HEATHCOTE GEOTECHNICAL ~ SOIL TESTING • FOUNDATIONS • INSPECTION ~~

1884 EASTMAN AVENUE, SUITE l 05, VENTURA, CALIFORNIA 93003 €.L!!:r~======:::==:::a

Snow ~ion C~nstruction 748 E. Avenida De las Flores Thousand Oaks, Ca S1360

Lad~es/Gentlemen:

Job: 16105 Date: Januar~· 31, 2017

We are pleased to ~~esent this acdendum to our soil eng~r.eering report dated October 8, 2016.

The Eroject is located at 627 E. Villanova Roa~, Ojai, Cal.~ f ornia.

The County of Ven:.~~a posed several questions. The follcwing are our responses.

1. There appears to be to be about 70 yardE of material being recompacted under the slab areas.

2. Site is showG on the State Eeismic Hazard map. 3. t1ap is inclu:led. ~-It appears ttat the front of the property is located

within an AP fault zone. rte area of the ~esidence addition is ~ct located wi~tin the fault zone.

5. Plates are sul:rdtted with :.tis addendum. 6. Care should be taken to not undermine any existing

=oundations. If foundati8~s are shallowe~ than 18 ~nches, excavations shall be done in 8 feet slots.

It ~as bee~ our pleasure to serve you and if ycu have any quest~ons or need additional servi~e, please ccntact us.

Fred Heathcote Civil :::ngir.eer No. C48316

Phone: (805) 644-9978 Fax: (805) 644-9906

-.• . :

.· .. -.. : -= .. ':."'"'

1 •.

' ... :: : _;. . . .

. ..

•o I • 0 I .._...:.. .. ~-=.~·

- -. ._

';" .- MflTILtjA

Ou AD.

J

.-----

/1

-E-<,-.. .... z~ 8 z BCtRING 1 ~~ >- .... >- 0

Z''"' ~CJ (.!),....,.

~ ~ p:: .... 0 CIJ r/'J .... ~ al :x: ........ t,) u ii= z'° --1¥1 ~ e-. ..... ~ ..... 3

~~ ~1 < •:!.) 11. CIJ A CJ > •l) ""1~ JOB: IGO.I'

~t ~~ ~~ 0'-' ~ IZ p., 1¥1 11. n!LD .!:t!ta:NUll: nw> Hr.ATllCOTE

!'/) 0 A ii::-~ - A DATOS DR'1J.ED: Sl!PTltUllKR UI. 2011

o~ ui :::s- ,.Q Cf.l - DRILUllO ~UlPWEHT: 4-INCH POWER AIJQBll - ML CLAYEY SILT-light brown.damp.mod firm,few ...

~ gravel e.nd cobbles

3.1 91 7 --

~ Abund.a.nt gravel .cobbles and

3.4 109 35 boulders --5

- ~ 4.3 112 41

WATER NOT ENCO~'N'I'ERED

.........

~~ .... 0 z BORING 2 ~~ 0 >- 0

~ .... D..-. -- (J ~ ..... z ~ 0 CIJ l'J)''"'

~ al 0 o::- t,) u;.: z ,ll ....,r-.. E-< .... ~Q) 9

~~ ~ :;l i:.:l j' §! c::i (..) Jlc1~ /09: 1604'•

:>- t ~]' Cl'-' ~ ~ .... rmLD ln!GDiEER: num HEATHCOTE ~o Cl: i:l. ~- rsl

~ A s~ ui Cl DATES DRiUED: St:PTlilMB!!R 12, 20l5

::ii'-' ..0 Cf.l c DIULWIO 1QlllP!.mrn 4-INCB POWlfl AliOIR

ML CLAYEY SILT-light brown.damp.mod firm.few - • gravel a d cobbles 2.2 105 11 ,_ Abundant gravel.cobbles and

bouldr::rs - • 4.2 110 24 --5 -

WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED

• .L. • -s • . ...

- . ~~ H:= ,,

~~ l l ~~w~~~ <,..;.... 1" :·.:

~: I~; ~ ~ ~ ;~

~ · · ... /"' .. - - -·

,::. ~·:~fTC:CT:JRAL s.-:-r ;::i; ;:._ ;._

. ,

. l

--. ' · ~ - ;,~ .

-- ~

.Af~O· .. · .. u~ 11· 'h~. . - of ventura December 12, 2016

Heathcote Geotechnical 1884 Eastman Avenue, Suite l05 Ventura, California 93003

Subject: Review of Building Permit Appli:::ation.

Reference: C16-l025, SR16-0076 Pallack [627 Villanova Road, AP>f 033-0-060-865]

PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY JEFF PRATT

A~e:icy Director

Central Services Department J. Tabin Cosio, Director

Engineering Services Department Christopher E. Cooper, Director

Transportation Department David L. Fleisch, Director

Water & Sanitation Department Michaela Brown. Director

Watersh~d Protection District Peter Sheydayi, Interim Director

l. Heathcote Geotechr.ical, October 8, 2016, Soil Engineering investigation, New Addition to Residence at 627 E. Villanova Road, Ojai, California for Snow Lion Construction. Prepared for Snow Lion Constrnction, Job No. 16105.

A review of the referenced re"Jort has been completed and additional. information is necessary to to approve the project. The following comments are provided:

1. A Grading Permit is required unless sufficient information is submitted to Public Works Agency shov.ring the project is exempt under Section J 103 .2 of the Ventura County Building Code. An eYaluation of the cubic yards of soil to be removed and recompacted is required. Earthwork quantities in excess of 50 cubic yar~s require a remo·,·al and re·:ompaction grading permit.

2. Please show the location of the site on the State Seismic Hazard 1\1lap.

3. Please provide a site plan that provides the location of existing i:11provements.

4. Portions of the site are located within an Earthquake Fault Hazard Zone. 'The report is unclear regarding thios section. Please address and clarify.

5. The plates at the end of the report are illegible. Please resubmit legible plates.

6. Please provide recommendations for the excavations adjacent to the existing foundations.

7. Ajditional comments may be presented upon submittal of above information

1

"·i. Hall of Administration L # 1600 • , '· ~ 800 S. Victoria Avenue, Ventura. CA 93009 • (805) 654-2018 •FAX (805) 654-3952 •http://www.ventura.org/p·wa t :

county of ventura December 12, 2016

Heathcote Geotechnical 1884 Eastman Avenue, Suite 105 Ventura, California 93003

Subject: Review of Building Permit Application.

Reference: C16-1025, SR16-0076 Pallack [627 Villanova Road, APN 033-0-060-865]

PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY JEFF PRATT

Agency Director

Central Services Department J. Tabin Cosio, Director

Engineering Services Department Christopher E. Cooper, Director

Transportation Department David L. Fleisch, Director

Water & Sanitation Department Michaela Brown, Director

Watershed Protection District Peter Sheydayi, Interim Director

l. Heathcote Geotechnical, October 8, 2016, Soil Engineering investigation, New Addition to Residence at 627 E. Villanova Road, Ojai, California for Snow Lion Construction. Prepared for Snow Lion Construction, Job No. 16105.

A review of the referenced report has been completed and additional information is necessary to to approve the project. The following comments are provided:

1. A Grading Permit is required unless sufficient information is submitted to Public Works Agency showing the project is exempt under Section J103 .2 of the Ventura County Building Code. An evaluation of the cubic yards of soil to be removed and recompacted is required. Earthwork quantities in excess of 50 cubic yards require a removal and recompaction grading permit.

2. Please show the location of the site on the State Seismic Hazard Map.

3. Please provide a site plan that provides the location of existing improvements.

4. Portions of the site are located within an Earthquake Fault Hazard Zone. 'The report is unclear regarding thios section. Please address and clarify.

5. The plates at the end of the report are illegible. Please resubmit legible plates.

6. Please provide recommendations for the excavations adjacent to the existing foundations.

7. Additional comments may be presented upon submittal of above information

1

• • Hall of Administration L # 1600 ., ~ 'a+: 800 S. Victoria Avenue, Ventura, CA 93009 • (805) 654-2018 • FAX (805) 654-3952 •http://www.ventura.org/pwa t., .,:

If you have any questions relating to the subject matter, please contact Jim O'Tousa at (805) 654 -2034.

Sincerely,

esO'Touso,~~ Engineering Manager 11

RG:jot

c: Representative/Owner

Raymond Gutien-ez, Jr., PE Manager

2

·SOIL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION

NEW ADDITION TO RESIDENCE

AT

827 E. VILLANOVA ROAD

OJAI, CALIFORNIA

FOR

SNOW LION CONSTRUCTION

---·HEATHCOTE ~.........._, GEOTECH NICAL

SOIL TESTING • FOUNDATIONS • INSPECTION

HEATHCOTE GEOTECHNICAL ~ SOIL TESTING • FOUNDATIONS • INSPECTION ~~

1884 EASTMAN AVENUE, SUITE 105, VENTURA, CALIFORNIA 93003 €:./:~~:::;:::::~~~

Snow Lion Construction 748 E. Avenida De Las Flores Thousand Oaks, Ca 91360

Ladies/Gentlemen:

Prop: 16105 Date: October 8, 2016

We are pleased to present this soil engineering report to aid in the design of your proposed project.

The project is located at 627 E. Villanova Road, Ojai, California. See the plot plan for complete details of the location.

The investigation will provide recommendations for the foundations and slabs of the proposed addition and patio cover. The addition will be one story. Wood construction is proposed. Slab on grade will be used. No basement will be built. Minor retaining walls may be used.

The existing public sewer lines will service the proposed residences. No septic studies are included.

The project will be safe for intended use as long as the recommendations of the report are followed.

Submittal of this report to appropriate governmental agencies is the responsibility of the owner or their representatives.

The report will follow and includes; a comprehensive task list, observations and findings, recommendations, basis of report, results of testing, plot plan, and borings.

It has been our pleasure to serve you and if you have any questions or need additional service, please contact us.

Fred Heathcote Civil Engineer No. C48316

Phone: (805) 644-9978

COMPREHENSIVE TASK LIST

2

GENERAL This portion of the report specifies all the work that was performed and the procedures used. This investigation did not address the possibility of any geologic hazards or contaminants in the soil. The following is the comprehensive task list.

SITE WORK 1. Reviewed site for engineering problems that can be

associated with the soil. 2. Drilled two borings, up to 7 feet in depth, using 4-

inch power auger equipment. Undisturbed samples taken with a 2-1/2 inch I.D. sampler using a 140 pound weight dropped 30 inches.

3. Visual logging of the borings for classification of soil types and characteristics.

4. Obtained bulk samples for laboratory testing.

TESTING 1. Determined in place density and moisture of

undisturbed samples. 2. Performed expansion index test of the

soils. The test was performed according to the guidelines set forth in the latest ASTM version.

3. Performed compaction test of the soils to aid in grading and density testing. The test was performed according to the latest ASTM procedure (five layers, 25 blows/layer, 10 lb. hammer, 18" drop, 1/30 cubic foot mold) .

4. Performed consolidation testing for foundations design.

Results of testing are presented following the Basis of Report and in the boring logs.

REPORT 1. Comprehensive task list 2. Findings and Observations

a) site conditions b) soil conditions c) geologic conditions

3. Recommendations a) foundation: depths, bearing value, settlements,

and lateral values b) slabs on grade c) drains and grades d) construction procedures: earthwork, inspection

3

4. Basis of report 5. Results of testing 6. Plot plan 7. Boring logs

4

FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS

5

SITE CONDITIONS The area of the proposed residence is on a mildly sloping pad. The site slopes down to the south. In the area of the proposed addition there is a brick hardscape. No large drainage patterns are evident on the property. No trees are vegetation in the area of the proposed construction. The existing residence contains a basement. Existing foundations for the patio cover is 21 inches.

SOIL CONDITIONS Fill soils were not observed in the borings. Fill soils may be encountered in the construction phase.

The upper natural soil encountered in the borings is a clayey silt. This soil is moderately loose, compressible and has a very low expansion potential.

The lower natural soils are a clayey silt. These soils are found at a depth of 3 feet. There are abundant gravel, cobbles and boulders. These soils are firm, moderately compressible and have a very low expansion potential.

The borings did not cave. Groundwater was not observed in the borings. Historical groundwater is at 50+ feet. This historical groundwater is not within 5 feet of the finished floor elevation.

LIQUEFACTION No groundwater was observed in the borings. The site is not listed in an area of possible liquefaction due to high ground water. Consequently, the potential for liquefaction is considered not a factor. In our opinion, lateral spreading will not occur on the project. No surface displacements due to lateral spreading or faulting are anticipated.

No need for enlarged footings and slabs to mitigate liquefaction induced settlement problems due to the lack of liquefaction.

6

DEBRIS FLOW- FLOODING-STABILITY There are no steep slopes above the site. There is very little potential for debris flow. No specific flooding is anticipated in the area. Some minor surface waters need to be drained around the proposed building. No slope instability problems are present.

FAULTS The site is listed in a State Special Study Zone. Fault lines need are required by the County of Ventura, if more than 50% of the value of the residence is being proposed.

User-Specified Input • Building Code Reference DocumentASCE 7-10 Standard(which utilizes USGS hazard

data available in 2008) • Site Coordinates34.43°N, 119.27°W • Site Soil ClassificationSite Class D - "Stiff Soil" • Risk Categoryl/II/III

USGS-Provided Output

Ss = 2.213 g

S1= 0.819g

SMs = 2.213 g

Sl\u = 1.229 g Sos= 1.476 g

Sot= 0.819 g

7

RECOMMENDATIONS

8

FOUNDATIONS

General The proposed structures may be supported on the underlying firm natural soils that are gravelly at 1-1/2 to 3 feet beneath the surface.

The expansion potential of the soils indicates a foundation design for low expansion soils is needed. Foundations should have at least 1-#4 bars top and bottom.

No lateral pressure on foundations due to seismic loads are anticipated.

No lateral loads or movement are expected on foundations due to liquefaction. There are no retaining walls that will be affected by liquefaction. There is no flotation of buried structures that will affect the project.

No ground stabilization is deemed necessary. The foundations do not need extra structurally reinforcing from normal structural reinforcing due to liquefiable soils. Differential settlement has been accounted for in the design.

Minimum Depth and Width The footings for the building inches below existing grade. least 18 inches wide. Depth dictate depths.

must be at least 18 to 36 The footings must be at

to gravelly soils will

Next to basement walls, proposed foundations shall be deepened so as to not surcharge basement walls from a 1:1 plane from the bottom of the foundations.

Allowable Bearing Value The proposed foundations may be designed to place a load of 2000 pounds per square foot on the soil. This value may be increased by 1/3 for wind or seismic forces.

Settlement The settlement of the structures should not exceed 3/4 inch. Differential settlement should be less than 1/4 inch. There is no seismic settlement.

9

Lateral Values The allowaole coefficient of friction is 0.35. The allowable passive pressure is equal to a fluid density of 250 pounds per cubic foot. This value may be increased by 1/3 for wind or seismic forces. Sliding resistance and passive pressure may be used to resist lateral forces without reduction.

SLABS ON GRADE The subgrade for the slabs on grade must be prepared as described in the section on earthwork. The slabs should be designed for soils of low expansion. At least 1-#4 bar at 24 inches on centers should be used. A minimum of a 4 inch slab should be used. Pre-saturation is not required.

We recommend that you use a 4 inch layer of gravel beneath the slab as a capillary break. The gravel should be of 3/4 inch variety with less than 10% sand with very little amount of fines. Drain pipes under the slab shall drain off any water to the exterior retaining wall drains.

A visquene covering shall be used to serve as a water vapor barrier. To reduce problems associated with the concrete curing process and expansive soils, a 2 inch layer of sand shall be placed on top of the visquene.

DRAINS AND GRADES All grades shall drain away from the foundations. Downspouts should be drained away from the foundations.

RETAINING/BASEMENT WALLS

Lateral values For basement walls, the lateral pressure shall be equal to 60 pounds per cubic foot assuming a level backfill. Seismic value shall be 15% more.

For retaining walls, the lateral pressure shall be equal to 30 pounds per cubic foot assuming a level backfill. Seismic value shall be 15% more.

Drainage To provide proper drainage behind basement walls, a layer of gravel should be placed behind the wall to a depth of 24 inches below the proposed finished grade. The gravel should extend up to within 24 inches of the top ground surface, but no higher. Felt shall be wrapped around entire gravel pack in burrito fashion. Compacted soils

10

should be placed in the remainder to reduce surface water infiltration. A method of drainage should be provided in the form of a slotted pipe with Class 2 permeable material. Water shall be drained from basement to lower areas on the property or shall be pumped.

Walls should be properly waterproofed and protected from puncture.

CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES

EARTHWORK To support the slabs, the following must be excavated.

1) In the area of the proposed building all organic material should be removed and taken off site.

2) All softer soils.

3) All soils to a depth of 1-1/2 foot.

After excavation the following must be accomplished. 1) All bottoms of the excavations and slab subgrades

should be scarified and compacted to 90% ccmpaction.

2) All fills and backfills should be placed in horizontal layers less than 8 inches in loose ttickness.

3) The soils shall be compacted to a minimum of 90% of the maximum density rendered by the latest version of the ASTM(D-1557). Field density testing per latest ASTM version for Sand Cone Method.

4) The moisture content should not vary more than 2% from the optimum moisture content, although the grading process will be more easily accomplished with the soils being 1 to 2% wetter than optimum moisture content.

5) Any utility trenches will need to be properly backfilled.

6) All on site soils may be used. Any import soils should be approved by our f irrn and should not have an expansion index greater than 35.

11

Inspection This is an important step to obtain quality construction and to obtain correct design . The following will need inspection by our firm .

* Foundations * All earthwork

a) All fill and backfills b) Testing frequency is at all bottoms and every 2

vertical feet

Inspection, by our firm, is needed to assure that the soil conditions are consistent with this report and design assumptions. Inspection by local government agencies may also be needed.

12

BASIS OF REPORT

13

RIGHT OF USE This report is intended exclusively for the use of the Snow Lion Contruction and the project designers.

METHODS This report has been developed based on our understanding of the project details, field review, boring excavations, laboratory testing, engineering analyses, and experience with similar soil conditions with similar use and loads.

DEGREE OF PERFORMANCE The work was performed using the methods and degree of care used by other soil engineering firms operating in this vicinity, for similar projects, in this time period. This firm is responsible only for our own negligent errors and negligent omissions. Any error or omission that results in an unexpected cost that normally would have been present, is not the responsibility of our firm. Nothing else is warranted, implied or expressed, as to the details presented in this report.

VALIDITY OF REPORT

Changes This report is valid for this specific project as described in the text of the report and on the plot plan. Any change in project size, loads, location, grade or use would require a review of this report.

Inspection The recommendations given in this report are based on the assumption that all necessary inspection work will be performed during the construction phase of the project. The initial soil engineering investigation is only a part of the work needed to obtain correct engineering design. The soil conditions are only anticipated in the initial report. The inspection work verifies the conditions are as expected and allow our firm the ability to modify the recommendations in the event that the soil conditions are different.

The presence of inspection will provide the owner with the ability to obtain advice as to soil related construction procedures and answer related questions as to the implementation of the recommendations provided in this report.

14

If another firm is used to perform the construction inspection of the soil related aspects, our professional liability and responsibility would be drastically reduced to the point that we would no longer be the soils engineer of record.

15

RESULTS OF TESTING

16

EXPANSION INDEX TEST

Sample Location :

Soil type :

Confining Pressure :

Initial Moisture Content : ( % of dry wt . )

Final Moisture Content : { % of dry wt . )

Dry Density :

Expansion Index :

TEST METHOD: LATEST ASTM VERSION

EXPANSION INDEX TEST

Boring 1@1-2'

Clayey Silt

144 psf

13 . 0

20.0

99 pcf

1

17

COMPACTION TEST

Sample Location:

Soil type:

Maximum Dry Density:

Optimum Moisture Content: ( % of dry wt. )

TEST METHOD: LATEST ASTM PROCEDURE

COMPACTION TEST

Boringl@l-2'

Clayey Silt

120 pcf

11

18

STATE= 5EJ5fl]tc_

HAiii~D MAP

Nl ATI L 1.jA

Gu AD. I (I:=. z OC::>O '

!9

-~-+) 0

~ BORING 1 :d 0 >-~.~ i: .... 1~ :z; 5 o~ fil .S::? o_ :z; ,Q iS-=> u u ~ ~t 9

r&I i:' r..:i ::I ll. Q) A CJ r ~! ~~ JOB: l6047

~.,,

>- ~ ~g ~ ::::> .... FIJILD ~llfUB: FR&D K2ATKCOTE tl 0

~ p., r:.:I

~ Cl .... ul Cl DAftS DIULUlll: lJl:P'l'BWIER 12, 20111 o~ ::ii- .0 rn - DIUWHQ BQUIPME!n': 4-nlCH PORK AUGlll -

ML CLAYEY SlLT-light brown,damf ,mod firm.few - ~ gravel and cobb es

3.1 91 7 -- ~

Abundant gravel.cobbles and 3.4 109 35 boulders ,_

.__ 5

-- ~ 4.3 112 41

WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED

-r b :z; :d 0 BORING 2 t;:: t; 0 .~

~~ 5 8~ ~Z' C'll ' ... ~~ u :z; .a

~~ s l'.a1 t' ~e r:.:ij §! A~ lOB: l~'1

~; :>-! ti ~~ ~ nElD BffOOfDR: ffll!l> HU~ ~ p., ~- r:.:I .... Cl Cl ~ DATllS DIUlUID: SBPTDIB8R 12, 2016 o"' ul ::ii- .0 ..... DR!WMG &QU!PliWn: 4-INCB POW!fl AUQIR - ML CLAYEY SlLT-light brown,damfi 1mod firm.few ,_

• gravel and cobb es

2.2 105 11 ,.. Abundant gravel,co'bbles and boulders

- • 4.2 110 24 --5 -

WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED

,c .. Zf

10/8/2016 6'ZT E Villanova Rd- Google Maps

Go gle Maps 627 E Villanova Rd

,-.:c:

I~

Go gle

••:• I

• Ba,l<-1 ~G LOCAT?ol\J

Map data ©2016 Google SO ft ~----"'

zo 111