete Strength 6.0 ft 16.0 ft 14.0 1►14:1*9 3 Ea #8 3.0 Ea #8 #3 @ 8 4.0 ksi 1564 Sagunto St. 4486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www DRS-Engineering.net D R} s,. Engineering Cantilever Shoring Design Case # Case Piles F-6-6.5-S1 65-74 Pile Geometry Retained Height Pile Spacing Depth to Fixity Cut or Fill 6.00 ft ft ft 6.50 2.00 F Surcharge Pressures Pressure v Deoth Depth Oh (psf) 0.0 100.0 -0.5 100.0 -1.1 100.0 -1.6 100.0 -2.1 100.0 -2.7 100.0 -3.2 100.0 -3.7 100.0 -4.3 100.0 -4.8 100.0 -5.3 100.0 -5.9 100.0 -6.4 100.0 -6.9 100.0 -7.5 100.0 -8.01 100.0 Surcharge Strip Load S1 = Distance to strip load Xs = Width of strip load Ws = Depth to Strip Load ds = Shoring Rigidity Bousinesque (B) or Constant C Lateral Pressure psf Equivalent Rectangles for Surcharge 0 0 0 From Depth to Depth Oh psf 0.0 -4.3 100 -4.3 -&0 100 C psf/ft ft ft ft 3564 Sagunto St. 4486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net D RI Si. Engineering Determine Lateral Loads and Moments About Point of Fixity Static Earth Loads: Active Earth Pressure Pa = 43.0 pcf Total lateral force from active pressure PST8.91 kips 1/2 . Pa. (H+f)A2 . sp /1000 Total moment due to active pressure MST= 23.9 kip-ft P;r . (H+f) /3 Surcharge Loads Total lateral force from Surcharge PS = 5.2 kip Oh. (H+f) . Sp Total moment due to Surcharge Ms = 20.8 kip-ft P, . (H+f)/3 Seismic Earth Loads: Seismic Earth Pressure Pae = H 0.0 Zero if H<=bft Total lateral force from seismic pressure Peq = 0.0 kip 112. Poe . (H+f)A2 . Sp /1000 Total moment due to seismic pressure Meq = 0.0 kip-ft Peq. (H+f)/3 Wind Loads Lateral Wind Load per LF of Wall F = 0.4 kip/LF Micropile Caisson Spacing S =1 6.5 ft Lateral force on Caisson from Wind Fw=l 2.4 kip F*S Moment in Caisson from Fw Mw=j 13.0 kip-ft Fw . (H+f)/3 Summary of Loading ActiveEarth Surcharge Seismic Wind Load Load Load Load L H E W Lateral Force on Caisson above Point of Fixity (kip) 5.2 8.9 0.0 2.4 Moment About Point of Fixity (kip-ft) 20.8 23.9 0.0 13.0 Factor of Safety included in Static Pressure Provided by Geotech. 1.00 Factor of Safety included in Seismic PressureProvided by Geotech. 1.00 Unfactored Loads Surcharge Static Seismic Wind Load Load Load Load L H E W Lateral Force on Caisson above Point of Fixity (kip) 5.2 8.9 0.0 2.4 Moment About Point of Fixity (kip-ft) 20.8 23.9 0.0 13.0 3564 Sagunto St. ft486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 81.8 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net DI RIS11. Engineering Load Combinations For Caisson Structural Design (Strength Design) Load case #1 CBC Eq. 16-2 = 1.6(L+H) Load case #2 CBC Eq 16-5 = 1.61-1 +1.01-+1.OE Load case #3 CBC Eq 16-6 = 1.OW +1.6H For Caisson Lateral Stability & Overturning Load case #4 CBC Eq. 1807.2 = 1.5L+ 1.5H+1.5W Load case #5 CBC Eq. 1807.2 = 1.1L+1.1H+1.1E+1.1W Factored Factored Lateral Moment Force kip kip-ft 22.6 71.4 19.5 59.0 16.7 51.2 24.9 86.5 18.2 63.4 3564 Sagunto St. 4486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net QIRI'SI i Engineering Embedment Depth: Passive Pressure = Pp = 250 psf/ft or 0.25 ksf/ft Ppmax= 2,500 psf or 2.50 ksf Select Caisson Diameter 14 inches Arching Width 2.33 ft Effective width for passive pressure spacing is taken as minimum of arching width and caisson spacing Effective Width = 2.33 ft Trial Embedment depth dmin = 10.0 ft below po.,nt r;°fx Passive resistance provided Pp=I 29.2 kips Required Lateral Resistance Prqd =1 24.91 kips Po>=Prgd -OK Check Moment equilibrium Using Point of Fixity Passive Moment Capacity Mp= 194.5 kip ft Active Moment Ma =1 86.5 kip-ft kip-ft Mp>=Ma -OK Minimum Embedment below design subgrade 1 12.00 ft based on fixed earth method Check embedment required using free earth approach Determine Embedment Depth for balance moment about pile toe Min d for Ppassive>=Mactive = Mactive = Ppassive= Maximum design Moment = Maximum Design Shear = Minimum Embedment below design subgrade Check Caisson Toe Embedment Depth Determination per CBC 2013 1807.3.2.1 based on free earth method Pile Spacing Sp= Active pressure Pa = Passive Pressure = Pp= Effective Pile Diameter b = Retained Height H = Active Force P = Embedment Depth dmin = 0.5 A {1+[1+4.36 Embedment Provided d = d/3 = S1= Point of Appication of P h= A = 6.50ft pcf psf/ft to max. 2,500 psf inches ft Ibs per pile h/A)iA0.5) where A = 2.34 P / (S1.b) ft ft psf at 1/3 d ft 43.00 250 28.0 6.00 5031 16.00 5.33 1333 2.00 3.78 Minimum Embedment Rei d min= 5.33 ft d >= 1.0*dmin - OK per Pole Formula 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 TO 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net Dj.Rj,Sj. Engineering Caisson Structural Design Design Shear (kip) Design Moment (kip-ft) Seismic Design Cat. Pier Diameter Pier Radius Steel Yield Str Steel Modulus of Elas. Concrete Strength Depth Ratio for equivalent Earth Side Bar Size Earth Side # of bars Free Side Bar Size Free Side # of bars Tie or Spiral Reinforcement Lateral Reinforcement Bar Size Clear Cover (in) Area of Steel (in2) Reinforcement (%) 22.63 71.44 E if SDC D, E, or F, additional requirements per ACI ch. 18 14 in A (31 0.85 per ACI 22.2.2.4.3 #8 Earth Side Bundled? No 3 Max No. Bars = 4 #8 Free Side Bundled? No 3 Max No. Bars = 4 4. nforcement Good (Nominal Moment mMnl 761kip--ft Moment Capacity OK I Max shear spacing smin lateral tie spacing s Concrete Shear OVc Steel Shear OVs 8 in in kip kip 8 14.9 18.5 Shear Capacity Wn 33.4 kip Shear Capacity OK 3564 Sagunto St. 4486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net Q R 5l. Engineering Estimated Caisson Deflection dt1-1 d2,— P1 h1 Wall EFP I at Height H I: H [P 1 f I bf Bottom of - P2 h2 Excavation = VV J b2 f f Depth to D p2 Point of fixity L Caisson Dia 14.0 inches Delection Due to Static Earth Pressure Deflection Due to Surcharge d1= W*HA3 / 15*E*1 d2 = [(P1*b1A2)*(3H-bl)/6*E*I] + [(P2*b2A2)*(3H-b2)/6*E*I)] Wall Height Fixity Depth to Fixity [16..00feet ffeet Hfeet Spacing sp 6.5 Active EFP EFP 43.0 Active Force +W W 11.38 Inertia 1 1886 Concrete Modulus E 3,500 d static 0.10 Upper Surcharge pl 100 psf h1 4.3 feet Lower Surcharge p2 100 psf h2 3.7 feet b1 70.4 in b2 22.40 in /caisson P1= 2.77 kip P2= 2.43 kip d surcharge 0.08 in Delection Due to Seismic Earth Pre d3= We*W3 / 15*E*I Seismic Force We 0 kip / caisson d seismic in Total Estimated Deflection (static + surcharge) Total estimated deflection (static + surcharge + seismic) Maximum Allowable Deflection (Static conditions) Max deflection <= Allowable - OK 3564 Sagunto St. H486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www,DRS-Engineering.net RI.Sj. Engineering Case # Case Piles Cantilever Caisson Design Permanent Condition 5 F-9-6-S1 56-58, 62-64 Summary of Results Max Design Retained Height Minimum Toe below subgrade Caisson Dia Vertical bars Earth Side Vertical bars Free Side Ties Concrete Strength 9.0 ft 21.0 ft 16.0 INCHES 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www,DRS-Engineering.net D R.sj. Engineering Cantilever Shoring Design Case 4 0 Case Piles F-9-6-Sl 56-58,62-64 Pile Geometry Retained Height Pile Spacing Depth to Fixity Cut or Fill ft ft ft OF Surcharge Pressures Pressure v Depth Depth Oh (psf) 0.0 100.0 -0.7 100.0 -1.5 100.0 -2.2 100.0 -2.9 100.0 -3.7 100.0 -4.4 100.0 -5.1 100.0 -5.9 100.0 -6.6 100.0 -7.3 100.0 -8.1 100.0 -8.8 100.0 -9.5 1000 -1.3 100.0 .0-11.0 Surcharge Strip Load S1 = Distance to strip load Xs = Width of strip load Ws = Depth to Strip Load ds = Shoring Rigidity Bousinesque (B) or Constant C Lateral Pressure psf a o o o.o l.o er B 2.0 it -3.0 �6 to 5.0 H n o a,o -8.❑ -9.0 -10.0 -11.0 -12.0 Equivalent Rectangles for Surcharge 0 0 I XV- T....- ,. From Depth to Depth Oh psf 0.0 -5.9 100 -5.9 -11.0 100 Oh = 2 Oa "Inb Coa&)1 &142 3564 Sagunto St. 4496 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www,DRS-Engineering.net DJ.RJ.11. Engineering Determine Lateral Loads and Moments About Point of Fixity Static Earth Loads: Active Earth Pressure Pa = 43.0 pcf Total lateral force from active pressure Pa 15.6 kips 1/2 . Pa. (H+f)^2 . sp/1000 Total moment due to active pressure MsT=I 57.2 kip-ft PST . (H+f)/3 Surcharge Loads Total lateral force from Surcharge Ps 6-61 kip Oh . (H+f) . Sp Total moment due to Surcharge MsU - 36.3 kip-ft PS . (H+f)/3 Seismic Earth Loads: Seismic Earth Pressure Pa = 24.0 H Zero if H<=6ft Total lateral force from seismic pressure Feel8.71 kip 1/2 . Poe. (H+f)42 . Sp /1000 Total moment due to seismic pressure Meq = 31.9 kip-ft Pea. (H+f)/3 Wind Loads Lateral Wind Load per LF of Wall F = 0.4 kip/LF Micropile Caisson Spacing S = 6.0 ft Lateral force on Caisson from Wind Fw = 2.3 kip F*S Moment in Caisson from Fw Mw= I 12.0 kip-ft Fw . (H+f)/3 Summary of Loading Surcharge ActiveEarth Seismic Wind Load Load Load Load L H E W Lateral Force on Caisson above Point of Fixity (kip) 6.6 15.6 -8.7 2.3 Moment About Point of Fixity (kip-ft) 36.3 57.2 31.9 12.0 Factor of Safety included in Static Pressure Provided by Geotech. 1.00 Factor of Safety included in Seismic PressureProvided by Geotech. 1.00 Unfactored Loads Surcharge Static Seismic Wind Load Load Load Load L H E W Lateral Force on Caisson above Point of Fixity (kip) 6.6 15.6 -8.7 2.3 Moment About Point of Fixity (kip-ft) 36.3 57.2 31.9 12.0 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net Dj,Rj.Sj. Engineering Load Combinations For Caisson Structural Design (Strength Design) Load case 41 CBC Eq. 16-2 = 1.6(L+H) Load case #2 CBC Eq 16-5 = 1.6H +1.OL+1.OE Load case #3 CBC Eq 16-6 = 1.OW +1.6H For Caisson Lateral Stability & Overturning Load case #4 CBC Eq. 1807.2 = 1.51 + 1.5H+1.5W Load case #5 CBC Eq. 1807.2 = 1.1L+1.1H+1.1E+1.1W Factored Factored Lateral Moment Force kip kip-ft 35.5 149.7 22.9 159.8 27.2 103.6 36.7 158.3 17.3 151.2 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 81.8 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineerin-..net DI, Rl.S1. Engineering Embedment Depth: Passive Pressure = Pp = 250 psf/ft or 0.25 ksf/ft Ppmax = 2,500 psf or 2.50 ksf Select Caisson Diameter q67 inches Arching Width 2.ft Effective width for passive pressure spacing is taken as minimum of arching width and caisson spacing Effective Width = F 2.67 ft Trial Embedment depth dmin =1 11.0 ft below point of fixity Passive resistance provided Pp =1 40.0 kips Reauired Lateral Resistance Prqd =1 36.71 kips Pp>=Prgd -OK Check Moment equilibrium Using Point of Fixity Passive Moment Capacity Mp= 292.2 kip ft Active Moment Ma =1 158.3 kip-ft kip-ft Mp>=Ma -OK Minimum Embedment below design subgrade 1 13.00 ft based on fixed earth method Check embedment required using free earth approach Determine Embedment Depth for balance moment about pile toe Min d for Ppassive>=Mactive = 21.0 Mactive = 614748 Ppassive= 636667 Maximum design Moment = 166.2 Maximum Design Shear= 17.0 Minimum Embedment below design subgrade 21.00 Check Caisson Toe Embedment Depth Determination per CBC 2013 1807.3.2.1 based on free earth method Pile Spacing Sp = 6.00 ft Active pressure Pa = 43.00 pcf Passive Pressure = Pp= 250 psf/ft to max. 2,500 psf Effective Pile Diameter b = 32.0 inches Retained Height H = 9.00 ft Active Force P = 10449 Ibs per pile Embedment Depth dmin = 0.5 A {l+[1+4.36 h/A)]A0.5} where A = 2.34 P / (S1.b) Embedment Provided d = 21.00 ft d/3 = 7.00 ft S1= 1750 psf at 1/3 d Point of Appication of P h= 3.00 ft A = 5.24 Minimum Embedment Re d min= 7.52 ft d >= 1.0*dmin - OK per Pole Formula 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net D R1.SI Engineering Caisson Structural Design Design Shear (kip) 35.53 Design Moment (kip-ft) 166.24 Seismic Design Cat. SDC E if SDC D, E, or F, additional requirements per ACI ch. 18 Pier Diameter D 16 in Pier Radius r 8 in Steel Yield Str fy 60 ksi Steel Modulus of Elas. E 29000 ksi Concrete Strength fc 4 ksi Depth Ratio for equivalent (31 0.85 per ACI 22.2.2.4.3 Earth Side Bar Size #10 Earth Side Bundled? No Earth Side # of bars 5 Max No. Bars = 5 Free Side Bar Size #10 Free Side Bundled? No Free Side # of bars 5 Max No. Bars = 5 Tie or Spiral Reinforcement Tie Lateral Reinforcement Bar Size #3 Clear Cover (in) cc 1.5 in Area of Steel (in2) Ast 12.7 Reinforcement (%) p 6.3% Reinforcement between 4%and 8% Nominal Moment TMn 188 kip--ft Moment Capacity OK Max shear spacing smin 9 in lateral tie spacing s 9 in Concrete Shear (PVC 19.4 kip Steel Shear OVs 18.8 kip Shear Capacity mVn 88.2 kin Shear Caoacitv OK 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 wwwMRS-Engineering net D Rj.SI. Engineering Estimated Caisson Deflection dt �—1 d2__ — P1 ht Wall ` EFP ! - P1 Height H H::�21 t _- bi -.. Bottom of - _ ::., w I � — _P2 h2 Excavation b2 j Point of fixity i I __. L P2 Caisson Dia 16.0 inches Delection Due to Static Earth Pressure Deflection Due to Surcharge dl= W*HA3 / 15*E*I d2 = [(Pl*b1A2)*(3H-bl)/6*E*I] + [(P2*b2A2)*(3H-b2)/6*E*I)] Wall Height Fixity Depth to Fixity Spacing Active EFP Active Force +W Inertia Concrete Modulus d static 9.0 feet Upper Surcharge pl 100 psf f 2.0 feet hl 5.9 feet H 11.0 feet Lower Surcharge p2 100 psf h2 5.1 feet ip 6.0 feet b1 96.8 in P 43.0 pcf b2 30.80 in N 17.86 kip / caisson 131= 3.52 kip 1 3217 in4 P2= 3.08 kip E 3,500 ksi 0.24 in Id surcharge 0.16 in Delection Due to Seismic Earth Pre d3= We* HA3 / 15*E*I Seismic Force Wei 9 kip / caisson Fd seismic 0.12 in Total Estimated Deflection (static + surcharge) Total estimated deflection (static + surcharge + seismic) Maximum Allowable Deflection (Static conditions) 0.41 in 0.52 in 1.0 in Max deflection <= Allowable - OK 3564 Sagunto St. H486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering. net D R Sl. Engineering Case # Case Piles Cantilever Caisson Design Permanent Condition 6 F-10-4-S1 59-61 Summary of Results Max Design Retained Height Minimum Toe below subgrade Caisson Dia Vertical bars Earth Side Vertical bars Free Side Ties Concrete Strength 10.0 ft 19.0 ft 16.0 INCHES 3564 Sagunto St. 4486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www,DRS-Engineering. net D Rj.Sj. Engineering Cantilever Shoring Design Case # Case Piles F-10-4-S1 59-61 Pile Geometry Retained Height Pile Spacing Depth to Fixity Cut or Fill 10.00 ft ft ft 4.00 2.00 F Surcharge Pressures Surcharge Strip Load S1 = Distance to strip load Xs = Width of strip load Ws = Depth to Strip Load ds = Shoring Rigidity Bousinesque (B) or Constant C 300 psf/ft ft ft ft 0 30 0 Flexible C Pressure v Depth Depth Oh (psf) 0.0 100.0 -0.8 100.0 -1.6 100.0 -2.4 100.0 -3.2 100.0 -4.0 100.0 -4.8 100.0 -5.6 100.0 -6.4 100.0 -7.2 100.0 -8.0 100.0 -8.8 100.0 -9.6 100.0 -10.41 100.0 -11.21 100.0 -12.01 100.0 Lateral Pressure psf 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 "? -2.0 0 3.0 -4.0 tj -s.0 w -6.0 s a.o � -a.o -9.0 -10.0 -11.0 12.0 -13.0 Equivalent Rectangles for Surcharge From Depth to Depth Oh Psf 0.0 -6.4 100 -6.4 -12.0 100 3564 Sagunto St. 4486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net o Rj,sl. Engineering Determine Lateral Loads and Moments About Point of Fixity Static Earth Loads: Active Earth Pressure Pa = 43.0 pcf Total lateral force from active pressure PST= 12.4 kips Total moment due to active pressure MST= 49.5 kip-ft Surcharge Loads Total lateral force from Surcharge PSG = 4.8 kip Total moment due to Surcharge MSS - 28.8 kip-ft Seismic Earth Loads: Seismic Earth Pressure Pae = Total lateral force from seismic pressure Peq = Total moment due to seismic pressure Meq = Wind Loads Lateral Wind Load per LF of Wall F - Micropile Caisson Spacing S = Lateral force on Caisson from Wind Fw_ Moment in Caisson from Fw Mw= 24.0 H kip kip-ft kip/LF It kip kip-ft 6.9 27.6 0.4 4.0 1.5 8.0 Summary of Loading 1/2. Pa. (H+f)^2. sp/loon PST (H+f) / 3 Oh . (H+f) . SP Ps, (H+f) / 3 Zero if H<=6ft 1/2. Poe. (H+f)^2. Sp/loon Peq. (H+f)/3 F `S Fw . (H+f) J3 Active Surcharge Seismic Wind Earth Load Load Load Load L H E W Lateral Force on Caisson above Point of Fixity (kip) 4.8 12.4 -6.9 1.5 Moment About Point of Fixity (kip-ft) 28.8 49.5 27.6 8.0 Factor of Safety included in Static Pressure Provided by Geotech. 1.00 Factor of Safety included in Seismic PressureProvided by Geotech. 1 1.00 Unfactored Loads Surcharge Static Seismic Wind Load Load Load Load L H E W Lateral Force on Caisson above Point of Fixity (kip) 4.8 12.4 -6.9 1.5 Moment About Point of Fixity (kip-ft) 28.8 49.5 27.6 8.0 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering. net Dj,Rj,Sj. Engineering Load Combinations For Caisson Structural Design (Strength Design) Load case #1 CBC Eq. 16-2 = 1.6(L+H) Load case #2 CBC Eq 16-5 = 1.6H +1.OL+1.OE Load case 43 CBC Eq 16-6 = 1.OW +1.6H For Caisson Lateral Stability & Overturning Load case #4 CBC Eq. 1807.2 = 1.51-+ 1.5H+1.5W Load case #5 CBC Eq. 1807.2 = 1.1L+1.1H+1.1E+1.1W Factored Factored Lateral Moment Force kip kip-ft 27.5 125.3 17.7 135.7 21.3 87.3 28.0 129.5 12.9 125.4 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net DI R) Sl Engineering Embedment Depth: Passive Pressure = Pp =E26 psf/ft or 0.25 ksf/ft Ppmax =psf or 2.50 ksf Select Caisson Diameterinches Arching Width ft Effective width for passive pressure spacing is taken as minimum of arching width and caisson spacing Effective Width = 2.67 ft Trial Embedment depth dmin -1 10.0ft below pein.t of fixity Passive resistance provided Pp =1 33.3 kips Required Lateral Resistance Prqd =1 28.01 kips Pp>=Prgd -OK Check Moment equilibrium Using Point of Fixity Passive Moment Capacity Mp= 222.2 kip ft Active Moment Ma =1 129.5 kip-ft kip-ft Mp>=Ma •OK Minimum Embedment below design subgrade 1 12.00 ft based on fixed earth method Check embedment required using free earth approach Determine Embedment Depth for balance moment about pile toe Min d for Ppassive>=Mactive = Mactive = Ppassive= Maximum design Moment = Maximum Design Shear = Minimum Embedment below design subgrade Check Caisson Toe Embedment Depth Determination per CBC 2013 1807.3.2.1 based on free earth method Pile Spacing Sp= 4.00ft Active pressure Pa = 43.00 pcf Passive Pressure = Pp= 250 psf/ft to max. 2,500 psf Effective Pile Diameter b = 32.0 inches Retained Height H = 10.00 ft Active Force P = 8600 Ibs per pile Embedment Depth dmin = 0.5 A (1+[1+4.36 h/A)]A0.5) where A = 2.34 P / (S1.b) Embedment Provided d = 19.00 ft d/3 = 6.33 ft S1 = 1583 psf at 1/3 d Point of Appication of P h= 3.33 ft A = 4.77 Minimum Embedment Re, d min= 7.18 ft d >= 1.0*dmin - OK per Pole Formula 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net DI RI.s.. Engineering Caisson Structural Design Design Shear (kip) Design Moment (kip-ft) Seismic Design Cat. Pier Diameter Pier Radius Steel Yield Str Steel Modulus of Elas. Concrete Strength Depth Ratio for equivalent Earth Side Bar Size Earth Side # of bars Free Side Bar Size Free Side # of bars Tie or Spiral Reinforcement Lateral Reinforcement Bar Size Clear Cover (in) Area of Steel (in2) Reinforcement (%) 27.49 135.71 if SDC D, E, or F, additional requirements per ACI ch. 18 (31 A per ACI 22.2.2.4.3 Earth Side Bundled?Max No. Bars =Free Side Bundled? Max No. Bars = 5 1 10.161 Reinforcement between 4% and 8% (Nominal Moment mMnl 1651kio--ft Moment Capacity OK Max shear spacing lateral tie spacing Concrete Shear Steel Shear Tit 19.4 kip 18.8 kip Shear W 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net D R sj Engineering Estimated Caisson Deflection dit-_I d2H P1 hi Wall EFP 'I P1 Height H H�--Ni1 t Bottom of .,<w bt bz .~.._._P2 h2 6ma .Ot f .___ _i- f =Depth to f tl � Z Point of fixity _ t. Caisson Dia 16.0 inches Delection Due to Static Earth Pressure Deflection Due to Surcharge d1= W*HA3 / 15*E*I d2 = [(P1*b1A2)*(3H-b1)/6*E*I] + [(P2*b2A2)*(3H-b2)/6*E*I)] Wall Height Fixity f Depth to Fixity H Spacing sp Active EFP EFP Active Force +W W Inertia 1 Concrete Modulus E 10.0 feet Upper Surcharge pl feet h1 feet Lower Surcharge p2 h2 feet b1 pcf b2 kip / caisson P1= in4 P2= ksi 100 psf feet psf feet in in kip kip in 2.0 6.4 12.0 100 5.6 4.0 105.6 43.0 33.60 13.88 2.56 3217 2.24 3,500 d static 0.25 in d surcharge 0.15 Delection Due to Seismic Earth Pre d3= We*HA3 / 15*E*I Seismic Force We7 kip / caisson d seismic 0.12 lin Total Estimated Deflection (static + surcharge) Total estimated deflection (static + surcharge + seismic) Maximum Allowable Deflection (Static conditions) 0.40 in 0.52 in 1.0 in Max deflection <= Allowable - OK 3564 Sagunto St. #486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 318 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering,net Dj,Rj,Sj. Engineering Permanent Shotcrete Facing at Micro -Caisson Wall Facing Type F:::1:41inches Facing Thickness Max retained Height Hmax = 6 ft Static Earth Pressure H= 51 pcf Seismic Earth Pressure E= 24 pcf Surcharge Pressure L= 100 pcf Load case #1 1.6(L+H) P1 = 241.6 pcf Load case #2 1.6H +1.OL +1.0 P2= 205.6 pcf Max Earth pressure Pressur w = 1449.6 psf Hmox/2 * mox(P1,P2) Min Caisson Diameter bf= 14.0 inches Max. Caisson Spacing S= 6.5 ft Design Moment in Facing Mdes = 7.66 kip-ft/vert ft Design Moment in Facing Vdes = 4.71 kip/vert ft Wall thickness t = 14 in No Rebar Mats 2 Cover to rebar mat 3 Depth to rebar mat d = 11 in As / ft As = 0.230 sgin Mats #5 bars at 16" c/c EW Rebar Grade fy = 60 ksi Shotcrete Strength f'c = 4 ksi Unit width = b = 12 in Equiv. rect stress block a = 0.338 in Flexure Strength factor mfs = 0.9 Moment Capacity mMn = mfs As fy (d - a/2) = 11.2 kip-ft > Mu OK Shear Strength Factor mss = 0.75 Shear Capacity mVc = mss 2 b d Sgrt(f'c) = 12.5 kip > Vu OK Min As 3Sgrt(f'c) b d / fy = I 0.42 sgin As>min As OK Temp. & shrinkage: 0.0018. b. t 1 0.30 sgin As>min As OK 3564 Sagunto St. 4486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax: 818 276 1922 www,DRS-Engineering.net i o R,SI. Engineering Permanent Shotcrete Facing at Micro -Caisson Wall Facing Type Facing Thickness 16 inches Max retained Height Hmax = 10 ft Static Earth Pressure H= 43 pcf Seismic Earth Pressure E= 24 pcf Surcharge Pressure L= 100 pcf Load case #1 1.6(L+H) P1 = 228.8 pcf Load case #2 1.6H +1.OL +1.0 P2= 192.8 pcf Max Earth pressure Pressur w = 2288.0 psf Hmax/2 * max(PI,P2) Min Caisson Diameter bf= 16.0 inches Max. Caisson Spacing S= 6 ft Design Moment in Facing Mdes = 10.30 kip-ft/vert ft Design Moment in Facing Vdes = 6.86 kip/vert ft Wall thickness t = in 16 No Rebar Mats 2 Cover to rebar mat 3 Depth to rebar mat d = 13 in As / ft As = 0.230 sgin Mats #5 bars at 16" c/c EW Rebar Grade fy = 60 ksi Shotcrete Strength f'c = 4 ksi Unit width = b = 12 in Equiv. rect stress block a = 0.338 in Flexure Strength factor mfs = 0.9 Moment Capacity (I)Mn = Of As fy (d - a/2) = 13.3 kip-ft > Mu OK Shear Strength Factor mss = 0.75 Shear Capacity OVc = mss 2 b d Sgrt(f'c) = 14.8 kip > Vu OK Min As 3Sgrt(f'c) b d / fy = 0.44 sgin As>min As OK Temp. & shrinkage: 0.0018 . b . t = 0.35 sgin As>min As OK 3564 Sagunto St. 4486 Santa Ynez CA 93460 Tel 818 402 3962 Fax:818 276 1922 www.DRS-Engineering.net i D R1. Engineering Inc. Fence to CMU Wall Connection The connection of the fence to the micro -caisson wall was provided to DRS Engineering by the project team. Dj.Rj 51. Engineering Inc. APPENDIX A Geotechnical Report (Part) Wind Loading (from fence) 4 4 � April 2, 2021 Harbor Day School, A Non -Profit California Corporation 3443 Pacific View Drive Corona del Mar, California 92625 Attention: Ms. Angela Evans Project No.: 18G161-7 Subject: Geotechnical Investigation Harbor Day School —Phase 2 3443 Pacific View Drive Corona del Mar, California Dear Ms. Evans: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL In accordance with your request, we have conducted a geotechnical investigation at the subject site. We are pleased to present this report summarizing the conclusions and recommendations developed from our investigation. We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. We look forward to providing additional consulting services during the course of the project. If we may be of further assistance in any manner, please contact our office. Respectfully Submitted, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Gregory K. Mitchell, GE 2364 Principal Engineer Rv"X4 Robert G. Trazo, GE 2Tf55 Principal Engineer Distribution: (1) Addressee INC. A u No. 2364 ' i r Exp. 0 30/20 r OF Dary R. Kas, CEG 2467 Senior Geologist . ll� No. 2467 ) • CERTIFIED / 22885 Savi Ranch Parkway - Suite E - Yorba Linda - California - 92887 voice: (714) 685-1115 - fax: (714) 685-1118 - www.socalgeo.com TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES 3 3.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4 3.1 Site Conditions Proposed Development Previous Studies 4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 7 4.1 Scope of Exploration/Sampling Methods 4.2 Geotechnical Conditions 4.3 Geologic Conditions 5.0 LABORATORY TESTING 9 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 12 6.1 Seismic Design Considerations 12 6.2 Geotechnical Design Considerations 15 6.3 Site Grading Recommendations 17 6.4 Construction Considerations 21 6.5 Foundation Design and Construction 23 6.6 Floor Slab Design and Construction 25 6.7 Exterior Flatwork Design and Construction 27 6.8 Retaining Wall Design and Construction 28 6.9 Pavement Design Parameters 31 7.0 GENERAL COMMENTS 34 APPENDICES A Plate 1: Site Location Map Plate 2: Boring Location Plan Plate 2A: Cross Section A -A' Plate 3: Geologic Map B Boring Logs C Laboratory Test Results D Grading Guide Specifications E Seismic Design Parameters F Excerpts from Previous SCG Report SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 GEOTECHNICAL 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Presented below is a brief summary of the conclusions and recommendations of this investigation. Since this summary is not all inclusive, it should be read in complete context with the entire report. Site Preparation • The subject site is underlain by fill soils extending to depths of 21/2 to 61/2f feet at the boring locations. These fill soils possess variable strengths and variable collapse/consolidation characteristics. Based on the age of the existing development it is not expected any documentation regarding the placement or compaction of these fill soils is available. Furthermore, demolition of the existing improvements is expected to result in significant disturbance of these near -surface soils. Therefore, remedial grading is considered warranted within the proposed building areas to remove and replace these soils as engineered fill. • It is recommended that the existing undocumented fill soils within the proposed building areas be overexcavated in their entirety. It is also recommended that the building pad areas be overexcavated to a depth of at least 3 feet below proposed building pad subgrade elevation, in order to provide a relatively uniform layer of compacted structural fill throughout the building areas. It is also recommended that the existing soils within the new foundation areas be overexcavated to a depth of at least 2 feet below proposed foundation bearing grade to eliminate any potential bedrock/fill transitions. • After the recommended overexcavation has been completed, the resulting subgrade soils should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer to identify any additional soils that should be overexcavated. The resulting subgrade should then be scarified to a depth of 10 to 12 inches and thoroughly moisture conditioned to 2 to 4 percent above optimum moisture content. The resulting subgrade should then be recompacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. The previously excavated soils may then be replaced as compacted structural fill. • The new parking area subgrade soils are recommended to be scarified to a depth of 12f inches, moisture conditioned to 2 to 4 percent above optimum, and recompacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. • The new flatwork area subgrade soils are recommended to be scarified to a depth of 12f inches, moisture conditioned to 3 to 5 percent above optimum, and recompacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. • Due to the presence of medium expansive soils at this site, some minor cracking of flatwork should be expected. In order to reduce the potential for cracking, it may be desirable to overexcavate the flatwork areas to a depth of 24 inches, followed by replacement with a layer of imported very low expansive structural fill. Building Foundations • Conventional shallow foundations, supported in newly placed compacted fill. • 2,000 Ibs/ft2 maximum allowable soil bearing pressure. • Minimum foundation embedment: 24 inches below adjacent exterior grade. Additional embedment will be required for foundations located within 15 feet of the southerly descending slope. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALHORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 GEOTECHNICAL Page 1 • Reinforcement consisting of at least six (6) No. 5 rebars (3 top and 3 bottom) in strip footings, due to presence of medium expansive soils. Additional reinforcement may be necessary for structural considerations. Pole Foundations • New fencing, light poles and flag poles may be supported on shallow drilled pier foundations. • 2,500 Ibs/ftz maximum allowable soil bearing pressure. • Minimum embedment depth: 3 feet for fencing, at least 4 feet for poles or light standards. Additional embedment for foundations located adjacent to the southerly descending slope. Building Floor Slab • Conventional Slab -on -Grade, 5 inches thick. • Reinforcement consisting of No. 4 bars at 16-inches on center in both directions, due to presence of medium expansive soils. The actual floor slab reinforcement should be determined by the structural engineer. Pavements ASPHALT PAVEMENTS (R = 10) Materials Thickness (inches) Auto Parking (TI = 4.0) Auto Drive Lanes (TI = 5.0) Truck Traffic (TI = 6.0) Fire Lanes (TI = 7.0) Asphalt Concrete 3 3 31/2 4 Aggregate Base 6 9 12 15 Compacted Subgrade 12 12 12 12 PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENTS (R = 10) Thickness (inches) Materials Automobile Parking Truck Traffic Areas Fire Lanes and Drive Areas (TI =6.0) (TI =7.0) (TI = 4.0 to 5.0) PCC 5 5 V2 6 Compacted Subgrade 12 12 12 95% minimum compact on SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA C.ALIEORNLA Project No. 18GI611-Z GEOTECHNICAL 9 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of services performed for this project was in accordance with our Proposal No. 18P261, dated May 22, 2018, and the subsequent change order 18G161-006, dated February 24, 2021. The scope of services included a visual site reconnaissance, subsurface exploration, field and laboratory testing, and geotechnical engineering analysis to provide criteria for preparing the design of the building foundations and building floor slab, along with site preparation recommendations and construction considerations for the proposed development. The evaluation of the environmental aspects of this site was beyond the scope of services for this geotechnical investigation. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 GEOTECHNICAL Page 3 3.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 Site Conditions The subject site is located at the street address of 3443 Pacific View Drive in Corona Del Mar, California. The site is bounded to the south by San Joaquin Hills Road, to the west by apartment buildings, to the north by Pacific View Drive, and to the east by a cemetery. The general location of the site is illustrated on the Site Location Map, enclosed as Plate 1 in Appendix A of this report. This site consists of a roughly trapezoidal shaped property approximately 5.86 acres in size. The subject site is presently developed with the existing Harbor Day School. We understand that the main school building was constructed between 1971 and 1972. The site is presently developed with several structures that are part of the existing school facility, primarily located in the central region of the site. The site is currently undergoing renovation. Phase 1 of the renovation is almost complete and consists of a new 2-story classroom and administration building located in the southwestern region of the property. The area of the Phase 2 renovations is currently developed with the existing classroom/administration building and the multi -purpose building. The existing buildings appear to be of wood frame and stucco construction and are assumed to be supported on conventional shallow foundations with concrete slab -on -grade floors. The ground surface surrounding the building areas consists of asphaltic concrete in the parking lot and basketball courts, and turf grass in the sports field areas. Several landscape planters are also present around the buildings and parking areas. The pavements are in fair to poor condition with areas of moderate to severe cracking. Topographic information for the subject site was provided by Walden and Associates. The site is bordered by a descending slope along the southern property line. This slope is approximately 11 feet in height in the southwestern area of the site and near street level in the southeastern area of the site with an approximate inclination ranging from 2h:ly to 3h:ly. This slope does not immediately border any of the structures that are part of the Phase 2 development. The plan indicates that the site topography within the area of the proposed development generally slopes downward to the south at a gradient of less than 1± percent with some local various in the site topography. The existing site grades range from 312t feet mean sea level (msl) in the north - central area of the site to an elevation of 306f feet msl in the southeastern area of the site. 3.2 Proposed Development As part of the Phase 2 development, the existing classroom/administration building and the Moiso multi -purpose building will be demolished. All of the recently constructed Phase 1 improvements will remain in place during the Phase 2 construction. SOUTHER\ Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18 1-7 Page ae 4 GEOTRCHNICAL 9 The proposed improvements will consist of a new theater and gymnasium. These two buildings will be constructed immediately adjacent to one another, incorporating a seismic isolation joint. Overall, the new buildings will comprise a generally rectangular structure with overall dimensions of 160f feet by 240f feet. The buildings will be one and two stories in height, located in the east central region of the property. The proposed improvements will also include a quad area located adjacent to the new buildings, several basketball courts and a large sports field located in the southeastern region of the site. Some areas of new Portland cement concrete flatwork, landscape planters, and automobile parking areas and drive lanes are anticipated. Detailed structural information was not available at the time of this proposal. We assume that the new structures will be of steel frame or masonry block construction, typically supported on conventional shallow foundations and concrete slab on grade floors. Maximum column and wall loads are expected to be on the order of 200 kips and 2 to 6 kips per linear foot, respectively. Based on the assumed topography, maximum cuts and fills in and around the proposed buildings are expected to be on the order of 3f feet. The proposed structures are not expected to include any significant below -grade construction such as basements or crawl spaces. A retaining wall up to 5 feet in height will be constructed along a portion of the eastern property line. This wall will be in a cut condition on the subject property side of the property line. 3.3 Previous Studies Several geotechnical studies relevant to the proposed improvements have previously been performed at the site. Copies of these reports were obtained from the client and/or from a review of records at the City of Newport Beach. These reports are referenced below: 1. Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Gymnasium, Harbor Day School Campus, 3443 Pacific View Drive, Newport Beach, CA, prepared by Sladden Engineering for LPA, Inc., dated April 16, 1999. 2. Geotechnical Evaluation, Blass Gymnasium, Harbor Day School, 3443 Pacific View Drive. Newport Beach, CA, prepared by Ninyo & Moore for Harbor Day School, dated July 12, 2012. 3. Update Geotechnical Evaluation and Response to Review Comments, Blass Gymnasium Wall Movement, Harbor Day School, 3443 Pacific View Drive, Newport Beach, CA, prepared by Ninyo & Moore for Harbor Day School, dated June 2, 2014. 4. Response to Review Comments, Blass Gymnasium Wall Movement, Harbor Day School, 3443 Pacific View Drive, Newport Beach, CA, prepared by Ninyo & Moore for Harbor Day School, dated July 2, 2014. 5. Geotechnical Investigation, Harbor Day School —Phase 1, 3443 Pacific View Drive. Corona del Mar, California, prepared by Southern California Geotechnical, Inc., dated February 17, 2020. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School Pro Corona llo. l Mar, A Project �� GEOTECHNICAL Page The Sladden report comprises a geotechnical investigation that was conducted prior to the construction of the gymnasium that presently occupies the area of the proposed building. This study included four borings extended to depths of 161/2 to 511/2f feet. These borings encountered fill soils extending to depths of 2 to 10± feet, comprised of silty sands and sandy silts. The underlying soils are of similar composition, grading to dense silty sands (Terrace deposits), underlain by claystone/siltstone bedrock. Groundwater was not encountered within any of the borings, indicating a depth to groundwater in excess of 50 feet. Expansion index testing indicated that the onsite soils were very low to low expansive. Sladden recommended that the existing fill soils be removed and replaced as compacted fill. Sladden recommended that the proposed building be supported on shallow foundations, supported on properly compacted fill soils, designed for a bearing pressure of 2,500 to 3,000 psf. Site grading was recommended to include removal of all existing fill soils within the new building area, as well as overexcavation to depths of at least 3 feet below the bottom of any new footings. In 2012, Ninyo and Moore (N&M) performed an evaluation of the existing gymnasium, due to reported wall distress. This evaluation included site reconnaissance, soil borings, laboratory testing, a floor level survey and engineering analysis to develop recommendations for mitigation. N&M indicates that they reviewed a Sladden report documenting observation and testing performed during construction of the gymnasium building. The Sladden report indicated that the previously existing fill soils were removed to a depth of native soils, which ranged from 51/2 to 12 feet. The removals generally extended at least 5 feet beyond the building perimeter, although the removals were limited along the south building wall due to the presence of the Edison easement. N&M indicates that distress to the southwest corner of the gymnasium was observed beginning in 2010. The distress included a vertical differential offset of 11/2f inches at the tilt -up panel in the southwest corner of the building. A manometer (floor level) survey performed by N&M indicated a vertical tilt of 2.5 inches over 28 feet in the southern end of the building. N&M indicated that the distress was relate to fill settlement caused by: 1) the limited horizontal excavation and recompaction during the previous site grading, 2) lateral fill extension of the expansive soils within the Edison easement, and 3) poor drainage. N&M provided recommendations to improve the drainage system and site grades around eh perimeter of the structure to improve future performance. They indicated that underpinning of the south wall foundation would be an option to limit any future movement. References 3 and 4 provided detailed recommendations for the CIDH piles (drilled piers) that were recommended to be used for the underpinning. The piles were recommended to be 24 inches in diameter, 20 feet deep, spaced no closer than 8 feet on -center. Reference 5 is the geotechnical report prepared by SCG for the recently constructed classroom and administration building. As part of this study, we drilled six (6) borings at the site, to depths of 15 to 25f feet. This report provided detailed grading and foundation design recommendations. The current study incorporates the soil borings and laboratory testing performed as part of the previous study. The previous boring logs and results of the laboratory testing are included in Appendix F of this report. Four (4) borings (B-7 through B-10) were drilled as part of a supplemental investigation for the stairways on the southerly slope. These borings are not relevant to the current study. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18Pag1-7 VOWS e 6 GEOTECHNICAL B 4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 4.1 Scope of Exploration/Sampling Methods The subsurface exploration conducted for this project consisted of two (2) borings (identified as Boring Nos. B-11 and B-12) advanced to depths of 20t feet below the existing site grades. Both of the borings were logged during drilling by a member of our staff. Previously, six (6) borings were drilled within the main area of the subject site, as part of the report for the classroom building. However, Boring No. B-3 encountered an underground sprinkler line at the proposed boring location. Therefore, this boring was abandoned at a depth of approximately 1 foot. The boring sequence remained the same, and as a result, there is no boring log for Boring No. B-3. The borings were advanced with hollow -stem augers, by a truck -mounted drilling rig. Representative bulk and relatively undisturbed soil samples were taken during drilling. Relatively undisturbed samples were taken with a split barrel "California Sampler" containing a series of one inch long, 2.416f inch diameter brass rings. This sampling method is described in ASTM Test Method D-3550. Samples were also taken using a 1.4t inch inside diameter split spoon sampler, in general accordance with ASTM D-1586. Both of these samplers are driven into the ground with successive blows of a 140-pound weight falling 30 inches. The blow counts obtained during driving are recorded for further analysis. Bulk samples were collected in plastic bags to retain their original moisture content. The relatively undisturbed ring samples were placed in molded plastic sleeves that were then sealed and transported to our laboratory. The approximate boring locations are indicated on the Boring Location Plan, included as Plate 2 in Appendix A of this report. The Boring Logs, which illustrate the conditions encountered at the boring locations, as well as the results of some of the laboratory testing, are included in Appendix B. A cross-section illustrating the existing subsurface conditions, the existing and proposed topography, and the proposed development is presented as Plate 2A in Appendix A. The boring logs from the previous study are in included in Appendix F. 4.2 Geotechnical Conditions The geotechnical conditions discussed below are specific to Boring Nos. B-11 and B-12, which were drilled in the area of the proposed theater/gymnasium building. Concrete Concrete flatwork was encountered at the ground surface at Boring No. B-12. The flatwork consists of 3f inches of Portland cement concrete with no discernible layer of underlying aggregate base. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 GEOTECHNICAL Page 7 Artificial Fill Artificial fill soils were encountered beneath the pavements or at the ground surface at both of the boring locations, extending to depths of 21/2 to 61/2t feet below existing site grades. The fill soils generally consist of stiff to very stiff silty and sandy clays and loose to medium dense silty fine sands and fine to coarse sands. The fill soils possess a disturbed appearance resulting in their classification as artificial fill. Terrace Deposits Terrace deposits were encountered beneath the fill soils at Boring Nos. B-11, and B-12, extending to depths of 41/2 to 121/2± feet below existing site grades. The terrace deposits generally consist of medium dense fine sandy silts and very stiff silty clays. Bedrock Bedrock was encountered at both of the boring locations between depths of 41/2 to 121ht feet, extending to a depth of 20 feet (the maximum depth explored). Generally, the bedrock consists of medium dense to very dense silty fine grained sandstone that was friable, weathered, and weakly cemented. Groundwater Free water was not encountered during the drilling of any of the borings. Based on the lack of any water within the borings, and the moisture contents of the recovered soil samples, the static groundwater is considered to have existed at a depth in excess of 22f feet at the time of the subsurface exploration. Groundwater was not encountered within any of the borings drilled during the previous phase of exploration, which extended to depths of 25t feet. 4.3 Geologic Conditions Geologic research indicates that the site is underlain by Miocene age Monterey shale bedrock (Map Symbol Tm). The Monterey Formation is described as light gray to gray brown siliceous shale and siltstone with some limy beds, sandstone lenses, and conglomerate lenses. The primary available reference applicable to the subject site is the Geologic Map of the Laguna Beach Quadrangle Orange County, California, by Edginton and Tan, 1976. A portion of this map is included as Plate 3 in Appendix A of this report. The bedrock encountered in the exploratory borings are generally consistent with the mapped geologic conditions at the subject site. Based on the conditions encountered at the boring locations, the bedrock materials at the site are considered to consist of the Monterey Formation. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 CEOTECHNICAL Page 8 5.0 LABORATORY TESTING The soil samples recovered from the subsurface exploration were returned to our laboratory for further testing to determine selected physical and engineering properties of the soils. The tests are briefly discussed below. It should be noted that the test results are specific to the actual samples tested, and variations could be expected at other locations and depths. Classification All recovered soil samples were classified using the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS), in accordance with ASTM D-2488. Field identifications were then supplemented with additional visual classifications and/or by laboratory testing. The USCS classifications are shown on the Boring Logs and are periodically referenced throughout this report. Density and Moisture Content The density has been determined for selected relatively undisturbed ring samples. These densities were determined in general accordance with the method presented in ASTM D-2937. The results are recorded as dry unit weight in pounds per cubic foot. The moisture contents are determined in accordance with ASTM D-2216, and are expressed as a percentage of the dry weight. These test results are presented on the Boring Logs. Consolidation Selected soil samples have been tested to determine their consolidation potential, in accordance with ASTM D-2435. The testing apparatus is designed to accept either natural or remolded samples in a one -inch high ring, approximately 2.416 inches in diameter. Each sample is then loaded incrementally in a geometric progression and the resulting deflection is recorded at selected time intervals. Porous stones are in contact with the top and bottom of the sample to permit the addition or release of pore water. The samples are typically inundated with water at an intermediate load to determine their potential for collapse or heave. The results of the consolidation testing are plotted on Plates C-1 through C-4 in Appendix C of this report. Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content A representative bulk sample has been tested for its maximum dry density and optimum moisture content. The results have been obtained using the Modified Proctor procedure, per ASTM D- 1557. These tests are generally used to compare the in -situ densities of undisturbed field samples, and for later compaction testing. Additional testing of other soil types or soil mixes may be necessary at a later date. The results of this testing are presented on Plate C-5 in Appendix C of this report. Results of maximum density tests performed during the previous phase of investigation are included in Appendix F. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 GEOTECHNICAL Page 9 Direct Shear A direct shear test was performed on a selected soil sample to determine its shear strength parameters. The test was performed in accordance with ASTM D-3080. The testing apparatus is designed to accept either natural or remolded samples in a one -inch high ring, approximately 2.416 inches in diameter. Three samples of the same soil are prepared by remolding them to 90± percent compaction and near optimum moisture. Each of the three samples are then loaded with different normal loads and the resulting shear strength is determined for that particular normal load. The shearing of the samples is performed at a rate slow enough to permit the dissipation of excess pore water pressure. Porous stones are in contact with the top and bottom of the sample to permit the addition or release of pore water. The results of the direct shear test are presented on Plate C-6 in Appendix C of this report. The results of direct shear testing performed during the previous phase of investigation are included in Appendix F. Soluble Sulfates Representative samples of the near -surface soils were submitted to a subcontracted analytical laboratory for determination of soluble sulfate content. Soluble sulfates are naturally present in soils, and if the concentration is high enough, can result in degradation of concrete which comes into contact with these soils. The results of the soluble sulfate testing are presented below, and are discussed further in a subsequent section of this report. Sample Identification B-1 @ 0 to 5 feet B-5 @ 0 to 5 feet Expansion Index Soluble Sulfates ~ 0.071 0.007 ACI Classification Not Applicable (SO) Not Applicable (SO) The expansion potential of the on -site soils was determined in general accordance with ASTM D- 4829. The testing apparatus is designed to accept a 4-inch diameter, 1-in high, remolded sample. The sample is initially remolded to 50f 1 percent saturation and then loaded with a surcharge equivalent to 144 pounds per square foot. The sample is then inundated with water, and allowed to swell against the surcharge. The resultant swell or consolidation is recorded after a 24-hour period. The results of the EI testing are as follows: Sample Identification B-1 @ 0 to 5 feet B-5 @ 0 to 5 feet B-12 @ 0 to 5 feet Corrosivity Testing Expansion Index 72 49 74 Expansive Potential Medium Low Medium Representative bulk samples of the near -surface soils were submitted to a subcontracted corrosion engineering laboratory to determine if the near -surface soils possess corrosive characteristics with respect to common construction materials. The corrosivity testing included a SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No, lBPage 1e110 IV GEOTECHNICAL 9 determination of the electrical resistivity, pH, and chloride and nitrate concentrations of the soils, as well as other tests. The results of some of these tests are presented below. Saturated Chlorides Nitrates Sample Identification Resistivity RHH (mg/kq) (mg/kq) (ohm -cm) Classroom Bldg. Area (Phase 1) 680 8.6 34 8.2 Sample 1 Classroom Bldg. Area (Phase 1) 1,480 8.5 9.6 11 Sample 2 SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA .� CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 GEOTECHNICAL Page 11 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of our review, field exploration, laboratory testing and geotechnical analysis, the proposed development is considered feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. The recommendations contained in this report should be taken into the design, construction, and grading considerations. The recommendations are contingent upon all grading and foundation construction activities being monitored by the geotechnical engineer of record. The recommendations are provided with the assumption that an adequate program of client consultation, construction monitoring, and testing will be performed during the final design and construction phases to verify compliance with these recommendations. Maintaining Southern California Geotechnical, Inc., (SCG) as the geotechnical consultant from the beginning to the end of the project will provide continuity of services. The geotechnical engineering firm providing testing and observation services shall assume the responsibility of Geotechnical Engineer of Record. The Grading Guide Specifications, included as Appendix D, should be considered part of this report, and should be incorporated into the project specifications. The contractor and/or owner of the development should bring to the attention of the geotechnical engineer any conditions that differ from those stated in this report, or which may be detrimental for the development. 6.1 Seismic Design Considerations The subject site is located in an area which is subject to strong ground motions due to earthquakes. The performance of a site specific seismic hazards analysis was beyond the scope of this investigation. However, numerous faults capable of producing significant ground motions are located near the subject site. Due to economic considerations, it is not generally considered reasonable to design a structure that is not susceptible to earthquake damage. Therefore, significant damage to structures may be unavoidable during large earthquakes. The proposed structures should, however, be designed to resist structural collapse and thereby provide reasonable protection from serious injury, catastrophic property damage and loss of life. Faulting and Seismicity Research of available maps indicates that the subject site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. In addition, no evidence of faulting was observed during our geotechnical investigation. Therefore, the possibility of significant fault rupture on the site is considered to be low. Seismic Design Parameters The 2019 California Building Code (CBC) provides procedures for earthquake resistant structural design that include considerations for on -site soil conditions, occupancy, and the configuration of the structure including the structural system and height. The seismic design parameters SOUTHERN Harbor Day School.— Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 1BG161-7 Page 12 GEOTECHNICAL presented below are based on the soil profile and the proximity of known faults with respect to the subject site. Based on standards in place at the time of this report, the proposed development is expected to be designed in accordance with the requirements of the 2019 edition of the California Building Code (CBC), which was adopted on January 1, 2020. The 2019 CBC Seismic Design Parameters have been generated using the SEAOC/OSHPD Seismic Design Maps Tool, a web -based software application available at the website www.seismicmaps.org. This software application calculates seismic design parameters in accordance with several building code reference documents, including ASCE 7-16, upon which the 2019 CBC is based. The application utilizes a database of risk -targeted maximum considered earthquake (MCER) site accelerations at 0.01-degree intervals for each of the code documents. The table below was created using data obtained from the application. The output generated from this program is included as Plate E-1 in Appendix E of this report. The 2019 CBC requires that a site -specific ground motion study be performed in accordance with Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-16 for Site Class D sites with a mapped S1 value greater than 0.2. However, Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-16 also indicates an exception to the requirement for a site - specific ground motion hazard analysis for certain structures on Site Class D sites. The commentary for Section 11 of ASCE 7-16 (Page 534 of Section C11 of ASCE 7-16) indicates that "In general, this exception effectively limits the requirements for site -specific hazard analysis to very tall and or flexible structures at Site Class D sites." Based on our understanding of the proposed development, the seismic design parameters presented below were calculated assuming that the exception in Section 11.4.8 applies to the proposed structures at this site. However, the structural engineer should verify that this exception is applicable to the proposed structures. Based on the exception, the spectral response accelerations presented below were calculated using the site coefficients (Fa and F ) from Tables 1613.2.3(1) and 1613.2.3(2) presented in Section 16.4.4 of the 2019 CBC. 2019 CBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS Parameter Value Mapped Spectral Acceleration at 0.2 sec Period Ss 1.324 Mapped Spectral Acceleration at 1.0 sec Period S1 0.470 Site Class --- D Site Modified Spectral Acceleration at 0.2 sec Period SMs 1.324 Site Modified Spectral Acceleration at 1.0 sec Period SMi 0.860 Design Spectral Acceleration at 0.2 sec Period SDs 0.882 Design Spectral Acceleration at 1.0 sec Period SD1 0.573 The site class was determined in accordance with ASCE 7-16. Per this document, Site Class D is to be used for soils with average SPT N-values between 15 and 50 within the upper 100 feet. The soils at this site, within 50 feet of the ground surface, fall into this category. Furthermore, SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 W GEOTECHNICAL Page 13 since bedrock was encountered at all of the boring locations, similar or higher strength materials are expected to exist between depths of 50 and 100 feet. The seismic design category for this site is 'D', as indicated on Plate E-1. It should be noted that the site coefficient F and the parameters SMl and Sol were not included in the SEAOC/OSHPD Seismic Design Maps Tool output for the 2019 CBC. We calculated these parameters -based on Table 1613.2.3(2) in Section 16.4.4 of the 2019 CBC using the value of Si obtained from the Seismic Design Maps Tool, assuming that a site -specific ground motion hazards analysis is not required for the proposed building at this site. Ground Motion Parameters The peak ground acceleration (PGAM) was determined in accordance with Section 11.8.3 of ASCE 7-16. The parameter PGAM is the maximum considered earthquake geometric mean (MCEG) PGA, multiplied by the appropriate site coefficient from Table 11.8-1 of ASCE 7-16. The web -based software application SEAOC/OSHPD Seismic Design Maps Tool (described in the previous section) was used to determine PGAM, based on ASCE 7-16 as the building code reference document. A portion of the program output is included as Plate E-1 in Appendix E of this report. As indicated on Plate E-1, the PGAM for this site is 0.632g. Liquefaction Liquefaction is the loss of strength in generally cohesionless, saturated soils when the pore -water pressure induced in the soil by a seismic event becomes equal to or exceeds the overburden pressure. The primary factors which influence the potential for liquefaction include groundwater table elevation, soil type and grain size characteristics, relative density of the soil, initial confining pressure, and intensity and duration of ground shaking. The depth within which the occurrence of liquefaction may impact surface improvements is generally identified as the upper 50 feet below the existing ground surface. Liquefaction potential is greater in saturated, loose, poorly graded fine sands with a mean (dso) grain size in the range of 0.075 to 0.2 mm (Seed and Idriss, 1971). Clayey (cohesive) soils or soils which possess clay particles (d<0.005mm) in excess of 20 percent (Seed and Idriss, 1982) are generally not considered to be susceptible to liquefaction, nor are those soils which are above the historic static groundwater table. The Seismic Hazards Map for the Laguna Beach Quadrangle, published by the California Geological Survey indicates that the subject site is not located within a designated liquefaction hazard zone nor within an earthquake induced landslide zone. In addition, the subsurface conditions encountered at the boring locations are not considered to be conducive to liquefaction. These conditions consist of moderate to high strength engineered fill soils comprised of predominately cohesive materials, underlain by Monterey formation bedrock. In addition, groundwater was not encountered within the depths explored by our borings. Based on these considerations, liquefaction is not considered to be a design concern for this project. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 1BG161-7 Page 14 GEOTECHNICAL 6.2 Geotechnical Design Considerations General The proposed building areas are underlain by existing fill soils extending to depths of 21/2 to 61/2t feet at the boring locations. The existing fill soils possess variable strengths and variable consolidation/collapse characteristics. Based on the age of the existing development, it is expected that no documentation regarding the placement or compaction of these fill soils is available. Furthermore, demolition of the existing buildings at this site is expected to result in significant disturbance to the existing soils throughout most areas of the proposed buildings. Based on these considerations, remedial grading is considered warranted to remove and replace the existing fill soils as compacted structural fill. Based on the results of our geotechnical analysis, the proposed development will not adversely affect the geologic or geotechnical stability of the adjacent properties. The recommended grading will create a building pad suitable for the intended use. Settlement The proposed remedial grading will remove the existing fill soils from within the areas of the new buildings. These soils will be replaced as compacted structural fill. Following completion of the recommended remedial grading, post -construction settlements are expected to be within tolerable limits. Expansion The near -surface soils at this site generally consist of silty clays, clayey silts, sandy silts, and sandy clays. Expansion index tests performed by SCG indicate that these materials possess a low to medium expansion potential (EI = 49 to 74). Based on the presence of expansive soils, special care should be taken to properly moisture condition and maintain adequate moisture content within all subgrade soils as well as newly placed fill soils. The foundation and floor slab design recommendations contained within this report are based on the assumption that the building pad will be underlain by low to medium expansive soils. It is recommended that additional expansion index testing be conducted at the completion of rough grading to verify the expansion potential of the as -graded building pads. Soluble Sulfates The results of soluble sulfate testing on selected samples of the on -site soils contain soluble sulfate concentrations that are considered to be not applicable, in accordance with American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidelines. Therefore, specialized concrete mix designs are not considered to be necessary, with regard to sulfate protection purposes. It is, however, recommended that additional soluble sulfate testing be conducted at the completion of rough grading to verify the soluble sulfate concentrations of the soils which are present at pad grade within the building area. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 GEOTECHNICAL Page 15 Corrosion Potential The results of laboratory testing indicate that the representative samples of the on -site soils possess saturated resistivity values of 680 to 1,480 ohm -cm, and pH values of 8.5 to 8.6. These test results have been evaluated in accordance with guidelines published by the Ductile Iron Pipe Research Association (DIPRA). The DIPRA guidelines consist of a point system by which characteristics of the soils are used to quantify the corrosivity characteristics of the site. Sulfides, and redox potential are factors that are also used in the evaluation procedure. We have evaluated the corrosivity characteristics of the on -site soils using resistivity, pH, and moisture content. Based on these factors, and utilizing the DIPRA procedure, the on -site soils are considered to be moderately to severely corrosive to ductile iron pipe. Therefore, polyethylene encasement or some other appropriate method of protection may be required for iron pipes. Only low levels (9.6 to 34 mg/kg) of chlorides were detected in the samples submitted for corrosivity testing. In general, soils possessing chloride concentrations in excess of 350 to 500 parts per million (ppm) are considered to be corrosive with respect to steel reinforcement within reinforced concrete. Based on the lack of any significant chlorides in the tested sample, the site is considered to have a C1 chloride exposure in accordance with the American Concrete Institute (ACI) Publication 318 Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary. Therefore, a specialized concrete mix design for reinforced concrete for protection against chloride exposure is not considered warranted. Nitrates present in soil can be corrosive to copper tubing at concentrations greater than 50 mg/kg. The tested samples possess nitrate concentrations of 8.2 to 11 mg/kg. Based on these test results, the on -site soils are not considered to be corrosive to copper pipe. Since SCG does not practice in the area of corrosion engineering, the client may wish to contact a corrosion engineer to provide a more thorough evaluation of the corrosivity test results. Shrinkage/Subsidence Removal and recompaction of the near surface fill soils is estimated to result in an average shrinkage of 5 to 10 percent. Excavation and replacement of existing bedrock is expected to result in bulking of 0 to 5 percent. Minor ground subsidence is expected to occur in the soils below the zone of removal, due to settlement and machinery working. The subsidence is estimated to be 0.1± feet. This estimate may be used for grading in areas that are underlain by existing native alluvial soils or terrace deposits. These estimates are based on previous experience and the subsurface conditions encountered at the boring locations. The actual amount of subsidence is expected to be variable and will be dependent on the type of machinery used, repetitions of use, and dynamic effects, all of which are difficult to assess precisely. Grading and Foundation Plan Review Only preliminary grading plans and no foundation plans were available at the time of this report. It is therefore recommended that we be provided with copies of the updated plans, when they SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA -1W CALIFORNIA Project No. lPGale116 GEOTECHNICAL 9 become available, for review with regard to the conclusions, recommendations, and assumptions contained within this report. 6.3 Site Grading Recommendations The grading recommendations presented below are based on the subsurface conditions encountered at the boring locations and our understanding of the proposed development. We recommend that all grading activities be completed in accordance with the Grading Guide Specifications included as Appendix D of this report, unless superseded by site -specific recommendations presented below. Site Stripping and Demolition Initial site preparation will require demolition of the existing school buildings as well as some existing improvements around the existing structures. All remnants of the previously existing structures should be removed in their entirety, including foundations, floor slabs, and any utilities that will not be reused with the new development. All demolition debris should be disposed of offsite, in accordance with local regulations. Existing improvements that will remain in place for use with the new development should be protected from damage during construction. Concrete and asphalt may be crushed to a maximum 2-inch particle size, well -mixed with onsite sandy soils, and used as compacted fill. Demolition of some existing landscape planters and sports fields will be required. Any existing vegetation within these planters should be removed and disposed of offsite. Removal of any trees should include the associated root masses. The actual extent of site stripping should be determined by the geotechnical engineer at the time of grading, based on the organic content and the stability of the encountered materials. Treatment of Existina Soils; Building Areas and Site Elements It is recommended that the existing fill soils within the proposed building areas be overexcavated in their entirety. Based on conditions encountered at the boring locations, these fill soils extend to depths of 21/2 to 61/2t feet. It is also recommended that the overexcavation extend to a depth of at least 3 feet below proposed finished pad elevation, and 3 feet below existing grade, to provide for a uniform layer of compacted structural fill beneath the proposed buildings. It is also recommended that the existing soils within new foundation areas be overexcavated to a depth of at least 2 feet below proposed foundation bearing grade. This recommendation is designed to eliminate any fill/bedrock transitions that may exist at footing grade, especially within the western region of the site. The overexcavation should extend at least 5 feet beyond the building perimeters, and to an extent equal to the depth of new fill below the foundation bearing grade. If the proposed structures incorporate any exterior columns (such as for a building canopy or overhang) the overexcavation should also encompass these areas. The recommended lateral extent of remedial grading is illustrated on Plate 2 of this report. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 �� GEOTECHNICAL Page 17 Following completion of the overexcavation, the subgrade soils within the building areas should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer to verify their suitability to serve as the structural fill subgrade, as well as to support the foundation loads of the new structures. This evaluation should include proofrolling and probing to identify any soft, loose, or otherwise unstable soils that must be removed. Some localized areas of deeper excavation may be required if soft, porous, or low density fill soils are encountered at the base of the overexcavation. Based on conditions encountered at the exploratory boring locations, some zones of very moist soils will be encountered at or near the base of the recommended overexcavation. Stabilization of the exposed overexcavation subgrade soils may be necessary. Scarification and air drying of these materials may be sufficient to obtain a stable subgrade. However, if highly unstable soils are identified, and if the construction schedule does not allow for delays associated with drying, mechanical stabilization, usually consisting of coarse crushed stone or geotextile, could be necessary. In this event, the geotechnical engineer should be contacted for supplementary recommendations. After a suitable overexcavation subgrade has been achieved, the exposed soils should be scarified to a depth of at least 10 to 12 inches, and moisture conditioned (or air-dried) to at least 2 to 4 percent above optimum moisture content, and recompacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. The previously excavated soils may then be replaced as compacted structural fill. The recommendations presented above for the proposed buildings also apply to the areas of new foundations for structures with conventional foundations, such as shade structures, canopies, and walkway covers. It is expected that any new Flagpoles or light poles will be supported on shallow drilled piers. Subject to evaluation by the geotechnical engineer during construction, no overexcavation in the areas of these foundations is considered warranted, provided that the pole foundations are designed in accordance with the recommendations of Section 6.5. Treatment of Existing Soils: Parking and Drive Areas Based on economic considerations, overexcavation of the existing near -surface fill soils in the new pavement areas is not considered warranted with the exception of areas where lower strength or unstable soils are identified by the geotechnical engineer during grading. Subgrade preparation in the new parking and drive areas should initially consist of removal of all soils disturbed during stripping and demolition operations. The geotechnical engineer should then evaluate the subgrade to identify any areas of additional unsuitable soils. Any such materials should be removed to a level of firm and unyielding soil. The subgrade soils should then be scarified to a depth of 12f inches, moisture conditioned to 2 to 4 percent above optimum moisture content, and recompacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. The grading recommendations presented above for the proposed parking and drive areas assume that the owner and/or developer can tolerate minor amounts of settlement within the proposed parking areas. The grading recommendations presented above do not completely mitigate the extent of existing low strength fill soils in the parking areas. As such, settlement and associated SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 Page 18 GEOTECHNICAL pavement distress could occur. Typically, repair of such distressed areas involves significantly lower costs than completely mitigating these soils at the time of construction. If the owner cannot tolerate the risk of such settlements, the parking and drive areas should be overexcavated to provide for a new layer of compacted structural fill, extending to a depth of at least 2 feet below proposed pavement subgrade elevation. Treatment of Existing Soils: Flatwork The proposed development is expected to include some areas of new Portland cement concrete flatwork. Based on conditions encountered at the boring locations, it is expected that these areas of flatwork will be underlain by moist to very moist low to medium expansive soils. The presence of these soils possesses a minor risk of heave and damage to new flatwork, which will be relatively lightly loaded. Based on economic considerations, flatwork is typically constructed immediately over low to medium expansive soils. However, if the owner desires protection against heaving of flatwork, a layer of very low expansive select structural fill could be placed below the flatwork areas. Typically, this layer of select fill is 1 to 2 feet in thickness. Subgrade preparation in the new flatwork areas should initially consist of removal of all soils disturbed during stripping and demolition operations. The geotechnical engineer should then evaluate the subgrade to identify any areas of additional unsuitable soils. The subgrade soils should then be scarified to a depth of 12± inches, moisture conditioned to 3 to 5 percent above optimum, and recompacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. Based on the presence of variable strength fill soils throughout the site, it is expected that some isolated areas of additional overexcavation may be required to remove zones of lower strength, unsuitable soils. These flatwork subgrade preparation recommendations may also be used for areas of new exterior rubberized play surfacing and areas of new flagstone, subject to any applicable manufacturer's recommendations. Treatment of Existing Soils: Synthetic Turf The proposed improvements will include some areas of synthetic turf. The subgrade soils in these areas should be prepared in accordance with the recommendations presented above for the parking are drive areas. As such, all fill and subgrade soils within the synthetic turf areas should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. In addition, the remedial grading and site preparation activities within the area of the proposed turn areas should also be in accordance with any relevant specifications of the synthetic turf manufacturer. Treatment of Existing Soils: Retaining Walls and Site Walls The existing soils within the areas of new retaining walls should be overexcavated to a depth of 2 feet below foundation bearing grade and replaced as compacted structural fill, as discussed above for the proposed building pad. The foundation subgrade soils within the areas of any proposed non -retaining site walls should be overexcavated to a depth of 2 feet below proposed foundation bearing grade. For both types of walls, the overexcavation subgrade soils should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer prior to scarifying, moisture conditioning and SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 CEOTECHNICAL Page 19 recompacting the upper 12 inches of exposed subgrade soils. The previously excavated soils may then be replaced as compacted structural fill. Fill Placement Fill soils should be placed in thin (6t inches), near -horizontal lifts, moisture conditioned to 2 to 4 percent above the optimum moisture content, and compacted. On -site soils may be used for fill provided they are cleaned of any debris to the satisfaction of the geotechnical engineer. All fill should conform with the recommendations presented in the Grading Guide Specifications, included as Appendix D. On -site soils may be used for fill provided they are cleaned of any debris to the satisfaction of the geotechnical engineer. It should be noted that some of the soils at this site currently possess moisture contents above the anticipated optimum moisture content. Therefore, some drying of these materials may be required in order to achieve a moisture content suitable for recompaction. All grading and fill placement activities should be completed in accordance with the requirements of the 2019 CBC and the grading code of the City of Newport Beach. All fill soils should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. Fill soils should be well mixed. Compaction tests should be performed periodically by the geotechnical engineer as random verification of compaction and moisture content. These tests are intended to aid the contractor. Since the tests are taken at discrete locations and depths, they may not be indicative of the entire fill and therefore should not relieve the contractor of his responsibility to meet the job specifications. Imported Structural Fill All imported structural fill should consist of low expansive (EI < 50), well graded soils possessing at least 10 percent fines (that portion of the sample passing the No. 200 sieve). Additional specifications for structural fill are presented in the Grading Guide Specifications, included as Appendix D. Utility Trench Backfill In general, all utility trench backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D- 1557 maximum dry density. As an alternative, a clean sand (minimum Sand Equivalent of 30) may be placed within trenches and compacted in place (jetting or flooding is not recommended). It is recommended that materials in excess of 3 inches in size not be used for utility trench backfill. Compacted trench backfill should conform to the requirements of the local grading code, and more restrictive requirements may be indicated by the City of Newport Beach. All utility trench backfills should be witnessed by the geotechnical engineer, The trench backfill soils should be compaction tested where possible; probed and visually evaluated elsewhere. Utility trenches which parallel a footing, and extending below a 1h:1v plane projected from the outside edge of the footing should be backfilled with structural fill soils, compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 standard. Pea gravel backfill should not be used for these trenches. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 Page 20 GEOTECHNIC.4L 6.4 Construction Considerations Excavation Considerations The near -surface soils at this site generally consist of sands, silts, and clays. These materials are expected to be relatively stable within shallow excavations. However, if caving occurs within shallow excavations, flattened excavation slopes may be sufficient to provide excavation stability. Deeper excavations may require some form of external stabilization such as shoring or bracing. Maintaining adequate moisture content within the near -surface soils will improve excavation stability. Temporary excavation slopes should be no steeper than 1.5h:1v. All excavation activities on this site should be conducted in accordance with Cal -OSHA regulations. A retaining wall is proposed to be constructed along the eastern property line. This wall will require cuts to achieve the new grades. Special grading procedures, such as slot cutting or shoring may be required to construct these walls. Preliminarily, vertical cuts of up to 3 feet may be made without the use of shoring or slot cutting. If slot cutting is required, the A-B-C method may be used with slots 6 to 8 feet in width. The proposed grading and construction activities will require excavation in close proximity to existing buildings. The contractor should take all necessary provisions to protect the existing improvements during these activities. Expansive Soils The near surface on -site soils possess a low to medium expansion potential. Therefore, care should be given to proper moisture conditioning of all building pad subgrade soils to a moisture content of 2 to 4 percent above the Modified Proctor optimum during site grading. All imported fill soils should have very low expansive (EI < 50) characteristics. In addition to adequately moisture conditioning the subgrade soils and fill soils during grading, special care must be taken to maintain moisture content of these soils at 2 to 4 percent above the Modified Proctor optimum. This will require the contractor to frequently moisture condition these soils throughout the grading process, unless grading occurs during a period of relatively wet weather. Due to the presence of expansive soils at this site, provisions should be made to limit the potential for surface water to penetrate the soils immediately adjacent to the structures. These provisions should include directing surface runoff into rain gutters and area drains, reducing the extent of landscaped areas around the structures, and sloping the ground surface away from the buildings. Where possible, it is recommended that landscaped planters not be located immediately adjacent to the buildings. If landscaped planters around the buildings are necessary, it is recommended that drought tolerant plants or a drip irrigation system be utilized, to minimize the potential for deep moisture penetration around the structures. Presented below is a list of additional soil moisture control recommendations that should be considered by the owner, developer, and civil engineer: SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 GEOTE.CHNIC.AL Page 21 • Ponding and areas of low flow gradients in unpaved walkways, grass and planter areas should be avoided. In general, minimum drainage gradients of 2 percent should be maintained in unpaved areas. • Bare soil within five feet of proposed structures should be sloped at a minimum five percent gradient away from the structure (about three inches of fall in five feet), or the same area could be paved with a minimum surface gradient of one percent. Pavement is preferable. • Decorative gravel ground cover tends to provide a reservoir for surface water and may hide areas of ponding or poor drainage. Decorative gravel is, therefore, not recommended and should not be utilized for landscaping unless equipped with a subsurface drainage system designed by a licensed landscape architect. • Positive drainage devices, such as graded swales, paved ditches, and catch basins should be installed at appropriate locations within the area of proposed development. • Concrete walks and flatwork should not obstruct the free flow of surface water to the appropriate drainage devices. • Area drains should be recessed below grade to allow free flow of water into the drain. Concrete or brick flatwork joints should be sealed with mortar or flexible mastic. • Gutter and downspout systems should be installed to capture all discharge from roof areas. Downspouts should discharge directly into a pipe or paved surface system to be conveyed offsite. • Enclosed planters adjoining, or in close proximity to proposed structures, should be sealed at the bottom and provided with subsurface collection systems and outlet pipes. • Depressed planters should be raised with soil to promote runoff (minimum drainage gradient two percent or five percent, see above), and/or equipped with area drains to eliminate ponding. • Drainage outfall locations should be selected to avoid erosion of slopes and/or properly armored to prevent erosion of graded surfaces. No drainage should be directed over or towards adjoining slopes. • All drainage devices should be maintained on a regular basis, including frequent observations during the rainy season to keep the drains free of leaves, soil and other debris. • Landscape irrigation should conform to the recommendations of the landscape architect and should be performed judiciously to preclude either soaking or excessive drying of the foundation soils. This should entail regular watering during the drier portions of the year and little or no irrigation during the rainy season. Automatic sprinkler systems should, therefore, be switched to manual operation during the rainy season. Good irrigation practice typically requires frequent application of limited quantities of water that are sufficient to sustain plant growth, but do not excessively wet the soils. Ponding and/or run-off of irrigation water are indications of excessive watering. Other provisions, as determined by the landscape architect or civil engineer, may also be appropriate. Moisture Sensitive Subgrade Soils Most of the near -surface soils possess appreciable silt and clay content and will become unstable if exposed to significant moisture infiltration or disturbance by construction traffic. In addition, based on their granular content, some of the on -site soils will be susceptible to erosion. Therefore, the site should be graded to prevent ponding of surface water and to prevent water from running into excavations. As discussed in Section 6.3 of this report, unstable subgrade soils will likely be encountered at the base of the overexcavation within the proposed building area. The extent of unstable subgrade soils will to a large degree depend on methods used by the contractor to avoid adding additional moisture to these soils or disturbing soils which already possess high moisture contents. If grading occurs during a period of relatively wet weather, an increase in subgrade instability SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA I WE CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 GEOTECHNICAL Page 22 should also be expected. If unstable subgrade conditions are encountered, it is recommended that only track -mounted vehicles be used for fill placement and compaction. If the construction schedule dictates that site grading will occur during a period of wet weather, allowances should be made for costs and delays associated with drying the on -site soils or import of a less moisture sensitive fill material. Grading during wet or cool weather may also increase the depth of overexcavation in the pad areas as well as the need for and or the thickness of the crushed stone stabilization layer, discussed in Section 6.3 of this report. Groundwater The static groundwater table at this site is considered to exist at a depth in excess of 25f feet. Therefore, groundwater is not expected to impact grading or foundation construction activities. 6.5 Foundation Design and Construction Based on the preceding grading recommendations, it is assumed that the new building pads will be underlain by new structural fill soils used to replace the existing disturbed fill soils. These structural fill soils are expected to extend to depths of at least 2 feet below proposed foundation bearing grade. Based on this subsurface profile, the proposed structures may be supported on conventional shallow foundations. Shallow Foundation Design Parameters New square and rectangular footings may be designed as follows: Maximum, net allowable soil bearing pressure: 2,000 Ibs/ft2. Minimum wall/column footing width: 14 inches/24 inches. • Minimum longitudinal steel reinforcement within strip footings: Six (6) No. 5 rebars (3 top and 3 bottom), due to the presence of medium expansive soils. • It is recommended that the foundations be structurally connected to the floor slabs, in manner determined by the project structural engineer. • Minimum foundation embedment: 12 inches into suitable structural fill soils, and at least 24 inches below adjacent exterior grade. Any foundations located within 15 feet of the southerly descending slope should be embedded at least 48 inches below adjacent exterior grade. This condition is not expected to apply to the proposed theater/gymnasium. Interior column footings may be placed immediately beneath the floor slab. It is recommended that the perimeter building foundations be continuous across all exterior doorways. Any flatwork adjacent to the exterior doors should be doweled into the perimeter foundations in a manner determined by the structural engineer. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 GEOTECHNICAL Page 23 The allowable bearing pressures presented above may be increased by 1/3 when considering short duration wind or seismic loads. The minimum steel reinforcement recommended above is based on geotechnical considerations; additional reinforcement may be necessary for structural considerations. The actual design of the foundations should be determined by the structural engineer. Pole Foundation Design Parameters Isolated poles and fencing may be supported on shallow drilled pier foundations. These foundations may be designed as follows: Maximum, net allowable soil bearing pressure: 2,500 Ibs/ftz. Minimum pier diameter: 18 inches, 12 inches for fencing. Minimum pier embedment: 4 feet below adjacent exterior grade; 3 feet below adjacent exterior grade for fencing. Drilled piers constructed adjacent to the southerly descending slope should be embedded to a depth sufficient to provide at least 10 feet of lateral embedment from the exposed slope face. The allowable bearing pressure presented above may be increased by 1/3 when considering short duration wind or seismic loads. The actual design of the foundations should be determined by the structural engineer. Shallow Foundation Construction The foundation subgrade soils should be evaluated at the time of overexcavation, as discussed in Section 6.3 of this report. It is further recommended that the foundation subgrade soils be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer immediately prior to steel or concrete placement. Soils suitable for direct foundation support should consist of existing or newly placed structural fill, compacted to at least 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. Any unsuitable materials should be removed to a depth of suitable bearing compacted structural fill, with the resulting excavations backfilled with compacted fill soils. As an alternative, lean concrete slurry (500 to 1,500 psi) may be used to backfill such isolated overexcavations. The foundation subgrade soils should also be properly moisture conditioned to 2 to 4 percent above the Modified Proctor optimum, to a depth of at least 12 inches below bearing grade. Since it is typically not feasible to increase the moisture content of the floor slab and foundation subgrade soils once rough grading has been completed, care should be taken to maintain the moisture content of the building pad subgrade soils throughout the construction process. Drilled Pier Construction Minimum pier shaft diameters should be 18 inches (12 inches for fencing) to help eliminate arching of concrete and possible void formation within the piers. On -center pier spacing should be at least four (4) times the pier diameter at the bearing surface to eliminate an overlapping WWSOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA ICALIFORNIA Project No. 1 Pale 24 GEOTECHNICAL 9 stress influence. At a minimum, a pier spacing equivalent to three (3) times the pier diameter could be utilized, with an associated 20 percent reduction in allowable capacities. Based on the conditions encountered at the boring locations, minor caving of the drilled pier excavations may occur. If caving or groundwater intrusion does occur during drilling, casing or liners will be required. Prior to the placement of concrete, a clean -out bucket should be used to ensure that excess materials in the bottom of the pier have been sufficiently removed and that the dimensions of the pier are correct. Concrete should be place using a tremie pipe whenever the distance of fall is greater than five (5) feet. Concrete should be placed at about a 6-inch slump when long reinforcing steel is used. It is recommended that the pier construction be performed in accordance with American Concrete Institute documents (ACI 336, I-79 and ACI 336-3R-72, revised 1985). In the event that casing is required, a sufficient head of concrete (minimum of 5 feet) should be maintained in the casing as the casing is being removed to prevent the intrusion of caving soils in the pier. It is recommended that the bearing materials at each drilled pier location be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer prior to placing steel or concrete. Estimated Foundation Settlements Post -construction total and differential settlements of shallow foundations designed and constructed in accordance with the previously presented recommendations are estimated to be less than 1.0 and 0.5 inches, respectively. Differential movements are expected to occur over a 30-foot span, thereby resulting in an angular distortion of less than 0.002 inches per inch. Lateral Load Resistance Lateral load resistance will be developed by a combination of friction acting at the base of foundations and slab and the passive earth pressure developed by footings below grade. The following friction and passive pressure may be used to resist lateral forces: • Passive Earth Pressure: 250 Ibs/ft3 • Friction Coefficient: 0.25 These are allowable values, and include a factor of safety. When combining friction and passive resistance, the passive pressure component should be reduced by one-third. These values assume that footings will be poured directly against compacted structural fill. The maximum allowable passive pressure is 3000 Ibs/ftz. 6.6 Floor Slab Design and Construction Subgrades which will support new floor slabs should be prepared in accordance with the recommendations contained in the Site Grading Recommendations section of this report. Based on the anticipated grading which will occur at this site, the floors of the new buildings may be constructed as a conventional slabs -on -grade supported on existing or newly placed structural SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA VOW CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 GEOTECHNICAL Page 25 fill soils, extending to a depth of at least 3 feet below proposed pad grade. Based on geotechnical considerations, the floor slabs may be designed as follows: • Minimum slab thickness: 5 inches. Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (k,,): 100 Ibs/in3. This modulus may be used for bearing pressures up to the maximum allowable bearing pressure presented in this report. This modulus is the nominal 12" square value, and is valid for a footing width (B) of 2 feet or less, assuming an embedment of 1 foot or more. The subgrade modulus for footings more than 2 feet wide should be decreased as follows: B + 1l2 kcorr = kvi ( 2B / The modulus for a rectangular footing should further reduced as follows: 1 + o.5B/L kcorr,rect - kcorr ( 1.5 ) Minimum slab reinforcement: No. 4 bars at 16 inches on -center, in both directions, due to presence of medium expansive soils at this site. The actual floor slab reinforcement should be determined by the structural engineer, based upon the imposed loading. Slab underlayment: If moisture sensitive floor coverings will be used or if vapor transmission into the area above the building slab is problematic, then minimum slab underlayment should consist of a moisture vapor barrier constructed below the entire area of the proposed slab. The moisture vapor barrier should meet or exceed the Class A rating as defined by ASTM E 1745-97 and have a permeance rating less than 0.01 perms as described in ASTM E 96-95 and ASTM E 154-88. A polyolefin material such as 15-mil Stego Wrap Vapor barrier or equivalent will meet these specifications. The moisture vapor barrier should be properly constructed in accordance with all applicable manufacturer specifications. Given that a rock free subgrade is anticipated and that a capillary break is not required, sand below the barrier is not required. The need for sand and/or the amount of sand above the moisture vapor barrier should be specified by the structural engineer or concrete contractor. The selection of sand above the barrier is not a geotechnical engineering issue and hence outside our purview. Where moisture sensitive floor coverings are not anticipated, the vapor barrier may be eliminated. Moisture condition the floor slab subgrade soils to 2 to 4 percent above the Modified Proctor optimum moisture content, to a depth of 12 inches. The moisture content of the floor slab subgrade soils should be verified by the geotechnical engineer within 24 hours prior to concrete placement. Proper concrete curing techniques should be utilized to reduce the potential for slab curling or the formation of excessive shrinkage cracks. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. ISG161-7 VOW GEOTECNNICAL Page 26 The actual design of the floor slab should be completed by the structural engineer to verify adequate thickness and reinforcement. 6.7 Exterior Flatwork Design and Construction Subgrades which will support new exterior slabs -on -grade for patios and sidewalks should be prepared in accordance with the recommendations contained in Section 6.3 of this report. Based on these recommendations, the exterior flatwork will be supported on existing fill soils that have been scarified and moisture conditioned to a depth of 12 inches and recompacted to 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. The owner and/or developer should be aware that flatwork constructed over medium expansive soils may be subject to movements and minor distress due to heaving of the underlying expansive soils. If such movements are not acceptable, consideration should be given to the use of a low expansive layer of structural fill beneath the flatwork, as discussed in Section 6.3 of this report. Based on geotechnical considerations, exterior slabs on grade which are not subjected to any vehicular traffic may be designed as follows: Minimum slab thickness: 41/2 inches Minimum slab reinforcement: No. 4 bars at 18 inches on center, in both directions. • Moisture condition the flatwork subgrade soils to 2 to 4 percent of the optimum moisture content, to a depth of at least 12 inches. • Proper concrete curing techniques should be utilized to reduce the potential for slab curling or the formation of excessive shrinkage cracks. • Control joints should be provided at a maximum spacing of 8 feet on center in two directions for slabs and at 6 feet on center for sidewalks. Control joints are intended to direct cracking. • Expansion or felt joints should be used at the interface of exterior slabs on grade and any fixed structures to permit relative movement. • Where the flatwork is adjacent to a landscape planter or another area with exposed soil, it should incorporate a turned down edge. This turned down edge should be at least 12 inches in depth and 6 inches in width. The turned down edge should incorporate longitudinal steel reinforcement consisting of at least one No. 4 bar. • Flatwork which is constructed immediately adjacent to the new structures should be dowelled into the perimeter foundations in a manner determined by the structural engineer. • Some cracking of exterior flatwork at this site should be expected, due to the presence of expansive soils. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 GEOTECHNICAL Page 27 These flatwork design and construction recommendations may also be used for concrete slabs to be placed in areas of new exterior rubberized play surfacing and areas of new flagstone, subject to any applicable manufacturer's recommendations. 6.8 Retaining Wall Design and Construction The initial plans provided to our office indicate that some small retaining walls (less than 5 feet in height) will be required as part of the proposed construction. Most of these walls are located around the perimeter of the site. The retaining walls in the southwest region of the property will be located along the property line, and will retain the soils on the adjacent property. The parameters recommended for use in the design of these walls are presented below. Retaining Wall Design Parameters Based on the soil conditions encountered at the boring locations, the following parameters may be used in the design of new retaining walls for this site. The onsite soils consist of low to medium expansive silty clays, which are not recommended for retaining wall backfill. We have provided retaining wall design parameters assuming the use of imported sandy materials for retaining wall backfill. The imported sandy soils should possess an internal angle of friction of at least 30 degrees when compacted to 90 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. If desired, SCG could provide design parameters for an alternative select backfill material behind the retaining walls. The use of select backfill material could result in lower lateral earth pressures. In order to use the design parameters for the imported select fill, this material must be placed within the entire active failure wedge. This wedge is defined as extending from the heel of the retaining wall upwards at an angle of approximately 600 from horizontal. If select backfill material behind the retaining wall is desired, SCG should be contacted for supplementary recommendations. RETAINING WALL DESIGN PARAMETERS Soil Type Imported Sandy Soils Design Parameter Internal Friction Angle 300 Unit Weight 130 Ibs/ft3 Active Condition 43 Ibs/ft3 level backfill Equivalent Active Condition 70 Ibs/ft3 Fluid Pressure: 2h:1v backfill At -Rest Condition 65 Ibs/ft3 level backfill In some areas (such as along the eastern property line) it may be necessary to design the retaining walls to support the existing medium expansive soils, since it will not be feasible to fill SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 GEOTECHNICAL Page 28 the entire active wedge with very low expansive imported soils. In this case, the walls should be designed as follows: RETAINING WALL DESIGN PARAMETERS Soil Type On -site Medium Expansive Soils Design Parameter Internal Friction Angle 250 Unit Weight 125 Ibs/ft3 Active Condition 51 Ibs/ft3 level backfill Equivalent Active Condition 76 Ibs/ft3 Fluid Pressure: 2.5h:1v backfill At -Rest Condition 72 Ibs/ft3 level backfill The walls should be designed using a soil -footing coefficient of friction of 0.25 and an equivalent passive pressure of 250 Ibs/ft3. The structural engineer should incorporate appropriate factors of safety in the design of the retaining walls. The active earth pressure may be used for the design of retaining walls that do not directly support structures or support soils that in turn support structures and which will be allowed to deflect. The at -rest earth pressure should be used for walls that will not be allowed to deflect such as those which will support foundation bearing soils, or which will support foundation loads directly. Where the soils on the toe side of the retaining wall are not covered by a "hard" surface such as a structure or pavement, the upper 1 foot of soil should be neglected when calculating passive resistance due to the potential for the material to become disturbed or degraded during the life of the structure. Seismic Lateral Earth Pressures In accordance with the 2019 CBC, any retaining walls more than 6 feet in height must be designed for seismic lateral earth pressures. Based on the site plan provided to our office, it is not expected that any walls in excess of 6 feet in height will be required for this project. In the event that such walls are required, our office should be contacted for supplementary design parameters. Retaining Wall Foundation Design The retaining wall foundations should be supported within newly placed compacted structural fill, extending to a depth of at least 2 feet below proposed foundation bearing grade. Foundations to support new retaining walls should be designed in accordance with the general Foundation Design Parameters presented in a previous section of this report. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 GEOTECHNICAL Page 29 The foundations for any new retaining walls located along the southerly slope should be embedded to a depth of at least 36 inches, and to a depth sufficient to provide at least 10 feet of lateral embedment from the exposed slope face. Backfill Material Retaining walls should be backfilled with imported sandy soils. Onsite soils are not recommended for use as retaining wall backfill. All backfill material placed within 3 feet of the back wall face should have a particle size no greater than 3 inches. The retaining wall backfill materials should be well graded. It is recommended that a minimum 1 foot thick layer of free -draining granular material (less than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve) be placed against the face of the retaining walls. This material should extend from the top of the retaining wall footing to within 1 foot of the ground surface on the back side of the retaining wail. This material should be approved by the geotechnical engineer. In lieu of the 1 foot thick layer of free -draining material, a properly installed prefabricated drainage composite such as the MiraDRAIN 6000XL (or approved equivalent), which is specifically designed for use behind retaining walls, may be used. If the layer of free -draining material is not covered by an impermeable surface, such as a structure or pavement, a 12-inch thick layer of a low permeability soil should be placed over the backfill to reduce surface water migration to the underlying soils. The layer of free draining granular material should be separated from the backfill soils by a suitable geotextile, approved by the geotechnical engineer. All retaining wall backfill should be placed and compacted under engineering controlled conditions in the necessary layer thicknesses to ensure an in -place density between 90 and 93 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by the Modified Proctor test (ASTM D1557). Care should be taken to avoid over -compaction of the soils behind the retaining walls, and the use of heavy compaction equipment should be avoided. Subsurface Drainage As previously indicated, the retaining wall design parameters are based upon drained backfill conditions. Consequently, some form of permanent drainage system will be necessary in conjunction with the appropriate backfill material. Subsurface drainage may consist of either: A weep hole drainage system typically consisting of a series of 4-inch diameter holes in the wall situated slightly above the ground surface elevation on the exposed side of the wall and at an approximate 8-foot on -center spacing. The weep holes should include a 2 cubic foot pocket of open graded gravel, surrounded by an approved geotextile fabric, at each weep hole location. A 4-inch diameter perforated pipe surrounded by 2 cubic feet of gravel per linear foot of drain placed behind the wall, above the retaining wall footing. The gravel layer should be wrapped in a suitable geotextile fabric to reduce the potential for migration of fines. The footing drain should be extended to daylight or tied into a storm drainage system. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIAProject No. 18G161-7 GEOTECHNICAL Page 30 6.9 Pavement Design Parameters Site preparation in the pavement area should be completed as previously recommended in the Site Grading Recommendations section of this report. The subsequent pavement recommendations assume proper drainage and construction monitoring, and are based on either PCA or CALTRANS design parameters for a twenty (20) year design period. However, these designs also assume a routine pavement maintenance program to obtain the anticipated 20-year pavement service life. Pavement Subgrades It is anticipated that the new pavements will be supported on the existing fill soils that have been scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted. These materials generally consist of silty clays and sandy clays with some areas of clayey sands, and silty sands. These materials are expected to exhibit fair to poor pavement support characteristics, with estimated R-values of 10 to 20. Since R-value testing was not included in the scope of services for the current project, the subsequent pavement designs are based upon a conservatively assumed R-value of 10. Any fill material imported to the site should have support characteristics equal to or greater than that of the on -site soils and be placed and compacted under engineering -controlled conditions. It may be desirable to perform R-value testing after the completion of rough grading to verify the R- value of the as -graded parking subgrade. Asphaltic Concrete Presented below are the recommended thicknesses for new flexible pavement structures consisting of asphaltic concrete over a granular base. The pavement designs are based on the traffic indices (TI's) indicated. The client and/or civil engineer should verify that these TI's are representative of the anticipated traffic volumes. If the client and/or civil engineer determine that the expected traffic volume will exceed the applicable traffic index, we should be contacted for supplementary recommendations. The design traffic indices equate to the following approximate daily traffic volumes over a 20-year design life, assuming five operational traffic days per week. Traffic Index No. of Heavy Trucks per Da 4.0 0 5.0 1 6.0 4 7.0 13 For the purpose of the traffic volumes indicated above, a truck is defined as a 5-axle tractor trailer unit with one 8-kip axle and two 32-kip tandem axles. All of the traffic indices allow for 1,000 automobiles per day. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 GEOTECHNICAL Page 31 ASPHALT PAVEMENTS (R = 10) Thickness (inches) Materials Auto Parking Auto Drive Lanes Truck Traffic Fire Lanes (TI = 4.0) (TI = 5.0) (TI = 6.0) (TI = 7.0) Asphalt Concrete 3 3 31/2 4 Aggregate Base 6 9 12 15 Compacted 12 12 12 12 Subgrade The aggregate base course should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. The asphaltic concrete should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the Marshall maximum density, as determined by ASTM D-2726. The aggregate base course may consist of crushed aggregate base (CAB) or crushed miscellaneous base (CMB), which is a recycled gravel, asphalt and concrete material. The gradation, R-Value, Sand Equivalent, and Percentage Wear of the CAB or CMB should comply with appropriate specifications contained in the current edition of the "Greenbook" Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction. Portland Cement Concrete The preparation of the subgrade soils within Portland cement concrete pavement areas should be performed as previously described for proposed asphalt pavement areas. The minimum recommended thicknesses for the Portland Cement Concrete pavement sections are as follows: PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENTS (R = 10) Thickness (inches) Materials Automobile Parking Truck Traffic Areas Fire Lanes and Drive Areas (TI =6.0) (TI =7.0) (TI = 4.0 to 5.0) PCC 5 51/2 6 Compacted Subgrade 12 12 12 95% minimum compaction) The concrete should have a 28-day compressive strength of at least 3,000 psi. Reinforcing within all pavements should be designed by the structural engineer. At a minimum, the reinforcement in PCC pavements should consist of heavy welded wire mesh (6 x 6 - W2.9 x W2.9 WWF). The maximum joint spacing within all of the PCC pavements is recommended to be equal to or less than 25 times the pavement thickness. The actual joint spacing and reinforcing of the Portland cement concrete pavements should be determined by the structural engineer. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 . GEOTECHNICAL Page 32 Fire Vehicle Access Road We understand that any pavements that will be subject to access by fire fighting vehicles must consist of an all-weather road capable of supporting a 100,000-pound vehicle with outriggers. The fire lane pavements (TI = 7.0) presented above are considered suitable to support these loads. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 GEOTECHNICAL Page33 7.0 GENERAL COMMENTS This report has been prepared as an instrument of service for use by the client, in order to aid in the evaluation of this property and to assist the architects and engineers in the design and preparation of the project plans and specifications. This report may be provided to the contractor(s) and other design consultants to disclose information relative to the project. However, this report is not intended to be utilized as a specification in and of itself, without appropriate interpretation by the project architect, civil engineer, and/or structural engineer. The reproduction and distribution of this report must be authorized by the client and Southern California Geotechnical, Inc. Furthermore, any reliance on this report by an unauthorized third party is at such party's sole risk, and we accept no responsibility for damage or loss which may occur. The client(s)' reliance upon this report is subject to the Engineering Services Agreement, incorporated into our proposal for this project. The analysis of this site was based on a subsurface profile interpolated from limited discrete soil samples. While the materials encountered in the project area are considered to be representative of the total area, some variations should be expected between boring locations and sample depths. If the conditions encountered during construction vary significantly from those detailed herein, we should be contacted immediately to determine if the conditions alter the recommendations contained herein. This report has been based on assumed or provided characteristics of the proposed development. It is recommended that the owner, client, architect, structural engineer, and civil engineer carefully review these assumptions to ensure that they are consistent with the characteristics of the proposed development. If discrepancies exist, they should be brought to our attention to verify that they do not affect the conclusions and recommendations contained herein. We also recommend that the project plans and specifications be submitted to our office for review to verify that our recommendations have been correctly interpreted. The analysis, conclusions, and recommendations contained within this report have been promulgated in accordance with generally accepted professional geotechnical engineering practice. No other warranty is implied or expressed. SOUTHERN Harbor Day School — Corona Del Mar, CA CALIFORNIA Project No. 18G161-7 GEOTECHNICAL Page 34 r i L WPORT NES PDRT 5' 1 �q� i � 1! kt 8¢CK yu r n Yoa SAYS. y yq. ° FtmR $I M1N k, E ^# �W9 _ i V`.nK\ Yi'S i a YY. Y%'6P'� f "• \ C" 4'R WI h0'., Y,(�, t1`M1tiu�n dS �Y. .$ /'.. i , OF A1rC Qom', tR �Awu?' HMS PD � �c� I F' �Y 'S�G9.FI�i'4Y V✓ Y�M F MS�ftp EWxl@ a"� Myg�.. � M h e ''��ff � I 4uO°igss >4>�- y cE T5 p �'rgbJJAg14 d dr %i "k`IIxP'AV� YY9'x� ��eeppf'-Q�J� PJp,.'y . M .n x ryYriruin8 $R3 .-'"$ $"�Ar �I I �I GyC=Cw'tA¢M Vv o ,Ell � I w I, i I I i i I j I SITE LOCATION MAP HARBOR DAY SCHOOL CORONA DEL MAR, CALIFOR[NI7Ai TRCE:O GUIDE, COUNTY n SOURCE: ORANGE COUNTY \� SCDRAWN III SOUTHERN CHKD: GKM CALIFORNIA SC18G161]CT - GEOTECHNICAL PLATE 1 ,X I II' U I Ig '6i II '_. TO ag- 1DD ZO 3r � yO II� C r W W T 91 Ell__ O I _ X — IT 7 1I u 00 00 0 F O o m v D 0 0 A m x Om v z in X a A A N C z zj v0 O D m Z N N L7 '�C =� r MOO m I �N r Im o trot A � v O 000 � m NORrn n n o r _IX m m p m n Z O Z W Z n=Z 2 00 O O n O T < m M —r ;aoos m mo O A Z ➢ V O G)n r"�O n W mi O m -O n H no M w 2:2 � y z zz Trx qp0 sit n ;., " U � 1' dA af,' , �n j \ X27j T M� Tm =h' \,9 J � 22 i i 35 gins / ' Tf 4m I- V Tm Tm /'"J y \'/ 2oA \\ / /A \ �� /40 QT Stream terrace deposits Qtn Nonmarine deposits, on marine terrace deposits (subscripts indicate relative level with'I the,lowes+). 'Qtm Marine terrace depose+s (Wirndut ndnmarine cover). BEDROCK UNITS �E Tc Capistrano Formation Tm Monterey.Formation T.m-ss-sandstone SOURCE: "GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE LAGUNA BEACH QUADRANGLE, ORANGE 1p7Tn■1 COUNTY, CALIFORNIA" 1976 SCALE: 1" = 1000' DRAWN: JH CHKD: GKM SCG PROJECT 18G161-3 PLATE 3 .sz Qt Tt . -Tin '> . t Ttl 11 Tsc Qtm r! IsTE �TSai /Tm\' ss Ts( j `;3 im_^ E �F Qtrn 5 Tm )NA DEL MAR, CALIFORNIA SOUIHERN 1 CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL D Rj.SI. Engineering Wall Loading from Fence Prendergast, Magdalena<mprendergastCcalpadesignstudios.com> Wed, Sep 8, 2021, 1:30 PM to me, Brandon, Albina, Daniel, Michael, Danah, Jim, Marian, Chris HI David, i Here are the reactions from the 12-ft high chainlink fence (with 6-ft high wind screen at bottom) to the top of the east retaining wall. All loads listed below are ultimate wind loads and act normal to the face of the screen. End post: Shear at top of wall = 1.5-k Moment at top of wall = 8-k-ft Post adjacent to end post: Shear at top of wall = 3-k Moment at top of wall = 16-k-ft All other post (typical): Shear at top of wall = 2.5-k Based on the above data provied by client Max lateral loading on wall 3.00 kips / post Max moment at top of wall 16.00 kip-ft / post Post Spacing 1 1 8.00 ft Max lateral loading per ft of wall 0.375 kips / post Max moment per ft of wall 2.00 kip-ft / post 0 VICINITY MAP QPanl'm SWEIt _ Day SUID01 4WD P ImM1maln LlneOln (�CBllvl an 9den G 11 Lary 5Alo01 •( k =� P.[Ihet 4 P4or G l Olnallon Centel Igy�LS SUBJECT PA•a°b.nA SALE 11 UMd(S EIMIJIY 1MIPPIM'Scheal , 0 'OJOO,n nJ ,COOTa HOTHAN r D JIX15 fiJ San JOa4n'IIP`Hlld San JGaBVln It'll' RG- San AOORIIATAIISTd SSn JONUMIIIn9 Lj( ] 4 P 5{ S q B GENERAL NOTES MEEMM REMMON DESIGNER I9 DEFINED M WE REGISTERED CML ENGINEER WHOSE STRIP IS ON THERE PIMM. OPON1WimM15) OR PWOOTHI1 M. "let. ME WE OU SEHL CONTRACTOR IS DEEMED AS WE OR ANIFAPONISI OR PERSWL51 WIN OVERAL LMIMOL OF WE ATE MNWRUCHW, THE PROJECT OEORCHNILM ENGINEER IS DEFINED M THE OROMIWTIMI OR PERSON WHO ALMOREO Me MPROYED 601LMEOLWY REPORT ASSWUTED WITH THE PROJECT. THESE EVIW RETENTION PUNS $PML BE REMEWED BY THE PROJECT GEORECHNICM ENGINEER PAPUA TO BEOWNINO WOw LOCATION OF NLE HOW FACIIJ11E5.ADJACENT 87OMWMS AND UNDERGROUND AND OVOWFID MLmES SHOED ARE M WN RETED TOM INFORMATION PRONGED TO ORS ENGINEERING WRING DESIGN. THE CNN LOUTIMS OF ALL SUCH [TEN. SHALL BE FIELD MISSINGRP IOF TO COMAIFNCIW CW51WCilON OF WE EARTH RREMI MY DISC REPµCIES OR P0TENIW. CMRLMIS BEPYEEN EXISTING FANNER MD "IS WOW MULL IMMEDIATELY BE ..I TO ME A.. \RE EARTH RETENTION DESIGNER THE EARTH REIFMMN OEBIGNER WALL NOT BE RE9PDNSIVA FDA DAMAGE TO EXISTING FACNmE6 BIWCNREB iN OT WE9 DUE TO W MECT INTERPRETATION OF EXISTING OMWIN09 OR DATA OR M1441No LM:APON MWISAH . AN UNDERGROUND SEANCE ALERT INQUIRY IDENTRCAPW NUMBER MOST BE OBTNNEO AT LEAST TWO WOMMODAY6 OUORESTMnWWOMCORN ME PERIITIELEPHQNE WMOM(M)I F2SM. "COMMON Ml BE MOWIMWO "M THE INSTALLATION OF WE SMITH RETENTION SYSTEM SD A9 TO PREVENT LOSS OF ORMNID OR SEEREMEM OF ADJACENT STRIA RE6, HFAW EOUIPMFM OR COMES Sill NOT BE LOCATED MJACFM TO PIE EARTH RETENTION BVLKNEM EXCEPT WHERE SPECI GAULY PRMDM FOR IN THE BESIM. THEFMTN MI M COYTRMTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE TO ENSURE THAT ME EARTH RUEMM IS BUILT IN ACCORDANCE W11H WAS PLANS IF MERE 13 ANY QUESTION MWDINO THESE FLAGS. THE COMMCTCR SUAL REQUESTµ WfEIaPREIATION BEFORE WINO ART WPRN BY CQ ACPNO ME EMS) RETENTION DESIGNER, WE GENERAL COMPCTOR SIOLL ALSO TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO PROTECT THE PROJECT MD MNCEN! PROPERTY FROM MY ER09KK1 MID SILTA TART RESULT FROM HIS OPERATIONS BY µPROPPUTE AIETHAT ME BA05.CT BARES,TOW AND ACCEPTED AIINS.MKE9.EARTH RflESERU ETCI UWM1 SUCH THE THAT WE PROJECT 4Y Up AND ACCEPTED FOR AWMENMII DYNE AND OEM s MATERIALS SPE MI LIES LVIEW9 STEEL; MFMAW.µFLASHORA99a (NEW OR USED IN ODLO CONDIGN WITN MPLICMIE MERR ATE$) REINFORCINOSREL MUTA415-GWEN MLOINO ELECTRODES: E-IBW BemENRIRW9 CEMENT: AYFMCIRGIYPE1HV WOEMER: FIVE). 4ObPaI MV DESIGN TO RE SMIMFD BY EARTH RETENTION CONTRACTOR. MICR0.WS8ON CRWI: NEAT WATEWCEMTH WO OAS WIC MUD Pe(21 OAF')=40. lMIN MIN. .I.e. I. WMLDNNMGE: MIMO0.VN 6E R. USPAIN aMNL OR EQUIVALENT CODES AND SPECIFICATIONS CLLIFOBNUBWLOINBODE-...E.G. PECISIONN .NBC I4W EnmW CwCREMDE910N -ATAl DESIGN CRITERIA )AGING AdWe EPA PN0001WFW EFP3= Sl ql/II NI MONST Efof - B3 ptl/II SH-1,1114h plenule EFIRI- 29HpM/N "chalgeLmd(ALNve NO Xbltl1= ION WITH .NmIWind Loada... of Wall loom Fence p VAT= 3]5lT F Iolauonal Wind badallo of Wall (from Fence) p 1 i wrb xOro lb01F -S / PNHAEWhYlenxa. PHITIOPHIN'eal Slaty PITwill p1Eth"hicood, 1P.=Pdg•R UlUmam Pantie Dramrulope PpU•0LON One. MIST., Pantie Palsmle DMmaa• plI/M San Unuwer m 6 = vD 1 1Lh.H.OPY FatlOr lamas A(• ].O m Pile to, Pas• le tlla DESIGN MISSING NPRESS IRGGIXO DESIGN PRESSURE IaAD' doleal 4W Dal BaW`l 1 GTO3 CO.16.9 m Caae3 EV, 369 WOR COW 3 Ey 16.12 WITT EI EWIBI3 WO151O6W1R,]5 Ease Cry 16.13100.]5I0]E)40.]5 51750 GENERALPROCEDURES MICRO -CAISSON DRILLING REINFORCED SHOTCRETE MACHINE OFMITMOI WEH DVRHT¢WORMETERSSMLMY CASING TOPRIEWHAT WO 1 STI ICFBLEEOIRONOFACISTµ0M05. IOUIF PL I' Faa'Ng n$ESEB S INDICDI ORCAWNOOFANTFRVI INTO TIENIXE BMIEIIOLE OUAIEIEP951MLL BEµ IN01LATFD WITIIESE %AII4, AND B. ABWHDµD WRIN09N0lCRELFiEBTCYVNOFASMPIE FIELD SHLLLCONFOPAI TONTMClid9. RINGSHOTORERTSNAUCOHFO IN WHEN THE SHOT HAS BEEN MVµCED IOPP, ENSUREMEWATE UEVIINO OF THE BOREHOLE VARIANT OR 4 ALL S ONCREM WITH SPECIFIED ULTIMTE LOPPRESSIVE STREIIGTH IN EXCESS OF]9N PSI. SML BE WATER RUSHING MIO WITML WE REPORT CAGE WIEH ATTACHED CENIP.UEUNO DEVICES. THEANE BROW WOE "CEO ON DER ME LONMUOUO SVPERVN10110F A REGISTERED DEPUTY W9PEEIOR CERWIRT BY THE IMOTNEBDIIEHME. ..I. 0EPMWENi OF BUXOIN..109FFM. FILL THE BOREHOLE EMBEDMENT DEPTH'S) THROWN A ION, IW ID. EIXYE1N.E THELVE PIPE WITH C WATER FOR MgINOSHOFCRElE6HALL BETMEN FPOMAPOiµLESWRCE 0151pI0VFE0 FOR OMIE9TIL µPROVED HIGH'MRFH0ll1 GROIN, TERMINATE WEMIE GROUTING MEN ME BORMN 1S 111. 1. ME PURPOSES. AND SRLLL BE FREE FROM ANTERMLS TINT MY BE DELETERIOUS TO WE SHOTCROM OR LEVEL OF WE BOTTOM BE WE PROPOSED WALL. REINFORCWG STEEL. MICflPGVSBW P ALI REGAIN VNOISWROED UNTIL THE ORWi HAS CURED FOR AMINIMUM OF THREE DAYS. 5. UNLESS OTII MBE NOTED OR THE PLANS. WE FORKMAD MINIMUM COYER TO REINFORCEMENT SHALL 2019 CBC PERMANENT SHOTCRETE REQUIREMENTS IMPLY. MXST FA11TI1,. DE _.._ .,. ]' BNOICREIE SURFAC ... M.01 SO 18CMIGORNL\BUROWO CODE SBOMN IONS. SE DIRECTLYTOMBHOTCREIE SURFACES I.. TO FN.IN AFTER REAIOVM OF FORM900. 8H0\LREIESVRACES NOT EXPOBEO tOEMM00.01RECRYTOWMTNFfl: SAWRlMCTHIS CONCRETE TMTI9PNESHALL LY PROJECTED AT MMIMMRY IOWA0.0 GENERAL.EXCEPT BLARES µOCMVMHS.__..-.............. ._........._......__...... __.._.,,.,,,._,__.........._I i' OMOASVRACE EXCWNMRPECIFIFDIXTHI55ECTIW,SNOTLIIERSNMLCWFORAITO TNEREWIREMEM3 AS SIADSµOWNL9..._.._�...,_ .�.. _....................__.._ .._....._. La' OF WI9 CNNIMFOflq¢NFOPCEDCONLREIE 6. PEINFORCINO SHALL BE ACC"MY PLACED µD MEWAIMY SUPPORTED BY SNMCPEEE, METAL, OR 1MY PROP-- RYNB MID MATERAL6. 6HOTEREIE PROPORTIONS BOLL BE SELECTED THAT ALLOW BUIµM PLACEMENT PROCEDURE. MIIN0 THE OEUMMY EOUIPAIERT SELECTS) AND WALL RESUT IN FWISHEO OTHER µPROVED CHARS, SPACERS OR RE8 AWNST D15PLACEMEN! MNG WE TOLERANCES PERMITTED, ITPLACENITIOENEOSIIm RETEMEEWIOWESIRNOMREWIREhIEWSOFl S3 E. F. REINFORCING BOOST, MICRON SUITS. OOWft8.MID WALL. TIES BHNI BE SECURED IT MAMMA µD 1W6]AGGREO\TE. EOMSE AMMON.IF USED, 5HML NOT EXCEED Ya INCH NSI MAIL INSPECOWDYME LOCMBVRDINGINSPE07M MORTOPOUMOOFMIYSN METE IOWA REINMRLFMENT, FUNNFORCOPEM USED IN SHOTCRETE CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH \HE F S POSTPONED IN THE 9HOTERETE PER ME 0 MEN91pN3 SHOYM ON ME S. NL REN OflCEMEM HM BE POSmW 1 PROWfiIW90FBECTION9 FW19 WI1m111NE iIXLMV GIOLEMNCES: 1BCB.a.I SUE. ME MV{IANIA 911E OF pEWFOflCEMEN!$HAL BE NO. SWAS UNLESS IT IS DEMONSipPlEB BY 84s2 BFMI9 WADS A O CMVAINS WHERE AIIN OVERMLDEPLM rylS Ba'ORlE99.. ..... _. �� .�.,.1/E' PMWNSTM'CRONWS\S TNTMEWATE MCASEMEIITOFLMGERBMSIWLLBEACHIEVEO. BU.WMIS.WML. µ, C------ WHEREATNOV...PM MERE ORSdUARE S BM ME U64 YYAILING MBE HAA „... _,F _,.L.,.........WE OAKALL OF SheWAS REINFMO.E NO ME BEThilWEEN PARALLEL BMA OF LIR INCHES LARGER THAT HO, E ARE BETWEEN MJUL WHEN OAKS LMOER X (A p. My OEIMINO OF PEIMFCRCIIIO 6HKL CONGOPIA M WE REWIPFMORB OF Ml ll61{. METAL HEINFa Pig RE.,,IRW O . WERE PULL BEWHIG N P RAL DUMEEERS OF BEM'EEN PARALLEL BAONA..Be SED RONFORCEMENT SOUL BE EASE OF LOOSE FLOW RUST, MUD. OIL. MD DINER COAXGG3 TART WILL WHERE AS CURTATSHS4 OF STEEL E a. THE 4 MI USED. WHEREE O &TO 12S W 8 EE B PRONGED. MY hMNINO AW NUMER ME IVE AW8NV1 ME BANK MINIMUM ARM ME CURTAINOFTHE LLLMVE A MINIAIUM MVEA N 18A OEWMTO IEBMION, P CE POND SUNG SPACING SIN OJOS . ETINCED µ SUBTEEN TO AGE µPPOVM OF THE BOLDING OFfIC41. OUAU.I. m D D WEU.N.OF SPLICES EXCEPT THOSE ION. 6RKE91N ADJACENT BMfi SHOULD BE STAID E µ l AL C TEC BE ST PEDYIREDLLFAnµCE99MLL BE RE WEED WHERE RI40EMON91MlED BY PPECW9IPUCIHM TESTS T11Ai BpECB1EOW THEOMINNOS. SHMLOEµPPOVED BY WEENOINEEP. MEWAIEENCASEAIOR OF1XE BARB USED INIXE OE9W11 PILL BEACNIEVED. 11. SEOUENEE OF COMPRISING µD LOCATION OF LMISiRV . J(NNTB .x L BE MINDY . BY WE IMBAJ SPLICES. W SPLICES OF REINFORCING Bµ8 9NML MM THE NON CONTACT Lµ SPLICE MEMO WRIT A MWUIVM CLEWNICE OF 2 INCHES (.1 AIM) BETWEEN eAl THE USE BE CONTACT UP SPLICES MRUCWPALENOINEER. NECESRMY FDA SUPPORT OF IRE REWFMLCING 15 PFMIRIFD MERE µPROVED BY T%,0,NXDWGGF.%ClAL 11EACH PLUCEMEM 01$REFORM IN i.IULNPLE OR WEEK 9HML BE ALLOWS) TO SET FOR AT LEAST]4 BASED OR SATISFACTORY PRECMISTRUCTIO TESTS THAT SNOW PUT NEONATE ENG9EAISURGE 1NE BARS OIL BE AGOEYED, µD PNOWmW I. Me SPLICE 11 ORIENTED 80 PUT A PLATE P RRUM I THE CFNIEA OF IIWMµIEq MAN. SET OF 9NOILNEIEµDGEFOREME6TµTOFA $VBSEWEXi PLACEMENT. ME SPLICED BASS IS PERP¢IDIMU TD WE SURFACE OF ME SHOTTEETE. 5 Ol[P SHA ROIECTEDFOR ENWR9 FPMI WE ELEA1E1R5 µDOFFACEMFM DOE TO 1]. FRESH E1F LPEP IMBAASPtlU1LYiIMCCLUAWB.SNDICRETE BNML HOT BE µPIIECT0SPIRALLY PEDCMUAW3. LWSWUETION OPEMTON9, IA NONE%COMBED SURFACES AND ROUGH PATCHES SHAL BE MISS GOOD IMMEDIATELY AFTER REMOVAL OF W0l MR N'BMUCTION TESTS MORE PPELON9TRVLTION TESTS ME PICTURES BY SECTION IOWA. ATEST FINDS. 5IULL BE SHOT. CURED. CORED OR SAWN. FOUGHOM µD TESTED PRIOR W COWMCEAIEM Oi THE FORMWORK PROJECT ME SIMPLE PMEL ANSI BE REPRESENTATNE OF ME PROJECT AND SIMULATE JOB CONDITIONS A9 MOSETYµ POSSIBLE, THE PMEL MMMIESS MD REINFORCING $HALL REPRWUCE ME THICKEST AND MOST IS. ME B URFACE OF SOILS MONEY WHICH 9HOTLREiE 13 TO BE PLACED SHALL BE MET 91 EVEN MORDVOHLY. CONGESTED ARFF. SPECIFIED W THE SI RUCWRAL DE91011. 11 SHAD BE SHOT AT IN E SAME MILE. U51110 THE 1E. ALL EXCAMPON9 FOR THE FOUNDAWJN55WLLL BE OMPLEIELYOPWAIEREO. MO. RE. 5W1L NOT BE SAME NODUE NA WITH ME WOE CONCRETE MIX DESIGN THAT WILL Be USED W WE PROJECT. Me PLACED IWO SINJOINO WATCH WHERE EXCAVATIONS CANNOT BE CMJPLERRY D¢VAIERED, CONDUCT EOUIPMEM UPS W PREWNBWMGWM TERMS SWlI BE ME 9MIE EWIPMENT USED IN ME WORN REQUITING SUCH TESMO. UNLESS SUMn W IE E W IPMEM I9 ME WYED GV ME BUILDIXB OFOC VL REPORTS 6\IWCIVWJENGINEERPROR W PIACFMFMOi9HOTLREIE OF PREONSWUCFON TE5ES 81ULL BE SUBMITTED TO WE BUILDING OF FICK M SPECIFIED IN SECTION I INS. IY ML... TCRETE SMALL BE KEPI CO.YIINUWSLY MIST BY WETHOW FOR A ARABIA PERM OF TEN DAYS IM $ REBOUND. MY REBOUND MI ACCUMULATED LODW MOROARE $TOOL BE REMOYEO FRMA ME AFTER OR BY HAWIG ME SURFACE WITH MWNSTAWMO WRIIIG COMPWN09WIM CURRENT [Coo µPROVEN NO WRING LOATH ANON S1U1L BE USED W SURFACES WHERE Nf BLeM..O W11X EVIaFALE9 TO BE COVERED µbR t0 PIMINW ME MIiUl OR MT 9VLLEEOIXO LAYERS OF SHOTCRETE. BXDIERETEORPµJ11N019SPECIMEN 0PREWIRED , WBWN9 AMU NOT BE USED A9 AGGREGATE. 1B.LWOUTB MD PIPES EMBEOI.I INSHOTCRETEREIE OF ME CALIFORNIA T. RASIM. NOW JIIINES.EXCEPT WHERE PERMITTED HEREW, UNFINISHED WORK SFULL MCI BEMLg DTO PTMD FOR STEPS.ALL ETC, WAUNO5 COKE MTEST MRIOA VIXWE2PIPE5, WETS. 9IEEVE6. C1U4E$ETC SHALL NON BE PIECES MORE MST PC MINUTES UNLESS EWES AEG AOPEO TOAMM EWE FOR STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS W/ITMI (WRING IN SIAB3. BEUIS. DR Y/NLS UNLESS SPECIGICALLY SHOWN AS NOTED ON POI.. COMMC1 Mi SNARL BE VNBEA COMPRESSION M'0 FDA CM191PWPW JDWI9 SN]VM MI THE µPROVED CWSTPUCTIW OBTAN µPROVM fOA IHSTNIATION OF MY MOTIONAL PIPES, DUCTS. ETC. REFER TO CML AND DOCUMENTS. $DOME JOINTS ME PEMITED. BEFORE PLACINS AOM 1O MATERIAL ADNCEM i0 _____....... ,. ...�W -, M..... .... ... ...��.�„- ,,..... �. ,,. -..,., ..,�.,,��, MMnECWPAL SFORLWARONSOFMLPWE$THECA. CHA4ES.EM IOWA ONVAE IMPLME WOTCREIE TART M189B 6MS SLOUGHS. SEGREWTIW,N "CMBWO.1 POCKETS OR OTHER! OBVIOUS CEFECTS STALL BE BEVOhD AND REPLACED. 6ROTCRETE MOVE MOB SLWGNS SRA1 BE RO.IOVED MD RF➢NCED MILE SIBL PLASEIC. ALL NECESSARY EDITORS SHALL BE WTNNED (BY OTHERS) PRIOR TO CMAMEMWEW OF WSTAUPW OF THE FARM RUT MSYSTEM. 19019] FWN DUANO. NW THINGS Mal- CONTINUE FOR SEVEN MY 9 MIER 9HOICRUINO.OR GENERAL CMIMCi AND EARTH RETENTION CONTRACTOR WILL FGH OW AT MPUCILE CAL DAYS IF HIGW F Y4TRENGM CEMENT IS UBM. OR UNTIL ME SPECIFIED SIHENGTH 19 MIA flEWIRE91E1T81H ME EXECUTION OF WE WORNOESCRBEDHEflEIN. CUMHO 6NN1 CONSIST OF WE INRUL CUMND PROCESS OR ME SWTCRETE STALL BE COVER APP0.0VE0 WISMMAUMNINO COY£R, OUGHT TO THE START OF MIX ME WRING) OWE EURYARGINS AND MR D. AND WITH FIX VM 0 :�CURING, HATURAS. WRING SHOP. NOT BE LN UEU OF MAT SPECIFIED IN V M, ARM ME � RETENTION CWMCTOk A SAFETY FAILING AROUND WE PMIMUER OF ME �.�P,��LL �.��--:��-.tea=iIS �-----_____.�o._ CMMUCMI 6W1L CONFORM To ALL COLA OWES, ORDINANCES. IT 8 ED 110xB MO o M REWIREMENLS. SEQUENCE OF INSTALLATION NOEXCAVATTOW OR WASHING SHALL COMMENCE UMIL IB DAYS AFTER ADIOININO PROPERTY MYNEBB ROME WHERE WALL IS SUPPORTING ACM FAMPAPOST, BEEN NOTHING IN WRIWD AS ESCAPE BY SECTION I]M.I OF WE CMIFORNU BMLOMO LEE T. ONLL MICM41WSONS AT LOCATION MOHAMED W THESE PWIB LAID TO THE TOP ELEVAMG AND DEPTH A9 MMRM. E OROVf MCROGI9SONTOOTA WALL¢EVFBW. EXCAVATI FICATION S. EXCAVATED OBALKLLMIEN ARONAIERWAM IFT BE. IN WfINI6H 6VPfIEINFRONT OFWNL 4. EXP08E EDTO DAM OF WALL CMNMENTOSWO µFXPOBE ARM GNIf GLLL 1dMA]EAl11AAlmWAAOF PPo OA B CINO EXCAVAIRION ENSURE ALL FORMAM S. PUCE WALL OWIVAEµ. FAGX. REOM MILRYCOMPMIESMWCLFMMIMELOCP ,D ALL HERE MPFIWM 3 EVERY TEN DAYS. B. Sx T PERMANENT SHOTWETE FACING ENBUMW PROPER WVEMOE OF 11L MINMACINO STEEL 1}''I UA MN ME WALL IF WSSMIS µE TO D EARAN,D WIIFON FEED ILLY. MEN V11LRY ANSI BE FMOSED TO GWRRAI IOGPW µON WEARAN, WHEflE WALL ISSUPPORTING FILL SgL9'. OMLLM RNOCNS9ON9 AT LWAPW M ICAPIC W THESE PLANS DEFINITIONIS ANDM THEDEFINITIONµON DEPTH 1 AS MONRED. 2 OROUIIAIC SS TO BTM OF WAIT ELEVAPDX, 3. EMOSE AND WDV ALL MCRO{NSSMI RE Hat EXPOSE. 4. PULE BACNFOM.I TO FORM BACK OF WAJL 6. SMWT PEPMMFM FACTO 0. REMOVEBAC.0m. I. PUCE OMMGE CHIMNEYS AT BACK M WALL a. SACKgLL BEHIND WALL USING HAND CMVMTIW EMBPMW ONLY SO AS NOT TO EXERT MOUE P4W 4WPBF PRESSURE ON THE KOF THE WALL 9, PFAMNIEM FENCE W BE NAME TO TOP OFWALL BY OTHERS. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER AND GEOLOGIST MIS PLAN PAT BEEN MOMEWED ANON CONFORMS TO RECOM MOA71MJS OF OEOTECMNIGLL ENGINEERING OEOLWIC RE PORT REFERENCED MOVE. lAa1.E1Laa-� OEOTEONNILMENOINEER SIGNAWREMOBATE]L39L2_C23 $p9q WI d0 R'DyC //. GEOLOGIST SIGNATURE AND DATE iTaazoz5 ,{JfEyC ADDITIONAL PERMANENT SHOTCRETE REQUIREMENTS µOTLRJM BNNL BE µ%WED BY AN EXPERIMENT MFIIEAWI MERE MJNIFNATIWB MEET ME.1111A REQUIREMENTS AS SET FORM W MI'A6R.1E. MEET I OMERNIBE INDICATED HEREIN, SHOICRETE SHNL CONFORM TO ME FURVEREMENTS MFSOER'Is SUNIIT MIX DESIGN TO MINIMAL L FOR APPROVAL MAXIMUM SLAW. ] NO NO AMOXNRB SHALL 0E U WRNOUF WEMPRWa OF WEMGINEM ME M LNG ME FOR JAWRIALS OEWFREO BY HFPDYMnl TRUCKS i0 THE JOB SHE SNLLL NOT EXCEED I HWR9 OR SM RRUM MS OF ME DRUM. WHICHEWN LOMES PEST ALL REINFMCEM¢ BNNL BE LLWI AND NICE FROM LOOSE HILL SGLE LOUSE RUST, OIL OR OT ... INMRfE .. WITH WHO SPECIAL INSPECTIONS SPECK INSPECTIONS ME REUUIMO PER CHAPTER IT OF THE CMIMWA BVIMINO CONE ME TILES BELOW INDICATE WE POWDER SPECIAL INSPECTIONS MOOPEO. SPEC4L INSPECTIONS ARE NOT OUR9WAW FOR NSPEC710H BY A M1 INSPECTOR URCWLV VISPECTEO WORK INSTALLED OR COVERED MMMR AGE MIMEWS. OF ME CITY INSPECTOR IS $OBJECT TO REMOYN OR EMOSURE. ME DEPUTY PROMPTING MST BE MWOWU BY RELEWAT AGENCY W AWMLE M ORDER TO PERFOD.1 WE TYPES OF INSPECTION SPECIFIED R IS ME R S9 SIBII OF ME COMPACTOR i0 SCHMULE ME MAE YOUTH WE DEPUTY INSPECTOR OR INSPECTION AGENCY PRIOR TO PERFORMING MY YNRR ll W T RE W ACES SPECIAL INBPECPMW. SPECIAL INSPECTION MPOW SRML BE SUBMITTED TOME BUILDING DMSION FOR APPRWM POOR W CITY W $PEmOR µPROM OF TILAT W ONL PRIOR TO PERFORMING AW SPECIAL MSPECRW9. THE SPECIAL INSPECI.1 JUE TO INPUT WOR WALFICATIONB TOME BUADAM MPECHOR, ANCHI EMFMµPRVhO. !D Engineering Inc. 35645AGUNTOST.00X416 SANTA YNEI CA 934W TEL. 183B1402-3962 FAX: (8181216-1922 WWW.D84ENGINEERING.NET DF5@DRS ENGINEERING,NET HARBOR DAY SCHOOL NORACTOR LNIL Wl19VLTM1I5 J J Q_ !S V Z_ ZL U W U) VJ w PrOcade a. 2019-44 1 SH-1.0 L I.. NOTE: -. L. - - 1. 0.L VIIOtt LOGPGHSANV ELEVATpN9A1V319E VFJi61F9 - - NOTES SIN 10RTOINSTALUTGN OF SNGIiIHG.3EEGFNFMI NOTESEN.I D. 2 NIA CT EO IN MEPUMEW CRIG FWAVE IREOFGft ALLALTNIIIEfi IN ME PGBlICRIGNi-0FWAY/FASEAIEMi / - ARFAS Engineering Inc. \\ 36646AGVNBOX 4B6 9ANTAYNUCA93460 O TEL IBI4B)402-482-3962 I f9R; I-ENGIN ERING -1922 V LINE - �_ �. , NM1VWAE-ENGINERING ET -' \ I OBS@Gfl58NGINEERING.NEi PROJELTNNAE III{ / HARBOR DAY SCHOOL t G A .�II '$ GEOTEENNIM LLNxNL s -wuLonn encE oanE{G�� SH3.1 osrgo OO /�� Sr , CONfMCTOR H I S q3. � k94 I { I - CM1 WISULTurts / a .�. �;I %c�=� GWHEA kc \`I 1 I z �I=JING G \ RLP:E G PROPOM 11 PAP J T - � B 0 0qSS 10411-1�1 OG Z 1SHMlil HARBOR DAY SCHOOL zq•MrgG.e-,i r OR4CgT 3SrgsA L¢ 3 t 1 -'A \ V.SO v �"2•awlro'°divu s REY. DESCRIMM OAl i SOUTH WALL E R z .w.a E+xwC atm. do ON UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT B on dN 4 rr»u.ca:x6m :ml 6 dNU WMiJp B:.II PRa6cTN- 2019-44 4 11 1 I\/ S s 4a O y GHELIQfI ORS TY ala CU1T mfi-Feomzw i I 1 �SrFGO]I].W VERT CO """�� § G ��yyS � _ FINISry aUPFAtE TV aISM—\w E _ _ _ 310 F5a@.W F9 ]OAEO-� ri ]05 OPO]LFOOFWO BYMER9 6'D' B'-0' B'D' I _II 0 m,P) hull 20 1 II® ]90 NO VErti. E%PNJSrON J01NT (YEJI pNAGE CHINNEV xNBExINo 5 `XD sEE osiAlt a �g T ]EG— F n 'FINISHGMOE FGeoiLao _ nhi Fs a09 R0 TW [WIM'�"SEE"E'T'RIWNRRXR �1-FlNISryH—BVXR-E ry- yry� p' - lawl:vsuj �n—TP`Bat S'0' i'4 B�p 0'D' Yd'-0' B-0' B'O N-0' TD'— B-0. 1 B-0`- b-0' T-0' B-0' 0'd' 1 B-0 1 T-0' 1 pD' 6D' 6'D• BD' 0'Pi—T�p—I-S-0'�Bd'+6d` S'D' BD' T-0' )D* Engineering Inc. 3564 SAGUNTO ST. BOX 486 SANTA YNEZ CA93460 TEL 181B14@-396i FAX: 18181376-1931 V WVJARSENGINEERING.Nn ORS@OX4ENGINEERING.NET 11.1.T.E HARBOFIOAYSOHOOL GEEOTE»HNI`�CONSMVI'ANTS B v e P=fb-0' ax 2 NE B C NOTE: Nl RMAYTOIN TO IIN5 AND ELEVATIONS MUST EIX BE VENFlEO 1, FIE10 PR W fl TO MSTM1LIAiIIXI OF S NOgINO, SEE pENEMt NOl ES 6114.0. 6 NE LEGENO: TY/ =TOPK WAIL BW •BOirQY OF WPLL i0C •TOPOFCAISSON F9 =FINISH 6URFACE fb •FIM]NGMGE FGp eFINISXpMGE pEHINO LLON. •IMLE930TNEgWISE NOFEO %IOJECTXd DATE p EC 0 E 1 SH-3.0 1 320 315 H i 310 - arC W5 -. ]W w� 295 200 PEM MT FENLE BY OINFAS eN rCAStE FACIW SHO(CRSEE fiETPIL PROP.IJI Bmv. �PRGPER{ IIr, U1 E WY Fl41Sl.OPA°E.. --�ORMNAGE ez sFEOEiuL q. BThI OF WALL6NOTCRETE TOP OFGJSSON GgdJ( PEWU .t q MICPQ SSM SEE DPTN11 A SECTION Caisson 9 Caisson Type See Detail 25H 4.0 Design 8tm Shotcrete Elev. (ft) Top Wall Elevation (ft) Top Caisson El. (ft) Caisson Depth (ft) 1 1 311.31 314.00 313.50 13.00 2 1 310.67 314.00 313.50 13.00 3 1 309.96 314.00 313.50 14,00 4 1 309.25 314.00 313,50 15.00 5 1 1 1 308.8 314.00 313.50 15.00 6 1 308.54 314.00 313.50 15.00 7 1 308.6 314.00 313.50 15.00 8 1 308.65 314.00 313.50 15.00 9 1 308.7 314.00 313.50 15.00 10 1 308.75 314.00 313.50 15.00 11 1 308.8 314,00 313.50 15.00 12 2 308.86 315,00 314.50 21.00 13 2 308.91 315.00 314,50 21,00 14 2 308.96 315.00 314,50 21,00 15 2 309 315,00 314.50 21.00 16 2 309 315.00 314.50 21.00 17 2 309 315.00 314.50 21.00 18 2 309 315.00 314.50 21.00 19 2 309 315.00 314.50 21.00 20 2 309 315.00 314.50 21.00 21 2 309 315.00 314.50 21.00 22 2 308.99 315.00 314.49 21.00 23 2 308.97 315.00 314.50 21.00 24 2 308.97 315.00 314.50 21.00 25 2 308.93 315.00 314.50 21.00 26 2 308.9 315.00 314,50 21.00 27 2 308.95 315.00 314,50 21,00 28 2 308.98 315.00 314.50 21.00 29 2 308.92 315.00 314.50 21.00 30 2 308.86 315,00 314,50 21.00 Po.EM fENLE \\\ eye \ pp°pERTYLINE \ r >20 l M W FlLL HEW,S1gVLNMI SHOTCRETE FACINO SEEOE(NL H - ]LO St `_ 1 SH4 Ws L \ a ORNNAGE !EXIST. G.E L 300f °I6LHAN3E PIPE - R 6EEGETAIt ` 8ThI 0FWALL EHOTC PETE Y(y TGPGF CAIfiSDaI I'MAPo I,SMD VS I SEE DET11I55CN SEE OETMS � S SECTION 4IS, PIP 1� r-1Pa� Caisson 9 Caisson Type See Dele111 SH 4.0 Design 8tm Shotcrete Elev. (ft) Top Wall 11 Elevation (ft) Top Caisson El. (ft) Caisson Depth (ft) 31 2 308.8 315.00 314.50 21.00 32 2 308.74 315.00 314.50 21.00 33 2 308.68 315.00 314.50 21.00 34 2 308.62 315.00 314.50 21.00 35 1 2 308.68 315.00 314.50 21.00 36 2 308.56 315.00 314.50 21.00 37 2 308.45 316.00 314.50 22,00 38 2 308.38 315.00 314.50 22.00 39 2 308.32 315.00 314.50 22.00 40 1 308.22 313.00 312.50 15.00 41 1 308.16 313.00 312.50 15.00 42 1 308.08 313.00 312.50 15.00 43 1 308.02 313.00 312.50 15.00 44 1 308.08 313.00 312.50 15.00 45 1 1 306.6 313.00 312.50 16.00 46 1 306.6 309.50 1 309.00 13.00 47 1 306.6 309.50 309.00 13.00 48 1 306.6 309.50 309.00 13.00 49 3 306AS 309.50 309.00 13.00 50 3 306.02 309.50 309.00 13.00 51 3 305.68 309.50 309.00 14.00 52 3 305.2 309.50 309.00 14.00 63 3 304.79 309.50 309.00 15.00 54 3 304.38 309.50 309.00 15.00 55 3 303.35 309.50 309.00 16.00 56 5 301.9 309.50 309.00 29.00 57 5 300.65 309.50 309.00 30.00 58 5 299.41 309.50 309.00 31.00 59 6 298.27 309.50 309.00 30.00 60 6 297.41 309.50 309.00 31.00 Caisson Al Caisson Type Sea Detail l Sit 4.0 Design 8tm Shotcrete Elev. (ft) Top Wall Elevation (ft) Top Caisson El. (ft) Caisson Depth (ft) 61 6 298.06 309.50 309.00 30.00 62 5 299.21 309.50 309.00 31.00 63 5 300.21 309.50 309.00 30.00 64 5 301.72 309.50 309.00 29.00 65 4 302.15 309.50 309.00 23.00 66 4 302.32 309.50 309.00 23.00 67 1 4 302.58 309.50 309.00 23,00 68 4 302.76 309.50 309.00 23.00 69 4 303 309.50 309.00 22.00 70 4 303.14 309.50 309.00 22.00 71 4 303.32 309.50 309.00 22.00 72 4 303.51 309.50 309.00 22.00 73 4 303.69 309.50 309.00 22.00 74 4 303.87 309.50 309.00 22.00 75 3 304.06 309.50 309.00 15.00 76 3 304.23 309,50 309.00 15.00 77 3 304.4 309.50 309.00 15.00 78 3 304.58 309.50 309.00 15.00 79 3 304.62 309.50 309.00 15.00 80 3 304.67 309.60 309,00 15.00 81 3 304.71 1 309.50 309.00 15.00 82 3 304.74 309.50 309.00 15.00 83 3 304.79 309.50 309.00 15.00 84 3 304.84 309.50 309.00 15.00 85 3 304.88 309.50 309.00 15.00 86 3 304.92 309.50 309.00 15.00 87 3 304.97 309.50 309.00 15.00 88 3 304.85 309.50 309.00 15.00 89 3 1 303 309.50 309.00 in Inn NOTE: ALL MLITY LOCATWIS MD ELEMADON6 MI). °E VEN61E0 IN FIEL° PNORT MUA1LAMMOFSNORINO.bEEGENERALN°TE65X-1 °. IEGENG: WY •{°PGF WALL ' 4 RW •°°^GMGFWEL Engineering Inc. Toc -TOP GFcass°x F6 •FINI6xsURFALE 3561 SAGUMOST.90X 486 FG=FIHISHOR40E SAMAYNEZFA93460 FG6 •FWIBHGRADE BEHING TEC (81814023962 U.O H.=UNIESb OIXFAWISEN°iEO FA41 (BISI 1&9Z2 VAN W ARS-ENGIN EERING AET ORSti RS-ENGINEEIONGAU PRGJELTNMIE HARBOR DAY SCHOOL C6011 D,13124 PROJECT.. ZU19-44 WTE OSR9 Nxi OMWN 000 CHUKEG IMRS .ALE 6CEE I A6 SHOWH SNEETIh SH-3.1 IV l EMIEDSION OF MICROCNSSON .A.51110 WALL WALLREBAR Z.. SHOTC CILEIE HOZ. B VERT FACING FACING DRAINAGE BEEDELNL .S. VERTICPL BAR9 YBM 135'SEISMIC LIE. STIRRUPI TIE H... L6'CLFAR CNS80N ou CN860N GROTT BELOYJSTM WALL CalRon ryve calaFon ma PL 4.1 Ab.D TIM 1 141 4 1 BES NHQS 1 14 4 BEING B3S H 14 4 BEaNS Fs 0305 4 141 4 6EFE3 @8 5 16 4 lO @9 M R3ID 6 16 4 OWN) R399 L PWIVIEW gBOVEBUBGRAOE NETNNEO FAR, ETNL P. J � SEE ELEVATIONOR Hf MPX � V45 r lh Ire / CHAMFERAT \ _ — / EXPOSED FACE [APPOSED FACE OF WALL HOLE: JOIST NOTNEOUIREOIF ME WNL IS BTNNEO.. BCAPTEO. PROPERTY MHE� I I �'MERS FENCE �.'pppe DRAINAGE V' V B4O .Opp p CIXJNEGtOfl IEE EMISPNGGRADE� I II p O p / PERMNJENT / 9HOiCRETE FACING p p SEEOETAI O 70AMWY J SHOTCNETEFACING DPNNPGE „__,.I (IF USED) COLLECTOR r PANEL OMINAGECHIM.EYjr WIOE CNIMNEYBEINVEEx ,TERAIIMTEDMXAGE <'MIN.SCH4LPV0 DISCHARGE PIPE/.SGUAREEMS COIUAW OF CHIMNEY IY RELOW SPULE ]GL,CtiMA%.MICROLNSBONMP).-I SECTION.N,P r=° DRAINAGE LONNECLORiEE ] TbS( DME LLAN/�Ol I ALTERNATE HARGE PIPE SEE b FORLOCATION —Ir CONTIN rELEVATION VRPACEVW FINlSHS DISCHMDEPVEJ � ��_... BELOW ORAOE DISCHARGE PIPE BEE NOTE2 ( !- WATERSTOP THEM. SUPERSTOP ENO LO GITUOINPL OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT / REIIIFORCEMENT ]'FROM JOINT SEENOTEB, :\ M,PN j I s �1Ni I , 11• - tr IaItrs•IIS, HO'I i \ i I• ZBBAA& CJCVERT OENSOTME . 1'SCXOJD " 1 / PVC PIPE SLEEVE 'THwoLDED WATERSTOP DETAIL / CHAMFER DETAIL WAIEN.TOP RETNNEO FARM __ GETNL TYP. 4-MIN, -� --w T J CHA4IFERDETNLIYP.�SEEELEVATNW OR9Y MAX FXPOSEDFACE OF WNL NOTE 1. WATERSTOPS SHA LBE FLEXIBLE BENTONITE TYPE WATERSTOPS SUCH AS TREMC08UPERSTOP OR APPROVED EQUIV. 2. JOINT%LLEReWLLLBECOMEDCELL SUPERIOR GRADE POLYETHYLENE OR NON-EXTRUDWO PVC, SUCH AN SONNEVORN 'VIN W FOMI', SERVICEB'ROOOFONA II' BYWA.OMCE, DECK4�FOAM BYW.R MFACOWS OR APPROVED EOUIV. S. LINO COMPWNO NONSTNNINO STAY SMING COMPOWIO WITH POLTSOLFIDE LIQUID POLYMER GUMOMOE WLLX PRIMER, 4. WWI NOT REQUIRED IF THE WALL I8 STNNEO AND 8CWUFT EO. EXPANSION JOINT Sc810: N.T.S. WATERETOPTREMCOBUI I ENOlON01TUD NAL . ORAPPROVEOEQUNALE! REINFOftCE11OUT 1' O.,M NI • CMUWNLANDFOOLINO S I. LOIFA PBE WALL OR .9 C0.YCRELE WHET STRUCTURE HONG: 1. WATFASTOPSSN LBEFLEABLEBENTONNETYPEWATERBTOPBSULHASTREMCOSUPERBTOPORAPPROVEOEQUN. 2, JOINT FILLFA SHAMk. BE CLOSED CELL SUPERIOR GRACE POLYETHYLENE OR NONIEXTRUDRIG M. SUCH AS 80NNEBORN MNYIPOAM'. SEAVILES'ROOOFBAM II'BY WA. BRACE. DECKOFOAM BY WA MEADOWS OR APPROVED EOUN. 3. TWO COMPOONO NONSTAINING GRAY SEALING COMPOUND WIN POLYSOLFIDE LIQUID POLYMER GUNGRADE WRN PRIMER SOIL PERAWJENFFENCE� PROPERTY LINE SYOFHERS \ r DRAINAGE CONNECTORTEE FINISH SURFACE ,I( SHOTCRETE FACING BEFGETA0. — DRAINAGE CHIMNEY — 2'-0'WIDECNIMNEYBETWE%J EACH COLUMNOF MBCRO-0NSSOH (W) SEE MATERIALS SECN011 SH IS ' I I CHIMNEY I2'BELOW 54YALE EMISLWOGMDE COLLECTOR PIPES 1'I SEECMLPLNIB —!L ILIL SEIOW GIMOE G18LNARGEPWE AGE STA: 2+70 TO 3+28 b-LESSBOM ]YLEOSBOTH FACWO NEW SIDES OF SIDES OF BEE DETAIL INSIDES LTYp) 4'NSPIPE INSERT ETYP) ' TSTDPIPE 41] +l1] Engineering Inc. 35MSAGUNTO ST. BOX 446 SANTAYNEZCA93460 TEL: )BSB)402.396Z FAN' I818)276-1922 W NY1dBSENGINEEBINGMET ORS@ORS' ENGINEERING.NET I.M.CTRNAE HARBOR DAY SCHOOL DINNER Y• �.,_, `VPSCH40 J ` PROVIOE4LEVELS J PVL%PE 9LEEVE TOP OF FENCE PENCE OF IM BARS PROVIDE 4 LEVELS OFiHBAAL BEARS y 9EEEIEVAIION G > % BOB. FI _ TOP OF WNL Z J Z TOP FACING HEINERNUMEO E. IM E.U. Q — W DETAIL NOT DESIGN BY WC9 E. Lu GR9 ENOINEEBING OROMNLGTHO POST EETNL PRWIOEOBYLPA CONCRETEOR LL 6NOTCRETE WALL F SECTION (n W FENCE POST CONNECTION ON SOLDIER PILE WALL 6 , PROHECTw 2019-44 Scale: N.T.S. k,:/ Scale: N.T.S. �JISCANEAS.XOWN SHEET b. SH-4. 0