Attachment K - Compliance Checklist_PECC 03-23_Compiled part 1 — Long Beach City Council, September 19, 2023 (part 4 of 7)

Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 12
f. City staff and the qualified historic preservation professional shall review the finished rehabilitation/renovation in person upon completion. g. In the event that any historical resource(s) are leased to third-party tenants and tenant improvements will be made, all of the terms of this stipulation shall be disclosed in the lease agreements, agreed upon in writing, and mutually enforced by the property owner or project applicant/developer and the City. The tenants shall not be permitted to conduct work that does not comply with the Standards.

B. Retention/On-Site Relocation- For Proposed Demolition

1. If the proposed project includes total demolition of a historical resource, the property owner or project applicant/developer shall first consider an alternative that retains the historical resource and incorporates it into the overall project development as an adaptive re-use of the building.

2. If the project site permits, the historical resource should be relocated to another location on the site, and the resource should be reincorporated into the overall project.

3. If the City determines that retention/onsite relocation of the historical resource is not feasible through a credible feasibility study, the City shall elect to allow the property owner or project applicant/developer to move forward with the development/redevelopment project; however, all other requirements outlined in this mitigation measure shall apply.

C. Third Party Sale

1. If the City determines that retention or onsite relocation of the historical resource is not feasible, then the property owner or project applicant/developer shall offer any historical resources scheduled for demolition to the public for sale and offsite relocation by a third party:
a. The historic resource(s) shall be advertised by the property owner or project applicant/developer at a minimum in the following locations:
project applicant’s/developer’s website (if applicable); City of Long Beach website; Los Angeles Times website and print editions; Long Beach Press Telegram.
b. The bidding period shall remain open for 60 days after the date of advertisement to allow adequate response time from interested parties. c. Qualified parties shall meet the following minimum qualifications to be considered a realistic buyer: possess adequate financial resources to relocate and rehabilitate the historical resource(s); possess an available location for the historical resource(s); and provide for a new use for the historical resource(s).
d. The City shall approve the qualified buyer. If no such buyer comes forward within the allotted time frame, the City shall elect to issue a demolition permit for the historical resource. However, all other requirements outlined in this mitigation measure shall apply.

D. Recordation
Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 13

1. The property owner or project applicant/developer shall create HABS-like Level II documentation prepared in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Architectural and Engineering Documentation.

Information on the Standards and Guidelines is available at the following links:
http://www.nps.gov/history/local-law/arch_stnds_6.htm.
http://www.nps.gov/history/hdp/standards/index.htm.
a. Photographs with large-format black-and-white negatives (4 inches by 5 inches or larger) of the property as a whole shall be provided; photocopies with large format negatives of select existing drawings, site plans, or historic views where available. A minimum of 12 views showing context and relationship of historical resources to each other shall be provided; aerial views showing the whole property shall also be provided. b. Written historical descriptive data, index to photographs, and photo key plan shall be provided.
c. The above items shall be created by a historic preservation professional meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards with demonstrated experience in creating HABS Level II documentation.
d. The above items shall be created prior to any demolition or relocation work.
e. The above items shall be distributed to the following repositories for use by future researchers and educators. Before submitting any documents, each of the following repositories shall be contacted to ensure that they are willing and able to accept the items: City of Long Beach Public Library; Long Beach Historical Society; Los Angeles Public Library; South Central Coastal Information Center at California State University, Fullerton; and City of Long Beach Development Services Department (building files).

E. Salvage and Reuse

1. If offsite relocation of the historical resource by a third party is not accomplished, the property owner or project applicant/developer shall create a salvage and reuse plan identifying elements and materials of the resource that can be saved prior to any demolition work.
a. The salvage and reuse plan shall be included in bid documents prepared for the site and shall be created by a historic preservation professional meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards with demonstrated experience in creating salvage and reuse plans.
b. Elements and materials that may be salvageable include windows; doors; roof tiles; decorative elements; bricks, foundation materials, and/or paving materials; framing members; furniture; lighting; and flooring materials, such as tiles and hardwood.

2. The property owner or project applicant/developer shall identify individuals, organizations, or businesses interested in receiving the salvaged items; these may include Habitat for Humanity Restore; other affordable housing organizations; or salvage yards. The following steps shall be taken by the property owner or project applicant/developer:

Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 14
a. Identification of the individuals, organizations, or businesses interested in receiving the salvaged items shall be completed in consultation with the City.
b. Identification of the individuals, organizations, or businesses interested in receiving the salvaged items shall be accomplished by contacting potentially interested parties directly first.
c. Items to be salvaged shall be advertised in the following locations for a period of 60 days if none of the contacted parties are able to receive the items: Los Angeles Times and Long Beach Press Telegram.

3. The property owner or project applicant/developer shall remove salvageable items in the gentlest, least destructive manner possible. Historic materials and features shall be protected by storing salvaged items in indoor, climate- and weather-controlled conditions until recipients can retrieve them. The removal of salvageable items shall be performed by a licensed contractor with demonstrated experience with implementing salvage and reuse plans.

F. Other Optional Interpretive, Commemorative, or Educational Measures The City may also elect to require additional (optional) mitigation measures crafted in response to a specific historical resource’s property type or significance, association with a specific historic person, or overall value to the community, as practical, so long as the measure is commensurate with the significance of the property and the level of impact to that resource. Such measures may include educational or interpretive programming; signage; incorporation of historical features into new developments or public art; contribution to a mitigation fund for future historic preservation efforts; written histories or contexts important to the public’s understanding of the lost resource (presuming no other extant resource can interpret such significance); etc. The need for these additional measures shall be determined by the City on a case-by-case basis and incorporated into the conditions of approval for the project. Some measures may be made available to the public through museum displays, written reports at research repositories, on-or offsite signage, or existing online multimedia sites.

Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 15

BACKGROUND

HISTORIC SETTING

CITY OF LONG BEACH HISTORY
In 1866, Jonathan Temple sold Rancho Los Cerritos to Flint, Bixby & Co. who used the land to raise sheep. The company appointed Jotham Bixby to manage the business at Rancho Los Cerritos until the land was sold to William E. Willmore in 1880. Willmore subdivided the land and by 1882 had named it Willmore City. In 1887, a Los Angeles-based land syndicate known as the “Long Beach Land and Water Company” bought out Willmore, and the community was renamed “Long Beach” after the suggestion of Belle Lowe, whose husband was the town’s first postmaster. (Schipske 2011).

By 1889, the Southern Pacific Railroad connected Long Beach with the San Pedro Line. The arrival of the railroad represented an important step in the area’s population and commercial expansion. The success of this growth resulted in the City’s incorporated in 1897. Quickly following incorporation, the Long Beach School District, a local newspaper called the Long Beach Journal, the Long Beach Hotel, along with the Methodist Resort Association’s Chautauqua Assembly and Tabernacle at American Street and Third Avenue were established.

In addition, general stores, brick-making facilities, an electric-lighting plant, a water company, and telephone services were quickly constructed to support the City’s development. (Schipske 2011).

In the 1920s, six of America’s largest oilfields were discovered in Huntington Beach, Torrance, Inglewood, Seal Beach, and Signal Hill in Long Beach. The increase in drilling and demand for labor resulted in a wave of population growth and a subsequent housing crisis. In 1926, the Port of Long Beach was established and by 1938 the U.S. Navy began development on the largely manmade Terminal Island.

From the 1930s through World War II, more U.S. Navy personnel lived in Long Beach than in any other city in the United States (LSA 2017). Following the bombing of Pearl Harbor and the subsequent entrance of the United States into World War II, numerous military bases, aircraft assembly plants, and other war-related facilities and industries were established in southern California. Major installations were located in Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, and Long Beach. A workforce of 16,000 supported the Long Beach Naval Shipyard throughout World War II, making the Naval Shipyard the largest employer in Long Beach during the war.

Following the end of World War II and during Long Beach’s period of suburbanization, the city’s pre-established central business districts fell into decline. In the 1950s, with the rise of car culture throughout the United States and residential development away from the city center, local Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 16
shopping centers and retail stores were built (Sapphos Environmental, Inc. 2009). In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the area surrounding the Project area consisted of oil fields to the north, the marina and dense residential neighborhood of Naples to the south, and the residential area of Seal Beach to the east of the San Gabriel River. The Pacific Coast Highway and 2nd Street connected these areas (Frame Finder 1980).

PROJECT AREA HISTORY
The earliest known USGS historical topographic map of the Project area depicts the area as a marshland belonging to Alamitos Bay (Downey; 1:62500, 1896). By 1925, there is no physical change to the Project area, however, the 1925 topographic map depicts the Long Beach City boundaries just to the south (Long Beach; 1:24000, 1925). The 1942 Downey topographic map shows the Project area is, by that time, within the boundaries of an oil field (Downey; 1:62500, 1942).

The Project area is still within the boundaries of an oil field in 1950, with the addition of several access roads and three wells with associated towers (NETROnline 1952). By 1972, the access roads remain but the oil rigs have been removed (NETROnline 1972). By 1977, a paved parking lot is present with several tree plantings that remain today (FrameFinder 1977). By 1980, the El Torito at 6605 E. Pacific Coast Highway and the two-story commercial office building at 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway are present (Figure 4; FrameFinder 1980). By 1988, the two-story commercial office buildings at 6621 E. Pacific Coast Hwy and 6695 E. Pacific Coast Highway are present (NETROnline 1988).

Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 17
Figure 4. 1980 USDA Aerial photograph (Frame Finder 1980)

LONG BEACH MARKET PLACE OFFICE PARK AND THE BIXBY RANCH COMPANY The Long Beach Marketplace Office Park is comprised of three similarly designed two-story commercial buildings: 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway (built 1979), 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway (built 1980), and 6695 E. Pacific Coast Highway (built 1983). A review of documents and contemporary application permits lists the Bixby Ranch Company as the project applicant.

According to the initial 1978 site plan, the Marketplace Office Park was designed to include seven office buildings, an extension of Shopkeeper Road, elongation/realignment of Studebaker Road, landscaping, and hardscaped parking areas (Figure 5). Ultimately, only two of the buildings proposed in this plan were constructed (now 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway and 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway). The two-story office building at 6695 E. Pacific Coast Highway was not included in the original 1979 site plan but was constructed very similar to the style and materials of its preexisting neighbors.

As multi-tenant office buildings, many businesses have occupied both 6615 and 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway throughout the buildings’ period of use. Types of business include (but are not limited to): stock brokerage firms, real estate firms, wealth management, health services, international shipping companies, and domestic manufacturing offices. A representative El Torito
6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway
Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 18
sampling of businesses associated with each building is provided below. The length of each company’s tenancy at its respective location is not provided. 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway
• 1980: Wagenseller and Durst, Inc.; a regional stock brokerage firm (The Golden Rain Seal Beach Leisure World News 1980)
• 1981: Merrill Lynch; an American investment and wealth management company (The Los Angeles Times 1981a)
• 1994: CoastCo Real Estate (The Los Angeles Times 1994a) • 2001: Century 21 Sparrow-Shoreline; lending, escrow, notary, legal, and insurance services (The Los Angeles Times 2001)
• 2017: MJB Plastics, Inc.
• 2017: British American Shipping, LLC.
• 2017: DayWellness Chiropractic
• 2018: Caliber Home Loans
• 2021: Alliance Shippers, Inc./Alliance International
6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway
• 1981: Van de Kamp’s Frozen Foods (The Los Angeles Times 1981b) • 1982: Bateman Eichler, Hill Richards Incorporated; Broker and Investment Adviser (The Golden Rain Seal Beach Leisure World News 1982)
• 1989: Gregg Whelan-Associate Vice President/Investments (The Golden Rain Seal Beach Leisure World News 1989)
• 1989: U.S. Census Bureau (The Los Angeles Times 1989) • 1992: Conroy’s Flowers; Florist (The Los Angeles Times 1992) • 1994: 1-800-Flowers; Florist (The Los Angeles Times 1994b) • 2005: The Long Beach Escrow Assn. (The Los Angeles Times, 2005) • 2018: Main St. Financial
• 2018: Keller Williams Realty-Coastal Properties
Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 19
Figure 5. 1978 site plan for the “Marketplace Office Park” (Charles Kober Associates 1978).

EL TORITO
In 1954, Larry J. Cano (1924-2014), the founder of El Torito, purchased an old Polynesian restaurant in the City of Encino and converted it into a sit-down Mexican restaurant (Figure 6).

At the time, Mexican food in the United States was not considered mainstream and, according to a former El Torito chief executive, there was no such thing as casual Mexican dining (Woo 2014).

Mr. Cano served as an Air Force captain during World War II and the Korean War. After his military service, he earned his business degree from the University of Southern California. He planned to continue his education by attending law school but his summer job as a bartender at the Bali Hali sent him down a new path. Following the death of the owner, Mr. Cano and his wife purchased the restaurant and converted the Polynesian theme to a sit-down Mexican eatery.

The first few months were a struggle for the Canos and their restaurant; however, El Torito’s famed fajitas, margaritas, table-side-made guacamole, and staff dressed as charros helped to launch the business into a nationwide chain (Woo 2014). The success of El Torito was such that by the end of the decade additional locations were opened in Hollywood and Toluca Lake.

Considered a dining experience, El Torito drew customers from all walks of life including movie stars such as Lana Turner, John Wayne, Gregory Peck, and Michael Jackson (Woo 2014). 6615 E. Pacific Coast Hwy
6621 E. Pacific Coast Hwy
Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 20
El Torito rose to prominence in the 1970s and 1980s. In 1978, Mr. Cano sold his chain of 22 restaurants to W.R. Grace & Co. (later sold to Restaurant Enterprises Group in 1986), however, he remained as company president for ten years. During his period as president, El Torito expanded across the United States from 22 to 190 locations with annual sales by 1987 exceeding $425 million (Woo 2014). In 1988, Mr. Cano stepped down as company president.

Over the following decade, the franchise began a gradual decline. The business was purchased in 1994 by Koo Koo Roo Enterprises (originally Foodmaker and finally renamed to Prandium Inc. in 1999). By 1999, the chain included 101 locations with a total sales of $221 million (Reuters 2000). In 2000, due to substantial debt, Prandium Inc. sold all but six of its El Torito locations to the Long Beach-based Acapulco Acquisition Corp. At the time of the sale, 18 El Torito restaurants were located in Orange County and the company headquarters was based in Irvine, California (Hernandez 2000).

Currently, El Torito is owned by Xperience Restaurant Group (XRG). A total of 31 El Torito restaurants remain in operation under XRG, 26 of which are located in Orange County (XPERIENCE Restaurant Group 2023).

Figure 6. Founder of the El Torito chain, Larry J. Cano (photo by John Gilhooly; Woo 2014).

Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 21

SOURCES CONSULTED
A variety of sources were consulted in February 2023 to obtain information regarding the cultural context of the Project vicinity (Table 1). Sources included the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD), California Historical Landmarks (CHL), and California Points of Historical Interest (CPHI). Specific information about the Project area, obtained from historicera maps and aerial photographs, is presented in the Project Area History section.

Table 1. Additional Sources Consulted
Source Results
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) Negative
Historic USGS Topographic Maps See Project Area History Historic US Department of Agriculture Aerial
Photographs
See Project Area History
California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) Negative Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD) Negative
California Historical Landmarks (CHL) Negative
California Points of Historical Interest (CPHI) Negative Bureau of Land Management (BLM) General Land
Office Records
Positive; (T5S, R12W, Section 11)
Name Accession
No.

Authority
Abel Stearns CACAAA
084787
GrantSpanish/Mexican
Local Registers (Historical Societies/Archives) See below Able Stearns (1798-1871)
Abel Stearns was one of the richest and most influential citizens of Los Angeles during his lifetime. Born in Massachusetts in 1798, he eventually made his way to California and settled in Los Angeles around 1833. Mr. Stearns made a large amount of money in trade and eventually purchased large swaths of real estate including Ranchos Los Alamitos, Las Bolas, La Laguna de Los Angeles, and half interest in Los Coyotes. In 1849 he was a member of the first Constitutional Convention representing the district of Los Angeles. Mr. Stearns became one of the largest land and cattle owners in California. His wife Dona Arcadia, who was the daughter of Don Juan Bandini, inherited the entire estate upon his death in 1871 (Barrows 1899).

HISTORIC SOCIETY CONSULTATION
On March 7, 2023 a request for information was sent via USPS to the Historical Society of Long Beach and the Los Angeles Conservancy. On March 27, Cogstone followed up on the initial request via email to both the Historical Society of Long Beach and the Los Angeles Conservancy.

Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 22
Cogstone received an automated response from Julie Bartolotto, Executive Director of the Historical Society of Long Beach, stating she would be out until April 4. On April 6, 2023, a response was received via email from Jen Malone, who offered Cogstone a research appointment if further information was required regarding the buildings, land, use, City Manager Files, etc.

The Historical Society made no further comment regarding the Project. As Cogstone had already procured that information through alternative resources, an appointment with the Society was not requested.

A response was received via email on March 29, 2023, from Erik Van Breene of the Los Angeles Conservancy. Mr. Van Breene offered to check for additional information regarding the Project but also recommended Cogstone contact Long Beach Heritage for a request for information. On March 3, 2023, a request for information was sent to Long Beach Heritage through their website’s email/contact system. No response has been received from Long Beach Heritage and no further comment has been made by the Los Angeles Conservancy regarding the Project.

Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 23
SURVEY
The built environment resources survey typically identifies and verifies the location of all structures and buildings within the Project area aged 45 years or older. This study was completed in compliance with the Southeast Area Specific Plan (SEASP) Mitigation Measure CUL-1 which states that “Future development or redevelopment projects on or near buildings or structures 45 years of age or older shall require an intensive-level historical evaluation.” In total, three buildings were evaluated as part of this study. This includes two office buildings within the Long Beach Marketplace Office Park; 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway (built 1979) located within the Project area and 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway (built 1980) located adjacent to the Project area. The third building evaluated for this study is a vacant El Torito restaurant (built 1977/1978) located adjacent to the Project area at 6605 E. Pacific Coast Highway.

The buildings adjacent to the Project area (the El Torito restaurant at 6605 E. Pacific Coast Highway and the office building at 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway) were documented and evaluated for potential historic significant in compliance with Mitigation Measure CUL-1 and to determine if the Project would have a negative impact on the historic setting if either of these buildings were determined historically significant. While 6605 E. Pacific Coast Highway meets the minimum threshold of being 45 years old, 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway (43 years old) does not quite meet this threshold. Out of an abundance of caution and to maintain compliance with Mitigation Measure CUL-1, 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway was included in this study in the event that this is nearing 45 years of age an may reach that age threshold before this Project is complete. By that standard, the office building within the Project area at 6695 E. Pacific Coast Highway was not evaluated as part of this study as it does not meet the minimum 45 year threshold (built in 1983; 40 years old) and it is not anticipated that this building will reach the minimum threshold before this Project is complete.

Once identified, built environment resources were examined to ascertain if they are recommended eligible for listing as a historic resource at the local, state, or national level and if the original integrity of the resource remains intact. The seven aspects of integrity which are considered as part of a determination of eligibility include location, design, setting, materials, feeling, workmanship, and association.

RESULTS
On March 2, 2023, Cogstone’s architectural historian Shannon Lopez visited the Project area.

Ms. Lopez photographed and documented the exterior of the two office buildings at 6615 E.

Pacific Coast Highway and 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway and the vacant El Torito restaurant (6605 E. Pacific Coast Highway). As the two office buildings are part of the same office park, Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 24
both buildings were recorded on the same set of DPR 523 forms. The El Torito was newly recorded on one set of Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms.

EL TORITO
This one-story restaurant is part of Marketplace Long Beach (6401-6605 E. Pacific Coast Highway), an outdoor shopping plaza that consists of various restaurants, shops, a movie theater, and health services. Built-in late 1977-early 1978, this building was constructed in a style that draws heavily from both the Mission Revival style (most popular in California from 1890-1920), the Spanish Revival style (1915-1940), and Modern Style (Figures 7 and 8). Elements of this combination of styles include the widely overhanging open eaves, red tile roof, stucco wall cladding, asymmetrical façade, and dramatic front door and door surrounds (more typical of the Spanish Revival style).

The footprint of this building is irregular but generally follows a rectangular shape. The main body of this building is one-story with a two-story tower centered in the middle of the southwest façade. The rooflines consist of a mixture of gabled, shed, and flat roofs with the flat (more modern-styled) roofline relegated to the middle and back of the building. The gable and shedstyled roofs are clad with red clay tapered mission tiles. Unusual for Mission or Spanish Revival styles but seen with other El Torito locations, the tiles are double or triple-stacked and fixed to each other with thick layers of a combination of mortar and caulking. This gives the roofline a very rough and disheveled appearance, possibly an attempt to give the building the feeling of a much older structure. The exposed wood rafter tails are painted reddish brown and cut in a curved pattern; features exhibit substantial signs of material decay.

The exterior of all elevations is clad in stucco. Historically, Mission Revival and Spanish Revival wall surfaces are clad with smooth (or lightly textured) stucco containing smaller aggregate particles. This building’s stucco cladding, however, has a coarse aggregate combined with a more sweeping troweling pattern, giving it a rough textured look.

The main entrance is located at the southwest façade of the two-story tower. Typical of the Spanish Revival style is the more elaborate door and door surrounds which, for this building, include stylized wood-paneled double doors with multi-paned glass panels organized in a pattern reminiscent of the mission-shaped parapet. A decorative wood panel matching the color and style of the double doors is immediately above this entrance. The doors are flanked by two matching concrete pilasters. These pilasters are clad in plaster, textured, and painted to imitate carved stone blocks; the crumbling plaster at the base of the pilasters reveals the concrete beneath. These faux stone pilasters support a short plastered balcony. A decorative wood paneled false door with a faux stone lintel overhead is at the second story level of the tower. The door is flanked by two matching pilasters supporting an ornamental projection designed to imitate the mission’s arched parapet; these features are assumed to be painted or plaster covered Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 25
concrete. The roofing at the top of the tower is gabled and clad with red Spanish-styled tiles.

The exposed rafter tails show notable signs of decay.

A one-story wing projects from both the northwest and southeast elevations of the tower (main entrance). These wings are asymmetrical in design. Both share the same shed-style roof and are clad in multiple layers of red Spanish tile. A tall but narrow stucco-clad chimney that projects approximately 8-10 feet above the roofline is at the end of the southeast wing. Two tall chimneys (with very wide bases) that rise 10-12 feet above the roofline are at the end of the northwest wing. All three chimneys have circular chimney pots.

As the building is vacant, the majority of windows are shuttered behind wood panelboards. The windows still visible at the northwest elevation are wood framed and consist of 16 small rectangular panes. The surrounding window casing, sill, lintel, and sash are clad in rough stucco/plaster.

Secondary doors intended for staff and emergency exits are located at the northwest and southeast elevations. Two of these doors are wood paneled and the third is flush steel.

The flat-roofed section of the building at the back of the restaurant (northeast elevation) has no fenestration. Decorative details are limited to a simple exterior cornice molding, a stucco-clad string course several feet below the roof level, and three rectangular pilasters with tapered ends at the northwest elevation.

Figure 7. Southwest façade, facing northeast.

Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 26
Figure 8. Overview of southeast elevation, facing northwest.

LONG BEACH MARKETPLACE OFFICE PARK
The Long Beach Marketplace Office Park is comprised of three similarly designed two-story commercial buildings: 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway (built 1979), 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway (built 1980), and 6695 E. Pacific Coast Highway (built 1983). All three buildings are designed in the Modern Style with Shed style elements. Pursuant to Mitigation Measure CUL-1, for this study, only 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway and 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway were documented and evaluated for potential eligibility for listing at the national, state, and local level.

The office building within the Project area at 6695 E. Pacific Coast Highway was not evaluated as part of this study as it does not meet the minimum 45 year threshold (built in 1983; 40 years old) and it is not anticipated that this building will reach the minimum threshold before this Project is complete.
6615 E. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway very closely matches the footprint, design, and materials of the neighboring office building at 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway. This commercial building is two stories, with a rectangular shaped footprint, textured stucco exterior wall cladding, and a large open-air atrium set in the center of the footprint (Figures 9 and 10). The roofline is comprised of six sheet metal clad skillion roofs (four large primary- rectangular in shape; two small secondary- square in shape). The second story level projects over the first story by approximately two to three feet. Wide corrugated metal sheets that simulate a broken belt course are situated between the first and second story windows in large sections of all elevations.

Matching material is found just below the eave level (gutters) on the majority of all elevations, forming a projecting fascia. The majority of windows at the second story level are recessed and alternate in sets of two and four sliding windows (frames appear to be steel).

Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 27
Entrances are located at the western and eastern corners of the building. The primary entrance at the building’s western corner consists of one set of double glass doors which are accompanied by side and transom lights (steel frames). A short balcony, approximately three feet deep and seven feet long, with a steel safety railing is immediately above this entrance. An exterior singlepaneled door with a floor vent leading into a small electrical room is adjacent to the first floor entrance. This electrical room is part of a semi-detached unit that partially cuts away from the main body of the building. This unit’s skillion roof is set several feet lower than the neighboring roof lines and has two square fixed windows at the second-story level. In addition to the electrical room, this unit also encloses a storage room and staircase that connect the first and second floors. An ADA-compliant ramp and entrance are at the southwest-facing side of this semi-detached unit. The corresponding door is glass with a transom window and a two-pane sidelight. A short balcony, approximately one foot by three feet, with a steel safety railing is located directly above this entrance.

A similar semi-detached two-story segment which encloses both men's and women’s bathroom facilities is at the eastern corner of the building. Two separate entrances are situated between this unit and the main body of the building. The main entrance (facing southeast) consists of a pair of double doors accompanied by sidelights and a transom light. A short balcony, approximately two feet deep by ten feet long, is above this entrance. Access is provided via a sliding glass door with associated sidelights. Two sets of double glass doors are at the northeastfacing section between the semi-detached building segment and the main body of the building.

A narrow balcony, approximately two feet deep and fifteen feet long, is above this entrance.

Access to this balcony is provided by two sets of sliding glass doors; a single utility room door is set between these glass doors.

Matching large wrap-around balcony areas are at the north and south corners of the building.

Two large windows and a steel-framed glass door are at the northern balcony level. Two large sliding glass doors and one large two-paned glass window are at the southern balcony level.

Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 28
Figure 9. Overview of southwest façade (facing west).

Figure 10. Oblique view of northeast elevation (left) and northwest elevation (right), facing south. 6621 E. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway very closely matches the footprint, design, and materials of the neighboring office building at 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway. This commercial building is two stories, with a rectangular shaped footprint, textured stucco exterior wall cladding, and a large open-air atrium set in the center of the footprint (Figures 11 and 12). The roofline is comprised of six sheet metal clad skillion roofs (four large primary- rectangular in shape; two small secondary- square in shape). The second story level projects over the first story by approximately two to three feet. Wide corrugated metal sheets that simulate a broken belt course are situated between the first and second story windows in large sections of all elevations.

Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 29
There are four primary entrance points to this building, two at the northwest corner of the building, one at the southeast elevation, and the fourth at the northern end of the southeast elevation. A semi-detached unit that partially cuts away from the main body of the building is at the northwest corner of the building. This unit’s skillion roof is set several feet lower than the neighboring roof lines and has two square fixed windows at the second-story level. The two entrances located at this end of the building are in the recessed areas between the semi-detached unit and the main body of the building. One entrance facing northwest is comprised of a set of steel-framed double glass doors with sidelights and transom windows. A short balcony, approximately three feet deep and seven feet long, with a steel safety railing is immediately above this entrance. Two matching wheelchair-accessible steel-framed glass double doors are at the southwest corner of the building. A balcony area approximately three feet deep and 18 feet long is directly overhead. Two steel-framed sliding glass doors and a single panel with a floor vent door leading to a small storage closet are on the balcony level.

A projecting canopy constructed in 1981 is at the southeast elevation of the building. This canopy has a sloped metal sheet roof and is supported by two rectangular stucco-clad pillars.

The entrance consists of steel-framed glass double doors. Large ground-to-ceiling rectangular two-paned windows are on both sides of these double doors. Another semi-detached unit that partially cuts away from the main body of the building is at the southeast corner. A set of steelframed glass double doors is in the recessed area at the southeast end of the building. An exterior single-paneled door with a floor vent leading into a small electrical room is adjacent to the first-floor entrance. A short balcony, approximately three feet deep and seven feet long, with a steel safety railing is immediately above this entrance. A single steel framed glass door (secondary entrance) is at the northwest-facing side of this semi-detached unit. A short balcony, approximately three feet deep and six feet long, with a steel safety railing is directly above this entrance.

Figure 11. Overview of 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway, facing northeast.

Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 30
Figure 12. Southeast elevation, facing northwest.

Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 31

NATIONAL, CALIFORNIA, AND LOCAL EVALUATION
To be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) a resource must:

A/1. be associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history;
B/2. be associated with the lives of significant persons of the past; C/3. embody distinctive characteristics of type, period, or method of construction or represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic value, or represent a significant and distinguishable entity those components may lack individual distinction; or
D/4. yielded or may likely yield information important in history or prehistory.

Pursuant to Mitigation Measure CUL-1, 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway, 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway, and 6605 E. Pacific Coast Highway were evaluated under local guidelines for potential listing as a city Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District (City of Long Beach Municipal Code (LBMC) Chapter 2.63 Cultural Heritage Commission; City of Long Beach 2015) (Appendix C).

As defined in LBMC Chapter 2.63, 2.63.020 Definitions:
• Landmark: means any property or improvement, manmade or natural that has special historical, cultural, archeological, architectural or aesthetic value as part of the heritage of the City, State, or United States and has been designated as a Landmark pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter.
• Landmark District: means any grouping of related properties that has a special historical, cultural, archeological, architectural or aesthetic value as part of the heritage of the City, State or United States and has been designated as a Landmark District pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter.

CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION OF LOCAL LANDMARKS AND LOCAL

LANDMARK DISTRICTS
A cultural resource qualifies for designation as a Landmark if it retains integrity and represents one (1) or more of the following criteria:

A. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of the City's history; or
B. It is associated with the lives of persons significant in the City's past; or Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 32
C. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or it represents the work of a master or it possesses high artistic values; or D. yielded or may likely yield information important in history or prehistory.

A group of cultural resources qualify for designation as a Landmark District if it retains integrity as a whole and meets the following criteria:

A. The grouping represents a significant and distinguishable entity that is significant within a historic context.

B. A minimum sixty percent (60%) of the properties within the boundaries of the proposed landmark district qualify as a contributing property.

In addition to having significance using the above criteria, resources must have “integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association” to the period of significance (36 CFR Part 60). The period of significance is the date or span of time within which significant events transpired, or significant individuals made their important contributions.

Integrity is the authenticity of a historical resource’s physical identity as evidenced by the survival of characteristics or historic fabric that existed during the resource’s period of significance. Alterations to a resource or changes in its use over time may have historical, cultural, or architectural significance. Simply, resources must retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance.
6615 E. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
Theme: Commercial Development
Period of Significance: 1979-present
Criteria A/1, Criteria B/2, and Local Criteria A and B
Is this resource associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history? Is this resource associated with the lives of significant persons in our past?
This building was designed to function as a multi-tenant office building and has maintained its function for over 40 years. A search of various advertisements, newspaper articles, and local business listings show this location is associated with recognizable company names such as Merrill Lynch and Century 21, however, this location represented only branch offices of these companies and were not associated with either their establishment or significant development. In light of this research, this building is not associated with events or individuals significant to history. Therefore, 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway is recommended not eligible for listing on the NRHP under Criteria A or B or the CRHR under Criteria 1 or 2, or for listing as a Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District under Local Criteria A or B.

Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 33
Criteria C/3 and Local Criterion C
Does this resource embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction?
This two-story commercial building is an example of the Modern Style with Shed style elements.

The build range of Shed style throughout the United States was between ca. 1965-1990. The overall exterior condition of the building is well maintained, however 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway is not an exemplary representation of a distinctive type, period, or method of construction. The associated architectural firm which designed this building was Charles Kober Associates. While the firm undertook multiple distinguished architectural projects, 6615 E.

Pacific Coast Highway is not an exemplary representation of their work. Therefore, this building is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion C or the CRHR under Criterion 3or for listing as a Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District under Local Criterion C.

Criteria D/4 and Local Criterion D
Has this building yielded or is it likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory?
Criterion D/4 is most often applied to archaeological sites and districts but can also apply to buildings, structures, and/or objects. This building does not exhibit a local variation of a standard design or construction technique that can yield important information (such as construction expertise or availability of local materials). Due to a lack of significance, this resource is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion D or the CRHR under Criterion 4or for listing as a Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District under Local Criterion D.
6621 E. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
Theme: Commercial Development
Period of Significance: 1980-present
Criteria A/1, Criteria B/2, Local Criteria A and B
Is this resource associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history? Is this resource associated with the lives of significant persons in our past?
This building was designed to function as a multi-tenant office building and has maintained its function for over 40 years. A search of various advertisements, newspaper articles, and local business listings show this location is associated with recognizable names such as the U.S.

Census Bureau, Conroy’s Flowers, and 1-800-Flowers, however, this location represented branch offices of these entities/companies (some short term) and were not associated with either their establishment or significant development. In light of this research, this building is not associated Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 34
with events or individuals significant to history. Therefore, 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway is recommended not eligible for listing on the NRHP under Criteria A or B or the CRHR under Criteria 1 or 2or for listing as a Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District under Local Criteria A or B.

Criteria C/3 and Local Criterion C
Does this resource embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction?
This two-story commercial building is an example of the Modern Style with Shed style elements.

The build range of Shed style throughout the United States was between ca. 1965-1990. The overall exterior condition of the building is well maintained, however 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway is not an exemplary representation of a distinctive type, period, or method of construction. The associated architectural firm which designed this building was Charles Kober Associates. While the firm undertook multiple distinguished architectural projects, 6621 E.

EL TORITO (6605 E. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY)
Theme: Commercial Development
Period of Significance: 1978-2017
Criteria A/1 and Local Criteria A
Is this resource associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history?
Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 35
By the time this restaurant was officially opened in 1978, over 20 additional El Torito locations were in operation within the United States. The context of this location within the overall history of the franchise is in the middling period of the company’s height of success. This location was constructed decades after the early founding of El Torito and it did not contribute to the early expansion of the company. Therefore, this building is recommended not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Place (NRHP) under Criterion A or the CRHR under Criterion 1 or for listing as a Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District under Local Criterion A.

Criteria B/2 and Local Criteria B
Is this resource associated with the lives of significant persons in our past? This building was constructed in 1977/1978 and while the El Torito franchise is associated with respected restauranteur and businessman Larry J. Cano, this location was not associated with Mr.

Cano’s early years of business development or any significant event in his life. In addition, this restaurant is not associated with any other person or persons considered significant to national, state, or local history. Therefore, this building is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion B or the CRHR under Criterion 2or for listing as a Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District under Local Criterion B.

Criteria C/3 and Local Criteria C
Does this resource embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction?
This building is a combination of multiple architectural styles including Mission Revival, Spanish Revival, and some Modern style elements. This building was designed by the El Torito parent company and intended to exude an idealized corporate imagining of a Spanish Mission/ Mexican Revival aesthetic. While an interesting design, this building is not a true representation of any of the architectural styles used in its design nor does it reflect the material, techniques, or workmanship typically associated with those styles. Therefore, this building is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion C or the CRHR under Criterion 3or for listing as a Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District under Local Criterion C.

Criteria D/4 and Local Criteria D
Has this building yielded or is it likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory?
Criteria D/4 is most often applied to archaeological sites and districts but can also apply to buildings, structures, and/or objects. This building does not exhibit a local variation of a standard design or construction technique that can yield important information (such as construction expertise or availability of local materials). Due to a lack of significance, this resource is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion D or the CRHR under Criterion 4 Or for listing as a Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District under Local Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 36
Criterion D.

Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 37

RECOMMENDATIONS
The two office buildings within the Long Beach Marketplace Office Park; 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway (built 1979) located within the Project area and 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway (built 1980) located adjacent to the Project area are recommended not eligible for listing at the local, state, or national level due to a lack of significance. The vacant El Torito restaurant (6605 E.

Pacific Coast Highway) located adjacent to the Project area is also recommended not eligible for listing at the local, state, or national level due to lack of significance. No further work is required regarding the historic analysis of 6695 E. Pacific Coast Highway. This analysis satisfies the requirements set forth by Mitigation Measure CUL-1 and therefore implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-2 is not necessary.

No further work is recommended.

Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 38

REFERENCES CITED
Barrows, H.D.
1899 Abel Stearns. Published in the Annual Publication of the Historical Society of Southern California and Pioneer Register, Los Angeles. Vol. 4, No. 3 (1899), pp. 197-199.

Charles Kober Associates
1978 “6615 E. PCH”. The Marketplace Office Park Long Beach California Site Plan. Building 1A. Plans provided by the City of Long Beach.

City of Long Beach
2015 “Chapter 2.63 Cultural Heritage Commission” City of Long Beach Municipal Code.

Title-Administration and Personnel. Supp. No. 41, Update 1. Copy available at:
https://library.municode.com/ca/long_beach/codes/municipal_code?nodeId=TIT2ADPE_ CH2.63CUHECO_2.63.010PU.

FrameFinder
1977 “Flight TG_7700, Frame 12-20”. Photo taken February 1, 1977. Available at:
https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/. Accessed: February 27, 2023. 1980 “Flight AMI_OC_80, Frame 9924”. Photo taken February 9, 1980. Available at:
https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/. Accessed: February 27, 2023.

Golden Rain Seal Beach Leisure World News, The
1980 “Brokerage Firm Opens New Long Beach Office.” Published: Thursday, November 13, 1980. Page 11. Available at: https://www.newspapers.com/image/836147982. Accessed:

February 24, 2023.
1982 “Bateman Eichler, Hill Richards Incorporated”. Published: Thursday, January 14, 1982.

Page 15 ends

February 23, 2023.
1989 No title. Published: Thursday, April 6, 1989. Page 6. Available at:
https://www.newspapers.com/image/836150587. Accessed: February 24, 2023.

Hernandez, Greg
2000 “Acapulco Chain Owner to Buy El Torito”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published: Wednesday, March 29, 2000. Page 145. Available at:
https://www.newspapers.com/image/161480882. Accessed: February 24, 2023.

LSA
2017 Historic Resources Assessment: California State University, Long Beach Technology Park Phase III Project. Prepared for: Christopher Koontz, Advance Planning Officer Long Beach Development Services/Planning Bureau.

Los Angeles Times, The
1981a “Beat the April 15th deadline to save on 1980 income taxes”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 39
Angeles, California). Published: Sunday, April 12, 1981. Page 104. Available at:
https://www.newspapers.com/image/387164627. Accessed: February 23, 2023. 1981b “Purchasing Secretary”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published:

Sunday, February 8, 1981. Page 260. Available at:
https://www.newspapers.com/image/387621492. Accessed: February 24, 2023. 1989 “Census Bureau Recruits Workers for Next Year’s National Survey”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published: Thursday, May 4, 1989. Page 56. Available at: https://www.newspapers.com/image/405394917. Accessed: February 24, 2023. 1992 “Our Business is Really Blossoming”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California).

Published: Sunday, July 12, 1992. Page 10. Accessed: February 23, 2023. 1994a “People in Real Estate: CoastCo Real Estate opens office at the Marketplace in Long Beach.” The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published: Sunday, July 24, 1994. Available at: https://www.newspapers.com/image/159924109. Accessed: February 23, 2023.
1994b “National Marketing Promotions Director”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published: Monday, November 14, 1994. Page 84. Available at:
https://www.newspapers.com/image/159155788. Accessed: February 24, 2023. 2001 “People in Real Estate”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published:

Sunday, April 15, 2001. Page 112. Available at:
https://www.newspapers.com/image/188172046. Accessed: February 24, 2023. 2005 “Escrow education”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published:

Sunday, June 5, 2005. Page 221. Available at:
https://www.newspapers.com/image/192844565. Accessed: February 23, 2023.

NETROnline
1952 Historic Aerials. Available at: https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer#. Accessed:

February 27, 2023.
1972 Historic Aerials. Available at: https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer#. Accessed:

February 27, 2023.
1988 Historic Aerials. Available at: https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer#. Accessed:

February 27, 2023.

Placeworks
2017 “Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program”. Southern Area Specific Plan for City of Long Beach. Prepared for City of Long Beach.

Reuters
2000 “Company News; Prandium Plans to Sell El Torito Chain of Restaurants”. The New York Times. Published: March 29, 2000. Available at:
https://www.nytimes.com/2000/03/29/business/company-news-prandium-plans-to-sell-eltorito-chain-of-restau rants.html. Accessed: March 14, 2023.

Sapphos Environmental, Inc.
2009 City of Long Beach: Historic Context Statement. Prepared for: City of Long Beach Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 40
Department of Development Services. Copy available at:
https://www.laconservancy.org/sites/default/files/files/issues/2009%20historic%20contex t%20for%20city.pdf. Accessed January 16, 2020.

Schipske, Gerrie
2011 Images of America: Early Long Beach. Arcadia Publishing, Charleston.

USGS Historical Topographic Map Explorer
1896 Downey. [map]. U.S. Geological Survey.1:62500, Topographic Quadrangle Map, Downey, CA, 1896. Available at: https://livingatlas.arcgis.com/topoexplorer/index.html.

Accessed: February 27, 2023.
1925 Long Beach. [map]. U.S. Geological Survey. 1:24000. Topographic Quadrangle Map.

Long Beach, CA. 1925. Available at:
https://livingatlas.arcgis.com/topoexplorer/index.html. Accessed: February 27, 2023. 1942 Downey. [map]. U.S. Geological Survey. 1:62500. Topographic Quadrangle Map.

Downey, CA. 1942. Available at: https://livingatlas.arcgis.com/topoexplorer/index.html.

Accessed: February 27, 2023.

Woo, Elaine
2014 “Larry J. Cano dies at 90; founder of El Torito restaurants”. The Los Angeles Times.

Online article. Published: December 16, 2014. Available at:
https://www.latimes.com/local/obituaries/la-me-larry-cano-20141217-story.html.

Accessed: March 14, 2023.

XPERIENCE Restaurant Group
2023 “Company”. Available at: https://www.xperiencerg.com/company/. Accessed: March 14, 2023.

Historic Built Environment Evaluation for the Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project Cogstone 41
APPENDIX A. QUALIFICATIONS
Cogstone 42

MOLLY VALASIK
Program Manager and Principal Archaeologist

EDUCATION
2009 M.A., Anthropology, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio 2006 B.A., Anthropology, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

SUMMARY QUALIFICATIONS
Ms. Valasik serves as Cogstone’s CEO and CFO and helps guide the vision and direction of Cogstone. She has been with the company since 2009 and has helped transition Cogstone from sole ownership to multiple owners with an active board of directors. Ms. Valasik is a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA) with more than 14 years of experience. She is a skilled professional who is well-versed in the compliance procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and Sections 106 and 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and regularly prepares cultural resources assessment reports for a variety of federal, state, and local agencies throughout California. Ms. Valasik has managed a variety of projects at Cogstone in the water, transportation, energy, development, and federal sectors. She meets the qualifications required by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. She is accepted as a Principal Investigator for prehistoric archaeology by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and is listed as a Principal Investigator on Cogstone’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Cultural Resource Use Permit.

SELECTED PROJECTS
City of San Juan Capistrano, In-N-Out 31791 Del Obispo Street, San Juan Capistrano, CA. Cogstone conducted a Historic Resources Project Review to determine potential impacts to historical resources resulting from the proposed construction of a 3,897 square foot In-N-Out Restaurant with a drive-through and related site improvements on two adjoining lots totaling 1.77 acres. Cogstone’s services included a cultural resources records search, built environment survey, updates to existing California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 (DPR 523) forms, National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligibility assessments, and preparation of a Historic Resource Project Review Report. Cogstone also reviewed design plans of the proposed commercial building for compatibility with the NRHP-listed Blas Aguilar Adobe and attended an in-person public hearing with the public and the San Juan Capistrano Cultural Heritage Commission. The assessment was completed in compliance with the requirements of CEQA with the City of San Juan Capistrano as the lead agency under CEQA. Project Manager. 2021
Character Defining Features (CDF) Assessment for Contributing Buildings and Structures at Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, SC. Cogstone assessed CDFs for contributing resources to the Mainside Historic District and individually eligible historic properties at Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, South Carolina. The study was conducted to determine which elements of the buildings and structures of the historic district were CDFs for the elements that are eligible for the NRHP. The assessment satisfied Section 110 of the NHPA and will assist the United States Marine Corps with the management of their historic properties. Prime.

Project Manager and Principal Archaeologist. 2017-2020
San Gabriel River Commuter Bikeway and Big Dalton Wash Commuter Bikeway, City of Baldwin Park, Los Angeles County, CA. Cogstone conducted a cultural and historic built environment resources assessment to determine the potential impacts to cultural and historical resources for the proposed construction of approximately five miles of new bikeway/pedestrian pathway. Services included pedestrian surveys, records searches, a Sacred Lands File search from the NAHC, preparation of DPR 523 forms, NRHP eligibility assessments, and reporting. The project required a Section 408 permit from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) due to the proximity of the federally managed San Gabriel River and tributaries. All work was completed in compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA. The City of Baldwin Park acted as lead agency under CEQA. Sub to Infrastructure Engineering Corporation. Project Manager. 2020-2021 Cogstone 43

SHANNON LOPEZ
Architectural Historian

EDUCATION
2022 Certificate in Historic Preservation, The Boston Architectural College, Boston Courses included American Architecture: Colonial Period to Post Modernism, Historic Preservation Philosophy and Practice, and Architectural Materials Conservation 2018 M.A., History (with an emphasis in Architecture), California State University, Fullerton All courses taken by Ms. Lopez during her graduate program were under the public history concentration and were tailored by her professors to focus on American and world architectural themes. Specifically, two courses in history of world architecture were taken from the College of Arts, Art Department in collaboration with the History Department.
2012 B.A., History, Minor in Asian-Pacific Studies, California State University, Dominguez Hills

SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS
Ms. Lopez is a qualified Historian, and she meets the Secretary of the Interior’s (SOI) Standards and Guidelines for Architectural History. The SOI Professional Qualifications Standards for Architectural History state:

The minimum professional qualifications in architectural history are a graduate degree in architectural history, art history, historic preservation, or closely related field with coursework in American architectural history or a bachelor's degree in architectural history, art history, historic preservation or closely related field plus one of the following:

1. At least two years of full-time experience in research, writing, or teaching in American architectural history or restoration architecture with an academic institution, historical organization or agency, museum, or other professional institution; or

2. Substantial contribution through research and publication to the body of scholarly knowledge in the field of American architectural history.

Ms. Lopez has earned both a Bachelor’s degree and a Master’s degree in History which is a “closely related field” with her Master’s degree focused on American and world Architecture. Subsequently, Ms. Lopez completed a certificate in Historic Preservation which included additional American architectural history coursework.

From 2020 to 2022, Ms. Lopez participated in a mentorship program under Ms. Virginia Adams who is a Senior Architectural Historian at the Public Archaeology Laboratory, Inc. in Pawtucket, Rhode Island. Ms. Adams spent time above and beyond a typical mentorship to ensure Ms. Lopez had a thorough understanding of relevant topics.

Ms. Adams manages architectural history and multi-disciplinary planning and regulatory projects involving historic buildings, structures, landscapes, and archaeological resources for public and private clients throughout the Northeast and California. She received her B.A. and M.A. from Brown University and teaches at The Boston Architectural College in the Master of Historic Preservation program.

Ms. Lopez’s has five years of experience as an Architectural Historian at Cogstone Resource Management. She has completed numerous projects which required extensive research, writing, and evaluation of American architecture primarily in the state of California. Ms. Lopez’s degrees, certifications, and experience both meets and exceeds the minimum requirement of Option 1 for the SOI standards for architectural history. The California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) which operates through the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) approves of Ms. Lopez’s qualification and she is currently listed as a principal investigator on the CHRIS Consultant’s List for both History and Architectural History and is also listed as a principal investigator on Cogstone’s Cultural Resources Use Permit (CRUP) from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Ms. Lopez is experienced in Architectural History research and surveys along with photo documentation and recording of built environment resources for local, state, and federal projects. Ms. Lopez is acknowledged as an approved Architectural Historian by Caltrans. She has extensive knowledge with Native American consultation, consultation with city and county historical societies, and analysis of primary and secondary sources. Additionally, she is an approved Reader at the Huntington Library by the Los Angeles Office of Historic Resources.

Cogstone 44

SELECTED EXPERIENCE
Chico Very High Frequency Omni-Directional Range Project, City of Chico, Butte County, CA. Cogstone conducted a cultural resources assessment to identify potential impacts to archaeological and historical resources from the Chico (CIC) Very High Frequency Omni Directional Range (VOR) Project which will require the demolition, removal, and disposal of the CIC VOR building, stairs, stoops, roof mounted antennas, and dome. The building’s foundation including eight concrete pilings, two steel girders, a concrete pull box, a steel distance measuring equipment (DME) pole, and a metal equipment cabinet will also be demolished. The United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) Volpe National Transportation System Center (Volpe Center) provided environmental compliance support for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to meet their obligations for historic properties identification requirements under 36 CFR 800.4 in Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) which included Cogstone’s assessment and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligibility recommendations for the one historic building that was constructed in 1966.

Cogstone’s assessment included a cultural records search from the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), a Sacred Lands File search from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), an archaeological reconnaissance and built environment survey, and evaluation of one historic building on California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 (DPR 523) forms. Cogstone prepared a Cultural Resources Assessment Report documenting the findings of the study. Prime. Architectural Historian. 2021 Priest Valley Very High Frequency Omni-Directional Range Project, Priest Valley, Monterey and Fresno Counties, CA. Cogstone conducted a cultural resources assessment to identify potential impacts to cultural resources from the Priest Valley (ROM) VOR Project which will consist of the demolition, removal, and disposal of the facility (recorded as the Charley Mountain Radio Facility P-10-007062/P-27-003635). The USDOT Volpe Center provided environmental compliance support for the FAA to meet their obligations for historic properties identification requirements under 36 CFR 800.4 in Section 106 of the NHPA. Cogstone’s assessment was conducted under the BLM CRUP number CA-19-07 and BLM Fieldwork Authorization No.

FWA# CA-19-07-2022-190/01. Cogstone’s assessment included a cultural records search from the CHRIS, a Sacred Lands File search from the NAHC, an intensive pedestrian and built environment survey, and updated the evaluation and site record for one historic facility on DPR 523 forms. Cogstone prepared separate Archaeological and Historical Resources Assessment Reports documenting the findings of the study due to changes in scope during the Project. Prime. Architectural Historian. 2021 Development of Management Plans for Historic Properties at Marine Corps Recruit Depot (MCRD) Parris Island, Beaufort County, SC. Cogstone prepared multiple management plans for historic properties located at MCRD Parris Island in order to assist in the day-to-day management of numerous and diverse cultural resources within its installation boundaries including key resources such as the Santa Elena National Historic Landmark, the Mainside Historic District, and four historic African American cemeteries and to fulfill the United States Marine Corp’s Section 110 of the NHPA requirements. Specific deliverables included an Integrated Cultural Resources Management Plan (ICRMP) Update for 2020-2025, Character Defining Features Assessment of Historic Properties, Management and Treatment Plan for Historic Buildings and Structures, and a Determination of Eligibility for Four Historic Cemeteries. The management plans were met with praise from MCRD Parris Island and the South Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) for their usefulness in the day-to-day management of their cultural resources. Deliverables were completed on time and within budget.

All were reviewed and accepted by South Carolina SHPO. Prime. Architectural Historian 2017-2022 Character Defining Features (CDF) Assessment for Contributing Buildings and Structures at Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, SC. Cogstone assessed CDFs for contributing resources to the Mainside Historic District and individually eligible historic properties at Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, South Carolina. The study was conducted to determine which elements of the buildings and structures of the historic district were CDFs for the elements that are eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The assessment satisfied Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and will assist the United States Marine Corps with the management of their historic properties. Prime. Architectural Historian. 2017- 2020.

Rhode Island Historical Resource Archive of Melville Naval Historic District and United States Naval Hospital, Newport Historic District, Naval Station Newport, RI. Cogstone completed Rhode Island Cogstone 45
Historical Resources Archive (RIHRA) documentation of the Melville Naval Historic District and the United States Naval Hospital Newport Historic District, at Naval Station (NAVSTA) Newport, Newport, Rhode Island.

Prime. Architectural Historian. 2018
New Cuyama Dump Sites 1, 2, and 3, BLM Bakersfield Office, Santa Barbara County, CA. The Project involved identifying archaeological and historical resources present within three illegal dump sites on BLM land. This study included an assessment of the historic potential of dump refuse and NRHP eligibility recommendations for debris demonstrating affirmative evidence for an age of greater than 45 years. A Class III Cultural Resources survey was conducted and included an intensive-level pedestrian survey of the Area of Potential Effect (APE) with no larger than ten-meter-wide transects when used. Smaller transects were used in narrower areas of the APE and during investigations of newly identified archaeological sites and isolates. A total of three historic trash scatters were identified during the survey and a total of four historic isolates were identified. These resources were recorded on DPR 523 forms. No archaeological sites or isolates were identified. No artifacts were collected. Cogstone was able to meet the scheduled deadlines for the Project and completed the work within the budget. The deliverables were accepted by the BLM without revisions. Prime.

Historian. 2020-2021
San Gabriel River Commuter Bikeway and Big Dalton Wash Commuter Bikeway, City of Baldwin Park, Los Angeles County, CA. Cogstone conducted a cultural and historic built environment resources assessment to determine the potential impacts to cultural and historical resources for the proposed construction of approximately five miles of new bikeway/pedestrian pathway. Services included pedestrian surveys, records searches, a Sacred Lands File search from the NAHC, preparation of DPR 523 forms, NRHP eligibility assessments, and reporting. The project required a Section 408 permit from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) due to the proximity of the federally managed San Gabriel River and tributaries. All work was completed in compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA. The City of Baldwin Park acted as lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Sub to Infrastructure Engineering Corporation.

Historian. 2020-2021
Well 28 Project, City of Orange, Orange County, CA. Cogstone conducted a cultural and paleontological resources assessment to determine the potential impacts to cultural, historic built environment, and paleontological resources for the proposed construction of a new well and pumping station. Cogstone conducted records searches, a built environment survey, background research, and prepared a final report supporting the IS/MND. The study was completed in compliance with CEQA and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties. The City of Orange acted as lead agency under CEQA. Sub to EDP Solutions, Inc. Architectural Historian. 2020
Del Mar Heights School Rebuild Project, City of Del Mar, San Diego County, CA. Cogstone conducted a study to determine the eligibility of the built environment resources for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) for the proposed demolishment of an existing building. Services included a pedestrian survey, records search, background research, and the preparation of a historical review report. Sub to PlaceWorks. Architectural Historian. 2020
141st and Normandie Townhomes Project, City of Gardena, Los Angeles County, CA. Cogstone identified and evaluated the potential impacts to cultural, historic built environment, and paleontological resources for the proposed construction of 50 new, three-story townhomes, which will range in size from 1,252 to 1,689 square feet. Services included pedestrian survey, built environment evaluation, records searches, Sacred Lands File search from the NAHC, background research, and reporting. The project was completed in compliance with the requirements of CEQA with the City of Gardena acting as the lead agency under CEQA. Sub to De Novo Planning. Architectural Historian. 2020
Los Angeles Harbor College, City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, CA. Cogstone conducted a study to determine the potential impacts to cultural and historic built environment resources for the proposed demolition, renovation, and construction at the college. Three of the building scheduled for demolition were considered historic in age and required evaluation under CEQA. Cogstone conducted a records search, historical society outreach, a pedestrian survey, and produced a Historic Resources Evaluation Report. Sub to PlaceWorks.

Architectural Historian. 2020
Cogstone 46
737 S. Oxford Ave. Apartments Project, City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, CA. The purpose of this study was to determine the potential effects to cultural, historic built environment, and paleontological resources resulting from the construction of a new seven-story, 92-unit apartment building with a single-level subterranean parking garage. The project area was open ranching and agricultural lands until development began in the early 20th century. By 1918, two single-family homes with detached garages were present on the property with nearly two dozen homes around the project area as well a handful of empty lots. Cogstone conducted a survey, documented the building proposed for demolition within the project area, and prepared a cultural resources assessment. Sub to Private Developer. Architectural Historian. 2018 20000 Skyline Boulevard, Redwood City, San Mateo County, CA. Cogstone conducted a built environment evaluation to assist the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District in determining whether selected buildings on one of their properties are historic in age and whether they are eligible for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources. Cogstone conducted a cultural records search, two intensive level pedestrian surveys, and ultimately determined no mitigation was required due to lack of significance. Prime. Architectural Historian. 2019
3800 W. 6th Street Mixed-Used Development, Koreatown, Los Angeles County, CA. The project proposed to construct a 21-story mixed-use development with two levels of underground parking. Cogstone conducted a paleontological and cultural resources assessment. Tasks included records search, built environment survey, resource recording, and technical report. Conducted built environment survey, recorded building, and conducted viewshed impact analysis. Sub to Gateway Secured Regional Center. Architectural Historian. 2018 Fire Camp 8 Helistop Improvement Project, National Park Service, Los Angeles County, CA. The project involved the construction of a 6-inch diameter, 1,807-foot long water pipe to supply water to three fire hydrants.

The route ran through the historic age Nike Missile site – LA-78 L&A. Cogstone conducted an intensive survey, photographed and recorded the historic features and evaluated the site for its potential eligibility for NRHP eligibility listing in accordance with Section 106 procedures. This was part of an on-call contract with the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADPW). Sub to Aspen Environmental Group. Assistant Architectural Historian. 2018

HISTORIC RESOURCE EVALUATION REPORTS
Glassell Street at Palmyra Avenue Traffic Signal Installation Project, City of Orange, Orange County, California.

Prepared for the City of Orange. 2022 In partnership with Ms. Virginia Adams of PAL, Cogstone prepared a Historic Resource Evaluation Report (HRER)for Caltrans District 12 to determine if the installation of a two phase traffic signal, located with the boundaries of the NRHP listed Old Towne Orange Historic District would negatively impact the integrity of the District. Cogstone conducted an intensive site survey, consultation with local historical societies and city agencies, prepared new and updated DPR 523 forms, and drafted a HRER .

Architectural Historian. 2021-2022.

Cultural Resources Assessment Report for the Linbrook Villas Project, City of Anaheim, Orange County, California.

Prepared for the City of Anaheim. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the Linbrook Villas Project (Project) had the potential to impact cultural resources located within the project area. Cogstone conducted an intensive pedestrian survey, historical society consultation, intensive archival research, and prepared a cultural assessment report and associated DPR 523 forms. Architectural Historian. 2021.

Historical Resource Assessment for the Santa Ana River Levee Stabilization Project, Riverside County, California.

Prepared for County of Riverside, Flood Control and Water Conservation District. This study was conducted to determine the potential impacts to historical resources during the Santa Ana River Levee Stabilization Project (Project), located in Riverside County and San Bernardino, California. Cogstone surveyes and documented the segment of the levee to be impacted by the project, conducted consultation with local historical societies, museums, and various county agencies. Final deliverables included a Historical Resource assessment report and associated DPR 523 forms. 2021.

Cogstone 47
Historic Resources Evaluation Report for the McBean Park Drive Bridge over Auburn Ravine Bridge Replacement Project, City of Lincoln, Placer County, California. Prepared for Caltrans District 3 and the City of Lincoln. 2021. The project involved the replacement of the existing bridge (Bridge 19C0254) on McBean Park Drive, which was formerly State Route (SR) 193, over the Auburn Ravine. Cogstone conducted records search, built environment survey, resource recording and technical report. Architectural Historian. 2022.

Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment for the Palmyra Cemetery Project, City of Orange, Orange County, California. Prepared for the City of Orange. Cogstone conducted a cultural and historic built environment resource assessment to determine the potential impacts to cultural and paleontological resources resulting from the renovation of the existing on-site building and redevelopment of the project area. To meet CEQA compliance Cogstone prepared an onsite survey, historical society consultation, in depth research, prepared a cultural and paleontological assessment report and associated DPR 523 forms. Architectural Historian. 2021.2021
Cultural Resources Assessment for the San Gabriel River Commuter Bikeway and Big Dalton Wash Commuter Bikeway Projects, City of Baldwin Park, Los Angeles County, California. Prepared for the City of Baldwin Park. 2021. Cogstone conducted a cultural and historic built environment resources assessment to determine the potential impacts to cultural and historical resources for the proposed construction of approximately five miles of new bikeway/pedestrian pathway. Services included pedestrian surveys, records searches, a Sacred Lands File search from the NAHC, preparation of DPR 523 forms, NRHP eligibility assessments, and reporting. The project required a Section 408 permit from the USACE due to the proximity of the federally managed San Gabriel River and tributaries. All work performed complied with Section 106 of the NHPA. The City of Baldwin Park acted as lead agency under CEQA. Sub to Infrastructure Engineering Corporation. Architectural Historian. 2020-2021.

Century Villages at Cabrillo, City of Long Beach, Los Angeles County, CA. This Project involved the demolition of 215 dwelling units, 20,000 square feet of administrative and supportive services, and 10,000 square feet of amenities. Cogstone conducted a cultural and historic resources records search, a field visit, evaluation of the historic resources, and produced a built environment report. Conducted research, evaluation and co-author.

Architectural Historian. 2019 –2021
Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment Report for the 4416 Azusa Canyon Road Project, City of Irwindale, Los Angeles County, California. Prepared for the City of Irwindale. Cogstone conducted a cultural and historic built environment resource assessment to determine the potential impacts to cultural and paleontological resources resulting from the demolition of the existing on-site building and redevelopment of the project area. To meet CEQA compliance Cogstone prepared an onsite survey, historical society consultation, in depth research, prepared a cultural and paleontological assessment report and associated DPR 523 forms. Architectural Historian. 2021.

National Register of Historic Places Eligibility Assessment of Four Historic Cemeteries, Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, South Carolina. Prepared for Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Mid-Atlantic Region. Cogstone prepared a management plan for MCRD Parris Island in order to assist in the day-to-day management of the four historic African American cemeteries and to fulfill the United States Marine Corp’s Section 110 of the NHPA requirements. Specific deliverables included an Integrated Cultural Resources Management Plan (ICRMP) Update for 2020-2025. The management plans were met with praise from MCRD Parris Island and the South Carolina State .istoric Preservation Office (SHPO) for their usefulness in the day-today management of their cultural resources. Deliverables were completed on time and within budget. All were reviewed and accepted by South Carolina SHPO. Prime. Architectural Historian. 2017-2022 Historic Resources Evaluation Report for the Faith Home Road/Garner Road Project, Stanislaus County, California. Prepared for Stanislaus County Department of Public Works and Caltrans District 10. 2020.

Cogstone identified and evaluated cultural, paleontological, and historic resources present in or adjacent to the construction of a four-lane one-mile expressway. Cogstone produced an Archaeological Survey Report (ASR), Historic Properties Survey Report (HPSR), Historic Resources Evaluation Report (HRER), and Paleontological Identification and Evaluation Report (PIR-PER). Services included intensive level pedestrian surveys, mapping, Cogstone 48
records searches, DPR forms, and Native American consultation. Sub to Environmental Intelligence.

Architectural Historian. 2019.

Condition Assessment for 6101 Wilshire Blvd., Miracle Mile District, City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, California. Prepared for Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. 2020. On behalf of METRO, Cogstone was approved to reassess the exterior façade of Johnie’s Coffee Shop located on Wilshire Boulevard. The purpose of this assessment was to document the cracks of the current building during construction of the underground subway. Cogstone conducted a thorough site visit and prepared a condition assessment report. Architectural Historian and Monitor. 2018.

Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment for the Well 28 Project, City of Orange, Orange County, California. Prepared for the City of Orange. 2020. Cogstone conducted a cultural and paleontological resources assessment to determine the potential impacts to cultural and paleontological resources for the proposed construction of a new well and pumping station. Cogstone conducted records searches, a built environment survey, background research, and prepared a final report supporting the IS/MND. The study was completed in compliance with CEQA and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties. The City of Orange acted as lead agency under CEQA. Sub to EDP Solutions, Inc. Architectural Historian. 2020.

Built Environment Evaluation of the Community Baptist Church, Montgomery High School B/Fuze 5052688 Project, City of Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, California. Prepared for Complete Wireless Consulting, Inc. 2018.

Verizon Wireless proposed to install a cell tower and associated equipment located adjacent to two potentially historic buildings. Determined the potential effects to built environmental resources. The evaluation was completed in compliance with CEQA guidelines. Co-author of Built Environment Evaluation, prepared DPR forms. Architectural Historian. 2018.

Updated Crack Propagation Memo for 8423 Wilshire Boulevard, City of Beverly Hills, Los Angeles County, California. Prepared for Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. 2018. On behalf of METRO, Cogstone was approved to reassess the exterior façade of the old Porsche building located on Wilshire Boulevard. The purpose of this reassessment was to document and compare the cracks of the current building during construction of the underground subway with those recorded in a pre-construction survey. Architectural Monitor. 2018.

Cultural Resources Assessment for the Dos Palos Water Treatment Facility, City of Dos Palos, Merced County, California. Prepared for the City of Dos Palos. 2018. The purpose of this study was to determine the potential effects to cultural resources resulting from the proposed development of the Dos Palos Water Treatment Facility, where the Dos Palos’ allotment of water is removed from the California Aqueduct and travels through

17.5 miles of pipeline to the main facility for processing. This project had a federal nexus and required compliance with Section 106 of the Nation Historic Preservation Act. Services included archaeological and historical record searches, Sacred Lands search, pedestrian survey, built environment evaluation of three structures, and the production of a cultural assessment. Sub to QK, Inc. Architectural Historian. 2018

HISTORIC PROPERTY TREATMENT PLANS
Treatment Plan for Four Historic Cemeteries at Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, South Carolina.

Prepared for Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Mid-Atlantic Region. Cogstone prepared a management plan for MCRD Parris Island in order to assist in the day-to-day management of the four historic African American cemeteries and to fulfill the United States Marine Corp’s Section 110 of the NHPA requirements.

Specific deliverables included an Integrated Cultural Resources Management Plan (ICRMP) Update for 2020- 2025. The management plans were met with praise from MCRD Parris Island and the South Carolina State .istoric Preservation Office (SHPO) for their usefulness in the day-to-day management of their cultural resources. Deliverables were completed on time and within budget. All were reviewed and accepted by South Carolina SHPO. Prime. Architectural Historian 2017-2022 Maintenance and Treatment Plan for Historic Buildings and Structures at Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, South Carolina. Prepared for Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Mid-Atlantic Region. Cogstone prepared a management plan for historic properties located at MCRD Parris Island in order to assist in the day- Cogstone 49
to-day management of numerous and diverse cultural resources within its installation boundaries (including the Mainside historic district) in order to fulfill the United States Marine Corp’s Section 110 of the NHPA requirements. Specific deliverables included the Management and Treatment Plan for Historic Buildings and Structures. The management plan was met with praise from MCRD Parris Island and the South Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) for their usefulness in the day-to-day management of their cultural resources. Deliverables were completed on time and within budget. All were reviewed and accepted by South Carolina SHPO. Prime. Architectural Historian 2017-2022.

HISTORIC PROPERTY CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURES ASSESSMENTS Character Defining Features Assessment Report for the Contributing Buildings and Structures at Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, South Carolina. Prepared for Naval Facilities Engineering Command, MidAtlantic Region. Cogstone assessed CDFs for contributing resources to the Mainside Historic District and individually eligible historic properties at Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, South Carolina. The study was conducted to determine which elements of the buildings and structures of the historic district were CDFs for the elements that are eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The assessment satisfied Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and will assist the United States Marine Corps with the management of their historic properties. Prime. Architectural Historian. 2017-2020.

HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDING SURVEY FORMS
U.S. Naval Station Newport, Rhode Island Melville Naval Historic District, Portsmouth, Newport County, Rhode Island Fueling Pier 40. Prepared for Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Mid-Atlantic Region. 2018. This purpose of this project is to produce Rhode Island Historical Resources Archive (RIHRA) documentation of the Melville Naval Historic District, at Naval Station (NAVSTA) Newport, Newport, Rhode Island. Conducted research, form contributor, and assistant Architectural Historian. 2018.

U.S. Naval Station Newport, Rhode Island U.S. Naval Hospital Newport Historic District Newport, Newport County, Rhode Island Main Hospital. Prepared for Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Mid-Atlantic Region. 2018. This purpose of this project is to produce Rhode Island Historical Resources Archive (RIHRA) documentation of the U.S. Naval Hospital Newport Historic District, at Naval Station (NAVSTA) Newport, Newport, Rhode Island. Conducted research, form contributor, and assistant Architectural Historian. 2018.

PUBLICATIONS
Welebaethan-CSUF
The Welebaethan: A Journal of History is published by undergraduate and graduate scholars in the Department of History at California State University, Fullerton (CSUF). It is also the official journal of CSUF’s Theta-Pi Chapter (established 1962) of Phi Alpha Theta (History Honor Society).

In 2018, the Welebaethan published an article by Shannon Lopez titled “The Legacy of the Zanjas”. Ms. Lopez combined and interpreted various primary and secondary sources regarding the history and importance of the first water systems of the City of Los Angeles. The methodology of this piece analyzed the relevance of these systems through the framework of California history, local history and culture, economics, as well as Supreme Court legislation regarding water rights of Southern California. The goal was to connect the importance of these water systems to the growth and development of Los Angeles as a national and international city.

Cogstone 50

LOGAN FREEBERG
GIS Supervisor

EDUCATION
2018 Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Certificate, California State University, Fullerton 2003 B.A., Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara

SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS
Mr. Freeberg has over 19 years of experience in cultural resource management and has extensive experience in field surveying, data recovery, monitoring, and excavation of archaeological and paleontological resources associated with land development projects in the private and public sectors. He has conducted all phases of archaeological work, including fieldwork, laboratory analysis, research, and reporting. Mr. Freeberg also has a strong grounding in conventional field and laboratory methods and is skilled in the use of ArcGIS.

SELECTED EXPERIENCE
Morro Bay Water Facility, City of Morro Bay, San Luis Obispo County, CA. The City of Morro Bay has proposed to construct a new water reclamation facility. Federal funding for the project requires compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), along with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is the federal lead and the City is the state lead agency, with permitting by the California Coastal Commission (CCC), California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and the State Water Resources Control Board. Cogstone conducted Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) trainings for all construction personnel, cultural and paleontological resources monitoring, and completed a Cultural Resources Monitoring Compliance Report upon completion of construction. Sub to Filanc Black & Veatch Joint Venture. GIS Supervisor. 2020-2021 Bell Gardens Water Reservoir Project, City of Bell Gardens, Los Angeles County, CA. Cogstone conducted a cultural and paleontological resources assessment to determine the potential impacts to cultural and paleontological resources during improvements which included a new two-million-gallon reservoir, booster pump station, well to be drilled, and other components. Services included record searches, Sacred Lands File (SLF) search from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), and an intensive-pedestrian survey of the 1.7-acre project area. Sub to Infrastructure Engineers. GIS Supervisor. 2019-2020 Santiago Canyon Estates Fuel Mod Project, unincorporated Orange County, CA. Cogstone conducted a cultural resources assessment to determine the potential for surface cultural resources for compliance with Orange County Fire Authority’s Precise Fuel Modification Plan for zones of the Santiago Canyon Estates Community. Services included a cultural resources records search, SLF search from the NAHC, and a reconnaissance survey. Sub to Fire Safe Council East Orange County Canyons. GIS Supervisor. 2020 State Route 108/Highway 49 and Mackey Ranch Road Intersection Improvements Project, Caltrans District 10, Tuolumne County, CA. The Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians of California (Tribe), in partnership with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), proposed to replace an intersection and convert to a roundabout designed to accommodate forecasted future traffic volumes and provide an alternative access route to the Chicken Ranch Rancheria. Cogstone completed an intensive-level pedestrian survey, CHRIS records search, SLF search from the NAHC, Native American consultation, consulted with local history societies and preservation groups, and produced a Historical Resources Compliance Report and Archaeological Survey Report. Sub to Foothill Associates. GIS Supervisor. 2019-2020 Fresno West Area Specific Plan, City of Fresno, Fresno County, CA. The objective of this study was to review and summarize available information regarding known paleontological, archaeological, and historical resources within the boundaries of the City of Fresno’s West Area Specific Plan. The purpose of the West Area Specific Plan is to implement and refine the City’s vision for the West Area in order to guide future growth and development in the most northwest area of the City. Cogstone’s services included record searches, mapping, and extensive background research. Sub to De Novo Planning. GIS Supervisor. 2019 Cogstone 51
APPENDIX B. HISTORICAL SOCIETY CONSULTATION
Cogstone 52
Cogstone 53
Cogstone 54
Cogstone 55
Cogstone 56
Cogstone 57
Cogstone 58
Cogstone 59
APPENDIX C. CITY OF LONG BEACH: CHAPTER 2.63 CULTURAL

HERITAGE COMMISSION
Cogstone 60
Cogstone 61
Cogstone 62
Cogstone 63
Cogstone 64
Cogstone 65
Cogstone 66
Cogstone 67
Cogstone 68
Cogstone 69
APPENDIX D. DPRS
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 6Z
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
DPR 523A (9/2013) *Required information

Page 1 of 19 ends

P1. Other Identifier:

P2. Location:  Not for Publication  Unrestricted
a. County: Los Angeles
b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Los Alamitos Date: 1981 T; R; NE of SE of Sec; M.D.B.M. c. Address: 6605 E. Pacific Coast Highway City: Long Beach Zip: 90803 d. UTM: Zone: mN
e. Other Locational Data: APN: 7237-020-051
P3a. Description:

This one-story restaurant is part of Marketplace Long Beach (6401-6605 E. Pacific Coast Hwy), an outdoor shopping plaza that consists of various restaurants, shops, a movie theater, and health services. Built in late 1977-early 1978, this building was constructed in a style that draws heavily from both the Mission Revival style (most popular in California from 1890-1920), the Spanish Revival style (1915-1940), and Modern Style. Elements of this combination of styles include the widely overhanging open eaves, red tile roof, stucco wall cladding, asymmetrical façade, and dramatic front door and door surrounds (more typical of the Spanish Revival style).

The footprint of this building is irregular but generally follows a rectangular shape. The main body of this building is one story with a two-story tower centered in the middle of the southwest façade. The rooflines consist of a mixture of gabled, shed, and flat roofs with the flat (more modern-styled) roofline relegated to the middle and back of the building. The gable and shed-styled roofs are clad with red clay tapered mission tiles. Unusual for Mission or Spanish Revival styles but seen with other El Torito locations, the tiles are double or triple-stacked and fixed to each other with thick layers of a combination of mortar and caulking. This gives the roofline a very rough and disheveled appearance, possibly an attempt to give the building the feeling of a much older structure. The exposed wood rafter tails are painted reddish brown and cut in a curved pattern; the features exhibit substantial signs of material decay. See Continuation Sheet.

P3b. Resource Attributes: HP6. 1-3 story commercial building P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other P5b. Description of Photo:

Front (southwest) façade, facing
northeast, taken March 2, 2023
P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Sources:
Historic Prehistoric Both
Ca. 1977/1978 (The Los Angeles
Times 1978)
P7. Owner and Address:

CBRE
P8. Recorded by:

Shannon Lopez; Cogstone Resource
Management; 1518 W. Taft Ave.,
Orange, CA 92865
P9. Date Recorded: March 2, 2023
P10. Survey Type: Intensive pedestrian survey
P11. Report Citation: Historic Built Environment Evaluation For The Long Beach Market Place Mixed-Use Project, City Of Long Beach, Los Angeles County, California. Prepared for Mariana Zimmermann, PlaceWorks. Prepared by Cogstone Resource Management.

Attachments: NONE Location Map Sketch Map Continuation Sheet Building, Structure, and Object Record Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record  Other
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION Trinomial

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information

Page 2 of 19 ends

B1. Historic Name: None
B2. Common Name: El Torito
B3. Original Use: Restaurant
B4. Present Use: Vacant
*B5. Architectural Style: Combination Mission Revival style and Spanish Revival style influences *B6. Construction History:

A review of historic newspaper articles and USDA historic aerials indicates this building was constructed in late 1977-early 1978. An advertisement for employment opportunities published in the Los Angeles Times infers both the opening of the restaurant in 1978 and the building’s consistent occupation by the same business (El Torito) until its closure in 2017. A comparison of a 1980 USDA Aerial to current aerials (provided by Google Maps 2023) shows little to no notable alterations in the building’s footprint.
*B7. Moved? No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features:

B9a. Architect: Not known b. Builder: Not known
*B10. Significance: None Theme: Commercial Development Area: Long Beach, CA Period of Significance: 1978-2017 Property Type: Restaurant Applicable Criteria: None Criteria A/1 and City of Long Beach Local Criteria A
Is this resource associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history?
By the time this restaurant was officially opened in 1978, over 20 additional El Torito locations were in operation within the United States. The context of this location within the overall history of the franchise is in the middling period of the company’s height of success. This location was constructed decades after the early founding of El Torito and it did not contribute to the early expansion of the company. Therefore, this building is recommended not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Place (NRHP) under Criterion A or the CRHR under Criterion 1 or for listing as a Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District under Local Criterion A.

B11. Additional Resource Attributes: None.
*B12. References: See Continuation Sheet.

B13. Remarks: None.
*B14. Evaluator: Shannon Lopez
*Date of Evaluation:

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
LOCATION MAP Trinomial
DPR 523J (9/2013) *Required information

Page 3 of 19 ends

Map Name: Los Alamitos *Scale: 1:24,000 *Date of Map: 1981 State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 4 of 19 ends

BUILDING DESCRIPTION CONTINUED
The exterior of all elevations is clad in stucco. Historically, Mission Revival and Spanish Revival wall surfaces are clad with smooth (or lightly textured) stucco containing smaller aggregate particles. This building’s stucco cladding, however, has a coarse aggregate combined with a more sweeping troweling pattern, giving it a rough textured look.

The main entrance is located at the southwest façade of the two-story tower. Typical of the Spanish Revival style is the more elaborate door and door surrounds which, for this building, include stylized wood-paneled double doors with multi-paned glass panels organized in a pattern reminiscent of the mission-shaped parapet. A decorative wood panel matching the color and style of the double doors is immediately overhead this entrance. Two matching concrete pilasters flank both sides of the doors. These pilasters are clad in plaster, textured, and painted to imitate carved stone blocks (the crumbling plaster at the base of the pilasters reveals the concrete beneath). These faux stone pilasters support a short plastered balcony. A decorative wood paneled false door with a faux stone lintel overhead is at the second story of this tower. The door is flanked by two matching pilasters supporting an ornamental projection designed to imitate the mission’s arched parapet; these features are assumed to be painted or plaster covered concrete. The roofing at the top of the tower is gabled and clad with red Spanish-styled tiles. The exposed rafter tails show notable signs of decay.

Secondary doors intended for staff and emergency exits are located at the northwest and southeast elevations. Two of these doors are wood paneled and the third is flush steel.

BACKGROUND HISTORY

BRIEF HISTORY OF EL TORITO
In 1954, Larry J. Cano (1924-2014) purchased an old Polynesian restaurant in the City of Encino and converted it into a sit-down Mexican restaurant. At the time, Mexican food in the United States was not considered mainstream and, according to a former El Torito chief executive, there was no such thing as casual Mexican dining (Woo 2014). Mr. Cano served as an Air Force captain during the World War and the Korean War.

After his military service, Mr. Cano earned his business degree from USC. He planned to continue his education by attending law school but his summer job as a bartender at the Bali Hali sent him down a new path. Following the death of the owner, Mr. Cano and his wife purchased the restaurant and converted the Polynesian theme to a sit-down Mexican eatery. The first few months were a struggle for the Canos and their restaurant, however, El Torito’s famed fajitas, margaritas, table-side-made guacamole, and staff dressed as charros helped to launch the business into a nationwide chain(Woo 2014). The success of El Torito was such that by the end of the decade additional locations were opened in Hollywood and Toluca Lake. Considered a dining experience, El Torito drew customers from all walks of life including movie stars such as Lana Turner, John Wayne, Gregory Peck, and Michael Jackson (Woo 2014).

El Torito rose to prominence in the 1970s and 1980s. In 1978, Mr. Cano sold his chain of 22 restaurants to W.R. Grace & Co. (later sold to Restaurant Enterprises Group in 1986), however, he remained as company president for ten years.

During his period as president, El Torito expanded across the United States from 22 to 190 locations with annual sales by 1987 exceeding $425 million (Woo 2014). In 1988, Mr. Cano stepped down as company president.

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 5 of 19 ends

Over the following decade, the franchise began its gradual decline. The business was purchased in 1994 by Koo Koo Roo Enterprises (originally Foodmaker and finally renamed to Prandium Inc. in 1999). By 1999, the chain included 101 locations with a total sales of $221 million (Reuters 2000). In 2000, due to substantial debt, Prandium Inc. sold all but six of its El Torito locations to the Long Beach-based Acapulco Acquisition Corp. At the time of the sale, 18 El Torito restaurants were located in Orange County and the company headquarters was based in Irvine, California (Hernandez 2000).

NRHP/CRHR EVALUATION CONTINUED
Criteria B/2 and City of Long Beach Local Criteria B
Is this resource associated with the lives of significant persons in our past? This building was constructed in 1977/1978 and while the El Torito franchise is associated with respected restauranteur and businessman Larry J. Cano, this location was not associated with Mr. Cano’s early years of business development or any significant event in his life. In addition, this restaurant is not associated with any other person or persons considered significant to national, state, or local history. Therefore, this building is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion B or the CRHR under Criterion 2 or for listing as a Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District under Local Criterion B.

Criteria C/3 and City of Long Beach Local Criteria C
Does this resource embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction? This building is a combination of multiple architectural styles including Mission Revival, Spanish Revival, and some Modern style elements. This building was designed by the El Torito parent company and intended to exude an idealized corporate imagining of a Spanish Mission/ Mexican Revival aesthetic. While an interesting design, this building is not a true representation of any of the architectural styles used in its design nor does it reflect the material, techniques, or workmanship typically associated with those styles. Therefore, this building is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion C or the CRHR under Criterion 3 or for listing as a Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District under Local Criterion C.

Criteria D/4 and City of Long Beach Local Criteria D
Has this building yielded or is it likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory?
Criteria D/4 is most often applied to archaeological sites and districts but can also apply to buildings, structures, and/or objects. This building does not exhibit a local variation of a standard design or construction technique that can yield important information (such as construction expertise or availability of local materials). Due to a lack of significance, this resource is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion D or the CRHR under Criterion 4 or for listing as a Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District under Local Criterion D.

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 6 of 19 ends

SURVEY PHOTOGRAPHS CONT.

Survey Photo Key
1 2-4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 7 of 19 ends

1. Front entrance (southwest façade), facing northeast.

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 8 of 19 ends

2. Exposed concrete and painted stucco layers of pilaster flanking the main entrance.

3. False door and balcony immediately overhead main entrance at southwest façade.

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 9 of 19 ends

4. Wood-paneled main entrance door and faux stone pilasters.

5. Overview of northwest elevation, facing southeast.

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 10 of 19 ends

6. Close up of fenestration at the southern half of façade, double chimneys at northeast corner.

7. Oblique elbow and secondary entrance, northern end of the building.

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 11 of 19 ends

8. Projecting unit at the rear of the building (northeast elevation), facing south.

9. Projecting unit at the rear of the building (northeast elevation), facing northwest.

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 12 of 19 ends

10. Overview of southeast elevation, facing northwest.

11. Western end of southeast elevation, facing northwest.

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 13 of 19 ends

Marketplace Long Beach: area highlighted in pink at the southeast corner of E.2nd Street and E. Pacific Coast Highway (map courtesy of the USGS Historic Map Explorer).

El Torito
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 14 of 19 ends

Founder of the El Torito chain, Larry J. Cano (photo by John Gilhooly; Woo 2014).

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 15 of 19 ends

Employment opportunity advertisement (The Los Angeles Times 1978). Note: The façade depicted on this advertisement does not reflect the original design of 6605 E. Pacific Coast Hwy.

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 16 of 19 ends

1989 Event Advertisement (The Golden Rain Seal Beach Leisure World News 1989) State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 17 of 19 ends

Announcement for sale of El Torito by Prandium Inc. to Advantica Restaurant Group. (The Los Angeles Times 2000).

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 18 of 19 ends

1980 USDA aerial photograph of 6605 E. Pacific Coast Hwy (FrameFinder 1980).

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 19 of 19 ends

REFERENCES
FrameFinder
1980 “Flight AMI_OC_80, Frame 9924”. UCSB Library. Available at:
https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/. Accessed: March 2, 2023.

Golden Rain Seal Beach Leisure World News, The
1989 “Action Travel”. The Golden Rain Seal Beach Leisure World News (Seal Beach, California). Published:

Thursday, June 1, 1989. Page 29. Available at: https://www.newspapers.com/image/836151098. Accessed:

February 24, 2023.

Hernandez, Greg
2000 “Acapulco Chain Owner to Buy El Torito”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published:

Wednesday, March 29, 2000. Page 145. Available at: https://www.newspapers.com/image/161480882.

Accessed: February 24, 2023.

Los Angeles Times, The
1978 “Come and Grow with Us”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published: Sunday, July 23, 1978.

Page 536 ends

2000 “Acapulco Chain Owner to Buy El Torito”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published:

Wednesday, March 29, 2000. Page 145. Available at: https://www.newspapers.com/image/161480882.

Accessed: February 24, 2023.

Reuters
2000 “Company News; Prandium Plans to Sell El Torito Chain of Restaurants”. The New York Times. Published:

March 29, 2000. Available at:
https://www.nytimes.com/2000/03/29/business/company-news-prandium-plans-to-sell-el-torito-chain-of-restau rants.html. Accessed: March 14, 2023.

Woo, Elaine
2014 “Larry J. Cano dies at 90; founder of El Torito restaurants”. The Los Angeles Times. Online article. Published:

December 16, 2014. Available at:
https://www.latimes.com/local/obituaries/la-me-larry-cano-20141217-story.html. Accessed: March 14, 2023.

XPERIENCE Restaurant Group
2023 “Company”. Available at: https://www.xperiencerg.com/company/. Accessed: March 14, 2023.

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 6Z
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
DPR 523A (9/2013) *Required information

Page 1 of 19 ends

P1. Other Identifier:

P2. Location:  Not for Publication  Unrestricted
a. County: Los Angeles
b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Los Alamitos Date: 1981 T5S;R12W; NE of Sec11; M.D.B.M. c. Address: 6615-6695 E. Pacific Coast Highway City: Long Beach Zip: 90803 d. UTM: Zone: mN
e. Other Locational Data: APNs: 7237-020-040, 7237-020-041, and 7237-020-050.

P3a. Description:

The Long Beach Marketplace Office Park is comprised of three similarly designed two-story commercial buildings: 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway (built 1979), 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway (built 1980), and 6695 E. Pacific Coast Highway (built 1983). All three buildings are designed in the Modern Style with Shed style elements (common period of Shed style construction was between ca. 1965-1990). For the purpose of this study only 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway and 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway were documented and evaluated for potential eligibility for listing at the national and state level.

P3b. Resource Attributes: HP6. 1-3 story commercial buildings P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other P5b. Description of Photo: Aerial view of
6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway and 6621 E.

Pacific Coast Highway.

P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources:
Historic Prehistoric Both
1979, 1980, and 1983
P7. Owner and Address:

P8. Recorded by:

Shannon Lopez; Cogstone Resource
Management; 1518 W. Taft Ave., Orange, CA
92865
P9. Date Recorded: March 2, 2023
P10. Survey Type: Intensive pedestrian
survey
P11. Report Citation: Historic Built
Environment Evaluation For The Long Beach
Market Place Mixed-Use Project, City Of Long
Beach, Los Angeles County, California.

Prepared for Mariana Zimmermann,
PlaceWorks. Prepared by Cogstone Resource
Management.

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information

Page 2 of 19 ends

B1. Historic Name: None
B2. Common Name: Marketplace Office Park; Long Beach Marketplace Business Park; 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway B3. Original Use: Multi-Tenant Office building
B4. Present Use: Multi-Tenant Office building
*B5. Architectural Style: Modern Style with Shed style elements *B6. Construction History:

APN: 7237-020-050. Built in 1979 (Los Angeles County Assessors n.d. 2023), this two-story, multi-tenant, commercial building is a commercial example of Modern Style with Shed style elements designed around a central courtyard. 6615 E.

Pacific Coast Highway is one of three buildings that make up the office park. A review of 1979 building plans originally refers to the project at the “Marketplace Office Park” and list Charles Kober Associates as the architectural firm, however, it is not clear who the lead architect is. The plans also list the initials of multiple contributing draftsmen (J.C., S.O., T.K.

J.M.C., and B.D). In 1983, Charles Kober Associates merged with its affiliate Gale, Hornberger & Worstell (headquarters in San Francisco;The Los Angeles Times 1983). At the time of the merger, Charles Kober Associates was in business for over 40 years, maintaining eight U.S.-based offices (including one London office) and 200 employees. The firm’s notable projects included the Glendale Galeria, Plaza Pasadena, Bellevue Square (in Seattle), the German and China Pavilions at EPCOT Center (Orlando, Florida), Kilroy Airport Center, and the Wilshire Thayer high-rise condominium (Westwood, CA). *B7. Moved? No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features:

B9a. Architect: Charles Kober Associates b. Builder: Not known *B10. Significance: None Theme: Commercial Development Area: Long Beach, CA Period of Significance: 1979-present Property Type: 2-story commercial building Applicable Criteria: None Criteria A/1 and Criteria B/2 and City of Long Beach Local Criteria A and B Is this resource associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history?
Is this resource associated with the lives of significant persons in our past? This building was designed to function as a multi-tenant office building and has maintained its function for over 40 years. A search of various advertisements, newspaper articles, and local business listings show this location is associated with recognizable company names such as Merrill Lynch and Century 21, however, this location represented only branch offices of these companies and were not associated with either their establishment or significant development. In light of this research, this building is not associated with events or individuals significant to history. Therefore, 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway is recommended not eligible for listing on the NRHP under Criteria A or B or the CRHR under Criteria 1 or 2, or for listing as a Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District under Local Criteria A or B.

B11. Additional Resource Attributes: None.
*B12. References: See Continuation Sheet.

B13. Remarks: None.
*B14. Evaluator: Shannon Lopez
*Date of Evaluation: March 3, 2023
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION Trinomial

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information

Page 3 of 19 ends

B1. Historic Name: None
B2. Common Name: Marketplace Office Park; Long Beach Marketplace Business Park; 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway B3. Original Use: Multi-Tenant Office building
B4. Present Use: Multi-Tenant Office building
*B5. Architectural Style: Modern Style with Shed style elements *B6. Construction History:

APN: 7237-020-041. Built in 1980 (Los Angeles County Assessors n.d. 2023), this two story, multi-tenant, commercial building is commercial example of Modern Style with Shed style elements designed around a central courtyard. 6621 E.

Pacific Coast Highway is one of three buildings which make up the b. A 1979 Building Permit lists the associated architect as the Charles Kober Associates firm (City of Long Beach 1979, “Building permit…”). The only notable alteration to the footprint of the building since its initial construction is the 1981 addition of a large projecting canopy at the southeast elevation (currently the main entrance to Keller Williams Coastal Properties). *B7. Moved? No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features:

B9a. Architect: Charles Kober Associates b. Builder: Not known *B10. Significance: None Theme: Commercial Development Area: Long Beach, CA Period of Significance: 1980-present Property Type: 2-story commercial building Applicable Criteria: None Criteria A/1 and Criteria B/2 and City of Long Beach Local Criteria A and B Is this resource associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history? Is this resource associated with the lives of significant persons in our past? This building was designed to function as a multi-tenant office building and has maintained its function for over 40 years. A search of various advertisements, newspaper articles, and local business listings show this location is associated with recognizable names such as the U.S. Census Bureau, Conroy’s Flowers, and 1-800-Flowers, however, this location represented branch offices of these entities/companies (some short term) and were not associated with either their establishment or significant development. In light of this research, this building is not associated with events or individuals significant to history. Therefore, 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway is recommended not eligible for listing on the NRHP under Criteria A or B or the CRHR under Criteria 1 or 2 or for listing as a Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District under Local Criteria A or B.

B11. Additional Resource Attributes: None.
*B12. References: See Continuation Sheet.

B13. Remarks: None.
*B14. Evaluator: Shannon Lopez
*Date of Evaluation: March 3, 2023
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
LOCATION MAP Trinomial
DPR 523J (9/2013) *Required information

Page 4 of 19 ends

Page 5 of 19 ends

BUILDING DESCRIPTIONS:
6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway
6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway very closely matches the footprint, design, and materials of the neighboring office building at 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway. This commercial building is two stories, with a rectangular shaped footprint, textured stucco exterior wall cladding, and a large open-air atrium set in the center of the footprint. The roofline is comprised of six sheet metal clad skillion roofs (four large primary- rectangular in shape; two small secondary- square in shape). The second story level projects over the first story by approximately two to three feet. Wide corrugated metal sheets that simulate a broken belt course are situated between the first and second story windows in large sections of all elevations.

Matching material is found just below the eave level (gutters) on the majority of all elevations, forming a projecting fascia.

The majority of windows at the second story level are recessed and alternate in sets of two and four sliding windows (frames appear to be steel).

Entrances are located at the western and eastern corners of the building. The primary entrance at the building’s western corner consists of one set of double glass doors which are accompanied by side and transom lights (steel frames). A short balcony, approximately three feet deep and seven feet long, with a steel safety railing is immediately above this entrance.

An exterior single-paneled door with a floor vent leading into a small electrical room is adjacent to the first floor entrance.

This electrical room is part of a semi-detached unit that partially cuts away from the main body of the building. This unit’s skillion roof is set several feet lower than the neighboring roof lines and has two square fixed windows at the second-story level. In addition to the electrical room, this unit also encloses a storage room and staircase that connect the first and second floors. An ADA-compliant ramp and entrance are at the southwest-facing side of this semi-detached unit. The corresponding door is glass with a transom window and a two-pane sidelight. A short balcony, approximately one foot by three feet, with a steel safety railing is located directly above this entrance.

A similar semi-detached two-story segment which encloses both men's and women’s bathroom facilities is at the eastern corner of the building. Two separate entrances are situated between this unit and the main body of the building. The main entrance (facing southeast) consists of a pair of double doors accompanied by sidelights and a transom light. A short balcony, approximately two feet deep by ten feet long, is above this entrance. Access is provided via a sliding glass door with associated sidelights. Two sets of double glass doors are at the northeast-facing section between the semi-detached building segment and the main body of the building. A narrow balcony, approximately two feet deep and fifteen feet long, is above this entrance. Access to this balcony is provided by two sets of sliding glass doors (set between these glass doors is a single utility room door).

Matching large wrap-around balcony areas are at the north and south corners of the building. Two large windows and a steel-framed glass door are at the northern balcony level. Two large sliding glass doors and one large two-paned glass window are at the southern balcony level.
6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway
6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway very closely matches the footprint, design, and materials of the neighboring office building at 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway. This commercial building is two stories, with a rectangular shaped footprint, textured stucco exterior wall cladding, and a large open-air atrium set in the center of the footprint. The roofline is comprised of six sheet metal clad skillion roofs (four large primary- rectangular in shape; two small secondary- square in shape). The second story level projects over the first story by approximately two to three feet. Wide corrugated metal sheets that simulate a broken belt course are situated between the first and second story windows in large sections of all elevations.

Matching material is found just below the eave level (gutters) on the majority of all elevations, forming a projecting fascia.

The majority of windows at the second story level are recessed and alternate in sets of two and four sliding windows (frames appear to be steel).

There are four primary entrance points to this building, two at the northwest corner of the building, one at the southeast elevation, and the fourth at the northern end of the southeast elevation. A semi-detached unit that partially cuts away from the main body of the building is at the northwest corner of the building. This unit’s skillion roof is set several feet lower than the neighboring roof lines and has two square fixed windows at the second-story level. The two entrances located at this end of the building are in the recessed areas between the semi-detached unit and the main body of the building. One entrance facing northwest is comprised of a set of steel-framed double glass doors with sidelights and transom windows. A short balcony, approximately three feet deep and seven feet long, with a steel safety railing is immediately above this entrance. Two matching wheelchair-accessible steel-framed glass double doors are at the southwest corner of the State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 6 of 19 ends

building. A balcony area approximately three feet deep and 18 feet long is directly overhead. Two steel-framed sliding glass doors and a single panel with a floor vent door leading to a small storage closet are on the balcony level.

A projecting canopy constructed in 1981 is at the southeast elevation of the building. This canopy has a sloped metal sheet roof and is supported by two rectangular stucco-clad pillars. The entrance consists of steel-framed glass double doors.

Large ground-to-ceiling rectangular two-paned windows are on both sides of these double doors. Another semi-detached unit that partially cuts away from the main body of the building is at the southeast corner. A set of steel-framed glass double doors is in the recessed area at the southeast end of the building. An exterior single-paneled door with a floor vent leading into a small electrical room is adjacent to the first-floor entrance. A short balcony, approximately three feet deep and seven feet long, with a steel safety railing is immediately above this entrance. A single steel framed glass door (secondary entrance) is at the northwest-facing side of this semi-detached unit. A short balcony, approximately three feet deep and six feet long, with a steel safety railing is directly above this entrance.

HISTORY OF OCCUPATION
As multi-tenant office buildings, multiple businesses have occupied both 6615 and 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway throughout the buildings’ period of use. Types of business include (but are not limited to): stock brokerage firms, real estate firms, wealth management, health services, international shipping companies, and domestic manufacturing offices. A representative sampling of businesses associated with each building is provided below. The length of each company’s tenancy at its respective location is not provided.
6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway
• 1980: Wagenseller and Durst, Inc. (Regional stock brokerage firm) (The Golden Rain Seal Beach Leisure World News 1980)
• 1981: Merrill Lynch (an American investment and wealth management company) (The Los Angeles Times 1981) • 1994: CoastCo Real Estate (The Los Angeles Times 1994) • 2001: Century 21 Sparrow-Shoreline (lending, escrow, notary, legal, and insurance services) (The Los Angeles Times 2001)
• 2017: MJB Plastics, Inc.
• 2017: British American Shipping, LLC.
• 2017: DayWellness Chiropractic
• 2018: Caliber Home Loans
• 2021: Alliance Shippers, Inc./ Alliance International 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway
• 1981: Van de Kamp’s Frozen Foods (The Los Angeles Times 1981, p 260.) • 1982: Bateman Eichler, Hill Richards Incorporated (Broker and Investment Adviser) (The Golden Rain Seal Beach Leisure World News 1982)
• 1989: Gregg Whelan-Associate Vice President/Investments (The Golden Rain Seal Beach Leisure World News 1989)
• 1989: U.S. Census Bureau (The Los Angeles Times 1989) • 1992: Conroy’s Flowers (Florist) (The Los Angeles Times 1992) • 1994: 1-800-Flowers (Florist) (The Los Angeles Times 1994, p. 84) • 2005: The Long Beach Escrow Assn. (The Los Angeles Times, 2005) • 2018: Main St. Financial
• 2018: Keller Williams Realty-Coastal Properties
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 7 of 19 ends

BUILDING EVALUATION CONT.
6615 E. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
Criteria C/3 and City of Long Beach Local Criteria C
Does this resource embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction? This two-story commercial building is an example of the Modern Style with Shed style elements. The build range of Shed style throughout the United States was between ca. 1965-1990. The overall exterior condition of the building is well maintained, however 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway is not an exemplary representation of a distinctive type, period, or method of construction. The associated architectural firm which designed this building was Charles Kober Associates.

While the firm undertook multiple distinguished architectural projects, 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway is not an exemplary representation of their work. Therefore, this building is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion C or the CRHR under Criterion 3 or for listing as a Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District under Local Criterion C.

Criteria D/4 and City of Long Beach Local Criteria D
Has this building yielded or is it likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory? Criterion D/4 is most often applied to archaeological sites and districts but can also apply to buildings, structures, and/or objects. This building does not exhibit a local variation of a standard design or construction technique that can yield important information (such as construction expertise or availability of local materials). Due to a lack of significance, this resource is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion D or the CRHR under Criterion 4 or for listing as a Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District under Local Criterion D. 6621 E. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
Criteria C/3 and City of Long Beach Local Criteria C
Does this resource embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction? This 2-story commercial building is an example of the Modern Style with Shed style elements. The build range of Shed style throughout the United States was between ca. 1965-1990. The overall exterior condition of the building is well maintained, however 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway is not an exemplary representation of a distinctive type, period, or method of construction. The associated architectural firm which designed this building was Charles Kober Associates.

While the firm undertook multiple distinguished architectural projects, 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway is not an exemplary representation of their work. Therefore, this building is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion C or the CRHR under Criterion 3 or for listing as a Landmark or contributor of a Landmark District under Local Criterion C.

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 8 of 19 ends

REFERENCES
FrameFinder
1980 “Flight AMI_OC_80, Frame 9924”. Photograph taken: February 9, 1980. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Copy available at: https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/. Accessed: February 24, 2023. 1994 “Flight NAPP_2C, Frame 6858-112”. Photograph taken: May 31, 1994. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Copy available at: https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/. Accessed: February 24, 2023.

Golden Rain Seal Beach Leisure World News, The
1980 “Brokerage Firm Opens New Long Beach Office.” Published: Thursday, November 13, 1980. Page 11.

Available at: https://www.newspapers.com/image/836147982. Accessed: February 24, 2023. 1982 “Bateman Eichler, Hill Richards Incorporated”. Published: Thursday, January 14, 1982. Page 15. Available at:
https://www.newspapers.com/image/836146553. Accessed: February 23, 2023. 1989 No title. Published: Thursday, April 6, 1989. Page 6. Available at:
https://www.newspapers.com/image/836150587. Accessed: February 24, 2023.

Los Angeles County Assessors
n.d. “AIN: 7237-020-041”. Available at: https://portal.assessor.lacounty.gov/parceldetail/7237020041. Accessed:

February 23, 2023.
n.d “AIN: 7237-020-050”. Available at: https://portal.assessor.lacounty.gov/parceldetail/7237020041. Accessed:

February 23, 2023.

Los Angeles Times, The
1981 “Purchasing Secretary”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published: Sunday, February 8, 1981. Page 260. Available at: https://www.newspapers.com/image/387621492. Accessed: February 24, 2023. 1981 “Beat the April 15th deadline to save on 1980 income taxes”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California).

Published: Sunday, April 12, 1981. Page 104. Available at: https://www.newspapers.com/image/387164627.

Accessed: February 23, 2023.
1983 “Kober Associates, Gale Firm Merge”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published: Sunday, April 3, 1983. Page 116. Available at: https://www.newspapers.com/image/633630715. Accessed: March 17, 2023.
1989 “Census Bureau Recruits Workers for Next Year’s National Survey”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published: Thursday, May 4, 1989. Page 56. Available at:
https://www.newspapers.com/image/405394917. Accessed: February 24, 2023. 1992 “Our Business is Really Blossoming”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published: Sunday, July 12, 1992. Page 10. Accessed: February 23, 2023.
1994 “People in Real Estate: CoastCo Real Estate opens office at the Marketplace in Long Beach.” The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published: Sunday, July 24, 1994. Available at:
https://www.newspapers.com/image/159924109. Accessed: February 23, 2023. 2001 “People in Real Estate”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published: Sunday, April 15, 2001.

Page 112 ends

1994 “National Marketing Promotions Director”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published:

Monday, November 14, 1994. Page 84. Available at: https://www.newspapers.com/image/159155788.

Accessed: February 24, 2023.
2005 “Escrow education”. The Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Published: Sunday, June 5, 2005. Page 221. Available at: https://www.newspapers.com/image/192844565. Accessed: February 23, 2023.

Provided by City of Long Beach, CA
1979 “6621 PCH Bldy #6”. Scanned copy of hand-drawn building location map. 1979 “Building Permit for 6621 E. Pacific Coast Hwy”. Dated July 19, 1979. 1985 “First Floor Construction Plan”. The Marketplace Office Park Bldg 1A. Date: 2-22-1985. Published: July 16, 1986.

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 9 of 19 ends

SURVEY PHOTOGRAPHS CONT.

Survey photo key for 6615 E. Pacific Coast highway
1 2
3 4
5 State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 10 of 19 ends

6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway

1. Southern end of southwest façade (facing northest).

2. Overview of Southwest façade (facing west).

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 11 of 19 ends

3. Overview of northwest façade (facing southeast).

4. Oblique view of northeast elevation (left) and northwest elevation (right), facing south.

5. Oblique view southeast elevation (left) and northwest elevation (right) of facing west.

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 12 of 19 ends

6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway
Survey Photograph Key for 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway 1 2
3 4
5 6
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 13 of 19 ends

1. Overview of 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway, facing northeast.

2. Southeast elevation, facing northwest.

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 14 of 19 ends

3. Southern half of northeast elevation, facing southeast.

4. Balcony at northern end of northeast elevation
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 15 of 19 ends

5. Northwest elevation, facing northeast.

6. Overview of northwest elevation (left) and southwest elevation (right), facing east.

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 16 of 19 ends

1980 USDA Aerial photograph of 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway (Frame Finder 1980).

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 17 of 19 ends

1994 USDA aerial photograph of 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway (red) and 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway (blue).

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 18 of 19 ends

First Floor Construction Plan for 6615 E. Pacific Coast Highway (provided by City of Long Beach 1985).

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information

Page 19 of 19 ends

Hand drawn building location map for 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway (provided by City of Long Beach 1979).

MARKETPLACE MIXED - USE PROJECT AT 6615 E. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY

CITY OF LONG BEACH
Appendix
July 2023
Appendix E Geotechnical Investigation Report
MARKETPLACE MIXED - USE PROJECT AT 6615 E. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY

CITY OF LONG BEACH
Appendix
PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

PROPOSED LONG BEACH MARKETPLACE PROJECT
6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Long Beach, CA
Prepared for

CP VI MARKETPLACE, LLC
707 17th Street, Suite 3050
Denver, CO 80202
Prepared by
GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC.
370 Amapola Avenue, Suite 212
Torrance, California 90501
Group Delta Project No. LA-1583
September 30, 2022
370 Amapola Avenue, Suite 212, Torrance, CA 90501 TEL: (310) 320-5100 Anaheim – Irvine – Ontario – San Diego – Torrance
www.GroupDelta.com
CP VI MARKETPLACE, LLC September 30, 2022
707 17th Street, Suite 3050 Project No. LA1583
Denver, CO 80202
Attention: Mr. Joe Pink
Subject: Geotechnical Investigation Report
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project
6615, 6621, and 6695 E Pacific Coast Highway
Long Beach, California
Dear Mr. Pink,
Group Delta Consultants, Inc. (Group Delta) is pleased to submit this design-level geotechnical investigation and report for the proposed development of the subject site comprised of lots located at 6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway in Long Beach, California. This report presents our project understanding, the scope of work performed, our findings, and geotechnical recommendations.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical services for this project. Should you have any questions regarding this report, or if we can be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,
GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC.

Pirooz Kashighandi, Ph.D., G.E. Asheesh Pradhan, Ph.D., P.E.

Senior Engineer Project Engineer
Distribution: Addressee (1 electronic copy)
GE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Site History ............................................................................................................1

1.2 Project Description ................................................................................................1

1.3 Scope of Work .......................................................................................................2

2.0 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION................................................................................... 2

2.1 Previous Field Investigation and Laboratory Testing .............................................2

2.2 Current Field Investigation ....................................................................................3

3.0 SITE CONDITIONS ......................................................................................................... 3

3.1 Surface Conditions.................................................................................................3

3.2 Subsurface Materials.............................................................................................4

3.3 Groundwater .........................................................................................................4

4.0 GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARD EVALUATION ........................................................... 5

4.1 Geologic Setting.....................................................................................................5

4.2 Regional Seismicity................................................................................................5

4.3 Surface Fault Rupture............................................................................................6

4.4 Seismic Site Parameters ........................................................................................6

4.5 Liquefaction Potential ...........................................................................................6

4.1 Lateral Spreading and Slope Stability ....................................................................7

4.2 Flooding.................................................................................................................8

4.3 Methane, Oil, and Gas ...........................................................................................8

5.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................... 9

5.1 General..................................................................................................................9

5.2 Demolition.............................................................................................................9

5.3 Removals ...............................................................................................................9

5.4 Excavations............................................................................................................9

5.4.1 Temporary Excavations............................................................................10

5.4.2 Temporary Cantilevered Shoring .............................................................11

5.5 Earthwork and Grading........................................................................................11

5.5.1 Subgrade Preparation..............................................................................11

5.5.2 Import Fill ................................................................................................12

5.5.3 Grading Recommendations .....................................................................12

5.6 Deep (Pile) Foundation Recommendations .........................................................13

5.6.1 Axial Pile Capacity....................................................................................14

5.6.2 Settlement ...............................................................................................15

5.6.3 Lateral Pile Capacity.................................................................................15

5.7 Shallow Foundation Recommendations ..............................................................16

5.7.1 Bearing Capacity ......................................................................................16

5.7.2 Settlement ...............................................................................................17

5.7.3 Lateral Capacity .......................................................................................17

5.8 Retaining Walls....................................................................................................17

5.8.1 Earth Pressures........................................................................................17

5.8.2 Retaining Wall Backfill .............................................................................18

5.8.3 Retaining Wall Drainage ..........................................................................18 Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page ii
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx

5.9 Slab-on-Grade (Courtyard Area)..........................................................................18

5.10 Fill Settlement and Preloading.............................................................................19

5.10.1 Fill Settlement..........................................................................................19

5.10.2 Preloading................................................................................................19

5.10.3 Settlement Monitoring ............................................................................20

5.11 Methane Control System.....................................................................................20

5.12 Future Landfill Settlement and Periodic Maintenance ........................................20

5.13 Infiltration Potential ............................................................................................20

5.14 Site Drainage .......................................................................................................20

5.15 Utility Trenches ...................................................................................................21

5.16 Expansive Soil ......................................................................................................21

5.17 Soil Corrosivity.....................................................................................................22

6.0 LIMITATIONS.............................................................................................................. 22

7.0 REFERENCES............................................................................................................... 23

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Summary of Site-Specific Seismic Design Parameters Table 2 Summary of Liquefaction-Induced Settlement
Table 3-1 Lateral Pile Capacity Analysis for Single Pile (Static Loading) Table 3-2 Lateral Pile Capacity Analysis for Single Pile in a 2-Row Pile Group (Static Loading) Table 4 Summary of Soil Expansion Index (Previous Laboratory Testing)

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Site Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Aerial View Map
Figure 3 Exploration Location Map
Figure 4A Cross Section A-A’
Figure 4B Cross Section B-B’
Figure 4C Cross Section C-C’
Figure 5 Historically Highest Groundwater Map
Figure 6 Regional Geologic Map
Figure 7 Regional Fault and Seismicity Map
Figure 8 Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation Map Figure 9 Site-Specific Design Earthquake and MCER Spectrum Figure 10 24-Inch Diameter Driven Pile Static Allowable Axial Capacities Figure 11 24-Inch Diameter Driven Pile Seismic Ultimate Axial Capacities Figure 12 24-Inch Diameter (Displacement and Non-Displacement) Pile Static Allowable Axial Capacities
Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page iii
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
Figure 13 24-Inch Diameter (Displacement and Non-Displacement) Pile Seismic Ultimate Axial Capacities
Figure 14 18-Inch Diameter Driven Pile Static Allowable Axial Capacities Figure 15 18-Inch Diameter Driven Pile Seismic Ultimate Axial Capacities Figure 16 18-Inch Diameter (Displacement and Non-Displacement) Pile Static Allowable Axial Capacities
Figure 17 18-Inch Diameter (Displacement and Non-Displacement) Pile Seismic Ultimate Axial Capacities
Figure 18 Recommended Area for Preloading
Figure 19 Preloading Fill Height and Time for 90 % Settlement

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Previous Field Investigation and Laboratory Testing Appendix B Current Field Investigation
Appendix C Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading Analysis
Appendix D Pile Lateral Capacity Analysis

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

PROPOSED LONG BEACH MARKETPLACE PROJECT
6615, 6621, AND 6695 EAST PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY

LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Group Delta Consultants, Inc. (Group Delta) is pleased to submit this design-level report presenting our findings and geotechnical recommendations for the proposed project comprised of lots located at 6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway in Long Beach, California. The project location is shown in the vicinity map in Figure 1.

1.1 Site History
Until the mid-1920 the project site and vicinity were undeveloped wetlands. In 1928 there were 2 oil wells reported on the property. The oil wells were no longer visible by 1964. Between the mid-1960 and early 1961, the eastern portion of the site was used as a landfill. Trash was placed to a depth of up to about 30 feet. During the landfill operation, the trash was dumped from trucks and pushed into trenches excavated by dragline.

An aerial view of the site is shown in Figure 2. The site boundaries and approximate location of the landfill are also indicated. There are three existing 2-story buildings, labeled as Buildings 1, 2, and 3. As we understand, the development of the site began in 1979 and the first two buildings, Buildings 1 and 3, were constructed by 1980. Building 2 is believed to have been constructed by 1983.

1.2 Project Description
The project site comprises about 5.5 acres and is bounded on the west by Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) and the south by Studebaker Road. The San Gabriel River channel is located about 500 feet to the south. The site is currently developed with three two-story office buildings; two located along PCH and one located along the east edge. An asphalt paved parking lot is located within the center of the site and additional parking areas are located around the perimeter of the existing buildings.

As discussed earlier, the eastern portion of the site was previously used as a landfill between the mid-1960 and early 1961. An aerial view of the site is shown in Figure 2. The site boundaries and approximate location of the landfill are also indicated.

Based on the preliminary information provided by you, and the available conceptual plans, we understand that the plan is to demolish two of the existing buildings at 6615 and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway and to redevelop the site with two 5-story mixed-use buildings over the existing site surrounding a new at-grade 5-story concrete parking garage located in the center of the site.

The parking structure may consist of a subterranean level within a portion of its footprint. The project is in the planning phase currently.

Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 2
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
Group Delta prepared a Geotechnical Assessment Report for the property in October 2002, which included a review of several geotechnical investigations and environmental reports prepared by others. A due diligence report was also prepared by Group Delta in 2017 following a limited geotechnical investigation at the project site. This is a design-level geotechnical report for the proposed development. Figure 2 shows the approximate project limits based on the current conceptual plans for the proposed development.

1.3 Scope of Work
The scope of work was to supplement previous geotechnical data with a supplementary geotechnical investigation and prepare a design-level geotechnical investigation report. The scope of work included the following.

Review of available reports and data for the site.

Perform a supplementary subsurface exploration including Cone Penetration Tests (CPTs) to supplement the subsurface data, obtain shear wave velocity measurements of the subsurface soils, and estimate the potential limits of the landfill.

Perform site-specific response spectra in accordance with the requirement for ASCE 7-16 for seismic design for new structures, based on site-specific shear wave velocity measurements.

Use the geotechnical data to develop geotechnical design recommendations, including updated seismic design parameters, updated liquefaction, and lateral spreading analyses, updated axial and lateral capacities of the pile foundations, site grading recommendations, and pavement design recommendations.

Prepare a design-level geotechnical report presenting the data collected, and our findings, and provide geotechnical recommendations for the proposed project.

2.0 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

2.1 Previous Field Investigation and Laboratory Testing Previous Field Investigation by Group Delta
Group Delta performed a field investigation at the site on April 8, 2017, as a part of a due diligence assessment for the project. The field exploration program consisted of advancing six (6) CPT (cone penetration test) soundings at the locations shown in the exploration map in Figure 3. The CPTs were advanced to depths ranging from approximately 65 feet to 93 feet below the existing grade.

CPTs were terminated at depths where refusal to further penetration was reached. No laboratory testing was performed during this investigation. The CPT logs are presented in Appendix A.

Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 3
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
Previous Field Investigation by others
Moore and Taber performed a geotechnical investigation at the project site in 1979 for Building 3, and 1982 and 1983 for Building 2. The field investigation consisted of advancing a hollow stem auger (HSA) boring to the depths of about 51 feet. Soil samples were retrieved from the borings and laboratory testing was performed on the soil samples. The boring logs and the laboratory testing results from the investigation are presented in Appendix A.

In addition, a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was prepared in 2016 by SCS Engineers. A Draft Existing Methane Mitigation and Monitoring Systems Site Evaluation Report was prepared in 2002 by Methane Specialists for the project site.

2.2 Current Field Investigation
Group Delta performed a field investigation program at the site on September 6, 2022. The field investigation program consisted of advancing four (4) CPT soundings to depths ranging from about 50 feet to 96 feet below the existing grade, or refusal. Shear wave velocity measurements were performed at a 5-feet depth interval in two of the CPTs. The locations of the explorations are shown in Figure 3. Details of the field investigation, including CPT logs and seismic shear wave velocity measurements are presented in Appendix B.

Hand auger borings were advanced to the depth of 5 feet at each CPT location for visual identification and collection of bulk soil samples of the shallow subsurface soils for laboratory testing. However, no laboratory testing was performed on the bulk soil due to the presence of hydrocarbon odor in the collected soil samples.

3.0 SITE CONDITIONS

3.1 Surface Conditions
The site is currently developed with three two-story office buildings; two located along PCH and one located along the east edge of the site. An asphalt paved at-grade parking lot is located within the center of the site and additional parking areas are located around the perimeter of the existing buildings. Several landscape areas, trees, and utility poles exist throughout the site. The site is relatively flat with surface elevations varying from approximately 10 feet to 13 feet above mean sea level.

The asphalt paved at-grade parking lot area between the buildings on the east side and west side shows significant surface undulations visually estimated to be about a few inches to up to 2 feet with longitudinal cracks.

Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 4
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx

3.2 Subsurface Materials
The subsurface soil profile for the site is presented in Figures 4A through 4C. The subsurface soil profile was developed based on the subsurface investigation data available from the following sources.
x Current field investigation performed by Group Delta in 2022. x Previous field investigation performed by Group Delta in 2017. x Previous field investigations performed by Moore and Taber in 1979, 1982, and 1983. x The information available from SCS Engineering’s Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (SCS, 2016).

As discussed in the earlier sections and shown in Figures 2 and 3, the eastern portion of the site consists of landfill material. The depth contour of the landfill (SCS Engineers, 2016) is shown in the figures and the maximum depth of the landfill extends to about 30 feet at the approximate central region of the project site.

Outside of the landfill area on the western portion of the project site, non-trash fill material extends from the depth of about 4.5 feet to 14.5 feet. The fill soils generally consisted of silty sand, sandy silt, and silty clayey sand with trace to few gravels and debris.

Below the fill soils, alluvium was encountered in the previous borings. The alluvium consisted of a relatively compressible layer of interbedded layers of clayey silt and silty clay with intermittent layers of medium dense silty sand to the depth of 20 feet. This layer is underlain by interbedded medium dense silty sand interbedded with stiff clays and silts to the approximated depth of 50 feet (approximate El. -40 feet). Below 50 feet depth, the soil is dense to very dense sandy soil with occasional clayey interbeds.

3.3 Groundwater
Based on the current field investigation and previous field investigation data, groundwater is approximately 10 feet (Elevation 0 feet) below the existing grade and could vary between Elevation 0 feet and 3 feet above mean sea level. The Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Los Alamitos and Seal Beach (CDMG, 1998) also indicates the historically highest shallow groundwater at the depth of about 10 feet at the project site as shown in Figure 5. The design groundwater depth was taken at 10 feet below the existing grade.

Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 5
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx

4.0 GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARD EVALUATION

4.1 Geologic Setting
Regionally, the site is located within the seismically active Los Angeles Basin area of southern California Peninsula Ranges Geomorphic Province. The transtensional stresses and subsidence between north-west and east-west trending fault systems began forming the basin over 7 million years ago (Wright, 1991). Today, the basin is undergoing transpresssional stress bound by surrounding uplifting thrust blocks including the Palos Verdes fault system locally (Dolan, 1995).

Internally, the basin is filled with sedimentation thousands of feet thick. Thrusting fault blocks and strike-slip faults divide the basin into northwest-trending valleys and ridges (Wright, 1991).

Locally, the site is situated within the coastal margin of the Los Angeles Basin. It is bound on the east by the Newport Inglewood Fault Zone which locally divides the Long Beach flood plain. The San Gabriel River outlets to the Pacific Ocean southwest of the site and the Alameda Bay marina and channels are to the west. Surficial deposition is largely flood and deltaic debris transported by the river. Today the river is controlled within a lined channel that flows southwest and artificial fill materials blanket the site. Pleistocene marine sediments underlie the site at depth. The location of the site with respect to the geological features described above is presented in the Regional Geology Map in Figure 6.

4.2 Regional Seismicity
The site is located within the seismically active area of southern California and there is a high potential for the site to experience strong ground shaking from local and regional faults. These hazards and their potential impact can be mitigated with proper seismic design. The intensity of ground shaking is highly dependent upon the distance of the fault to the site, the magnitude of the earthquake, and the underlying soil conditions. Data evaluated for the local fault and seismic hazard at the site was obtained from USGS online earthquake catalog and Quaternary Fault Database resources unless otherwise noted. The site in relation to regional seismic faults and significant historical earthquake epicenters is presented in Figure 7 in Regional Fault and Seismicity Map.

Local historical earthquakes recorded within a 100-km radius of the site from 1800 to the present include 144 recorded events with M4.5 or greater. Of the 144 events, twelve were M6.0 and greater and include the 1933 M6.4 Newport-Inglewood Earthquake and the 1994 M6.7 Northridge Earthquake. Forty-three recorded events were M5.0 to M6.0 earthquakes. While not within the search radius, earthquakes of M7.0 and greater have been recorded in southern California. A M7.5 earthquake occurred in 1952 located about 95 miles north of the site and a M7.3 earthquake in 1992 was located about 100 miles east of the site. Construction in this area should be designed with accepted engineering practices and in compliance with current building codes that accommodate strong seismic ground motion.

Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 6
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx

4.3 Surface Fault Rupture
Based on the review of available published geologic maps there are no mapped active faults that cross through or project toward the site. The closest active fault to the site is the Newport Inglewood Fault at a distance of about 900 feet northeast of the site, as shown in Figure 7. An Alquist-Priolo Zone was identified for this fault as shown in the earthquake zones of required investigation map in Figure 8. The project site is not within an Alquist-Priolo Special Study Fault Zone. Therefore, the possibility of ground surface fault rupture at the site is considered low.

4.4 Seismic Site Parameters
Site-specific shear wave velocity measurements from the CPTs (SCPT-2 and SCPT-3) from the current field investigation were used to estimate the shear wave velocity within the upper 30 meters (Vs,30) at the site. The shear wave velocity measurement is provided in Appendix B. The site shear wave velocity was estimated at 210 m/s (689 feet/s) at the site, corresponding to a Site Class D.

A site-specific acceleration response spectrum was calculated in accordance with ASCE 7-16 Chapter 21 using UGMS MCER Tool available online from Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC, 2022). The site coordinates used in our seismic hazard analysis are -118.1066 (Longitude) and 34.7550 (Latitude). The summary of the Site-Specific Seismic Design Parameters is presented in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Summary of Site-Specific Seismic Design Parameters Design Parameters Seismic Design Parameters
(ASCE 7-16 Chapter 20)
Site Class D
SDS (g) 1.280
SD1 (g) 1.198
PGAM (g) 0.692
The site-specific design earthquake spectra and the site-specific MCER spectra are presented in Figure 9.

4.5 Liquefaction Potential
Liquefaction involves a sudden loss in strength of a saturated, cohesionless soil (predominantly sand) caused by the build-up of pore water pressure during cyclic loadings, such as that produced by an earthquake. This increase in pore water pressure can temporarily transform the soil into a fluid mass, resulting in a vertical settlement, and can also cause lateral ground deformations.

Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 7
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
Typically, liquefaction occurs in areas where there are loose sands and the depth to groundwater is less than 50 feet from the surface. Seismic shaking can also cause soil compaction and ground settlement without liquefaction occurring, including the settlement of dry sands above the water table.

The site is located in the state-identified liquefaction zone based on the earthquake zones of the required investigation map for the Los Alamitos and Seal Beach Quadrangle as shown in Figure

8. The liquefaction analysis was performed using NCEER (Youd et al. 2001) procedure for the sitespecific PGAM of 0.7g and design groundwater depth of 10 feet. Our analyses indicate that liquefaction-induced settlement up to 2.1 inches may occur during a seismic event, however, liquefaction-induced settlement is generally less than 1 inch in most areas of the site. More significantly liquefiable layers were identified to the depth of about 30 feet below grade. The summary of liquefaction-induced settlement is presented in Table 2 below and the analysis and plots are presented in Appendix C.

Table 2: Summary of Liquefaction-Induced Settlement
Exploration Number (Year) Liquefaction-induced Settlement (in) CPT-02 (2017) 0.7
CPT-03 (2017) 1.5
CPT-04A (2017) 0.6
CPT-05 (2017) 1.0
CPT-06 (2017) 1.2
CPT-13 (2017) 0.9
CPT-1 (2022) 0.7
SCPT-2 (2022) 0.8
SCPT-3 (2022) 0.8
CPT-4 (2012) 2.1

4.1 Lateral Spreading and Slope Stability
Lateral spreading is characterized primarily by lateral movement of surficial soil layers of gently to steeply sloping saturated soil deposits because of the liquefaction of a subsurface granular deposit and in areas adjacent to an open source of water. The site is relatively leveled, and the nearest open source of water is the San Gabriel River about 500 feet southwest.

Therefore, minimal liquefaction-induced lateral spreading was calculated based on the CPT results. The lateral spreading was estimated using the computer program CLiq which uses Zhang Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 8
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
et al. (2002) procedure for assessment of lateral spreading. The liquefaction-induced lateral spreading at the site was calculated to be in the range of 0.3 inches to 3.2 inches using all CPT results, with an estimated average value of 1.4 inches for the project site. The plots for lateral spreading (displacement) are also presented in Appendix C.

The site and surrounding vicinity are relatively level. There are no mapped landslides or potential earthquake-induced landslide slopes at the site. The potential for landslide hazards at the site is negligible. The proposed development may require some excavation up to 10 feet in depth. With proper engineered shoring and/or laying back of cut slopes, the potential hazard of slope instability at the site is low.

4.2 Flooding
The site is situated within a low-lying coastal plain area at an elevation ranging from 10 feet to 13 feet and less than a mile east of the Pacific Ocean. The closest large body of water is the San Gabriel River located about 500 feet south of the site. Alamitos Bay is located about 800 feet west of the site.

The site is within a FEMA-identified moderate flood hazard zone, with a 0.2% annual chance of flood. It is within a potential tsunami inundation zone and dam inundation zone. Tsunami events are historically infrequent and typically associated with significant offshore seismic events. Dam inundation is also a historically infrequent event, associated with catastrophic dam failure.

However, the Long Beach Seismic Safety Element (City of Long Beach, 1988) considers these potential hazards to be low.

4.3 Methane, Oil, and Gas
The site is located with the Seal Beach Oil Field according to the Division of Oil Gas and Geothermal Resources, District 1 Field Map 132. An abandoned landfill is located underneath the eastern portion of the site. We understand existing buildings are under observation and maintenance of ambient methane abatement by a methane specialist (SCS Engineers, 2016). The potential for methane and natural oil or gas at the site is considered high. A methane specialist will need to address the hazard potential for new development at the site and provide detailed recommendations regarding the City of Long Beach approved methane mitigation system in the final design of the proposed development.

Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 9
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx

5.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 General
Based on the findings and engineering analyses, it is our opinion that the proposed project is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, and the proposed mixed-use building and the parking structure may be supported on deep (pile) foundations and structural slabs supported on the piles.

Minor at-grade and lightly loaded structures (such as canopies, planter walls, and minor retaining walls) that are structurally isolated from the main structure may be supported on shallow footings following proper grading recommendations and notes provided in the following sections. Exterior Slab-on-grade for courtyard areas and hardscapes may be supported on properly compacted fill.

5.2 Demolition
Prior to the start of earthwork, demolition will be required to remove existing two buildings along the PCH. The existing Building 1 on the northwest side is supported on driven, 12-inch square, pre-cast concrete piles, and grade beams. The piles are 47 feet to 60 feet long. We understand that these existing pile foundations will be abandoned in place and cut off at the top as necessary to avoid conflict with the proposed foundation layout and structural slab. The existing Building 2 is supported on shallow footings. In addition, demolition will be required for the existing abovegrade utility poles, shrubs and trees, planter areas, and at-grade improvements such as pavements, curbs, hardscapes, and bollards. Any void created from the demolition should be properly backfilled to the limits determined by the project geotechnical engineer.

The site has several subsurface utilities such as electrical and communication, gas, water, sewer, and storm drain lines. The civil engineer should identify the presence and location of all existing utilities on and adjacent to the site. Precautions will be required to remove, relocate or protect any existing utilities, as appropriate.

5.3 Removals
The existing asphalt pavement and hardscapes will need to be removed before placing fill for raising the finished grade. Remnants of previous shallow foundations for the demolished structures will need to be removed in the areas of proposed slab-on-grade and hardscapes.

5.4 Excavations
Shallow excavation up to a maximum depth of about 10 feet below grade is anticipated for the project. Based on our investigation and the expected depth of excavations, we anticipate the excavations to be made in generally sandy materials and should be readily accomplished using Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 10
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
conventional heavy construction equipment. The sandy soils on site are generally classified as CAL/OSHA Type C soils.

If the excavation is exposed during periods of rainfall, provisions for collection of the runoff should be made. All surface drainage should be controlled and prevented from running down into the excavation. Ponding water should not be allowed within the excavation. In case clayey soil is exposed, any collected water should be pumped out. Soils softened by wetting should be removed and backfilled as directed by the geotechnical engineer.

All excavation slopes and shoring systems should meet the minimum requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health (OSHA) Standards. Maintaining safe and stable slopes on excavations is the responsibility of the contractor and will depend on the nature of the soils and groundwater conditions encountered and his method of excavation. Excavations during construction should be carried out in such a manner that failure or ground movement will not occur. The short-term stability of excavation depends on many factors, including slope angle, engineering characteristics of the subsurface materials, height of the excavation, and length of time the excavation remains unsupported and exposed to equipment vibrations, rainfall, and desiccation. The contractor should perform any additional studies deemed necessary to supplement the information contained in this report for the purpose of planning and executing their excavation plan. Recommendations regarding sloped temporary excavations are provided in the sections below.

5.4.1 Temporary Excavations
Temporary excavation slopes in the near-surface sandy soils may be made vertical for cuts of less than two (2) feet with some sloughing to be expected. Cuts higher than two (2) feet may be constructed at an angle of 1.5H:1V (horizontal to vertical ratio), or flatter. If sloping of the side slopes is not feasible due to a lack of spaces, shoring should be used.

Surcharge loads from equipment or stockpiled material should be kept behind the top of the temporary excavations at a horizontal distance of at least equal to the depth of the excavation.

Surface drainage should be controlled and prevented from running down the slope face. Ponding water should not be allowed within the excavation. Even with the implementation of the above recommendations, some sloughing of slopes and unstable soil zones may still occur within temporary excavations, and workmen should be adequately protected. Construction equipment and foot traffic should be kept off excavation slopes to minimize disturbance/sloughing.

Groundwater - Permanent groundwater is not anticipated to be encountered during excavation to a maximum excavation depth of 10 feet, however nuisance water may be encountered due to capillary rise. If water is encountered in the excavation, it is anticipated that it can be controlled using shallow trenches, sumps, and pumps.

Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 11
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx

5.4.2 Temporary Cantilevered Shoring
Cantilevered shoring may be used for excavation depths up to about 12 feet to 15 feet. For the design of cantilever shoring, an active earth pressure equivalent to a fluid unit weight of 40 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) should be used for level ground. If traffic loading can occur near the top of the shoring (i.e., within a lateral distance equal to the maximum height of the temporary shoring), an additional uniform lateral pressure of 120 pounds per square foot (psf) of vehicular traffic load should be added in the upper 10 feet of shoring. In addition, 35 percent of any other surcharge loads located adjacent to the shoring (i.e., within a lateral distance equal to the maximum height of the temporary shoring) should be included as a uniform rectangular loading over the height of the shoring. If an existing footing or other concentrated load is nearby, additional lateral pressure will be applied to the shoring. The magnitude and distribution of this additional pressure can be calculated when the nature and location of such loadings are known.

Resistance to lateral loading of the shoring piles may be provided by passive pressure of the native soils below the bottom of the excavation. The allowable passive pressure of the soils may be taken as the pressure developed from an equivalent fluid weight of 150 pcf, due to shallow groundwater conditions. To account for the rounded shape of the soldier piles, when calculating the passive pressure on individual piles, the equivalent fluid pressure may be multiplied by a factor of 2.

If the shoring will be used for the construction of a basement, the temporary shoring should be constructed with a geo-composite strip drain against the lagging. These drains will function as long-term drainage behind the basement walls. The drains should be tied into a pipe and sump system at the lowest basement level so the collected drainage can be pumped out to an appropriate outlet.

During construction, the shoring should be surveyed for any movement, until permanent walls are completed. Survey data should be reviewed by the project geotechnical engineer.

5.5 Earthwork and Grading

5.5.1 Subgrade Preparation
The bottom of the excavation should be checked and approved by the project geotechnical engineer. If soft or wet soils are exposed, over-excavation may be required to provide a firm subgrade to support construction equipment and compaction activities. All removals should be performed at the direction of the project geotechnical engineer.

Lean concrete slurry (often referred to as a “waste slab”) may be used to protect the exposed subgrade. The lean concrete slurry may be poured directly on the exposed firm subgrade, approximately 2 inches to 4 inches in thickness, to assist in preventing the clay soil from becoming Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 12
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
destabilized during construction activities before the concrete foundations are poured. If the lean concrete slurry is used, it should be poured on top of firm, competent native soils shortly after the excavation is exposed. Prior to placing the waste slab and the non-expansive fill, the subgrade soils should be moistened to prevent drying up.

5.5.2 Import Fill
The elevation of the project site is proposed to be raised in anticipation of future sea level rise.

The proposed finished floors are at an elevation of about 14.5 feet. This requires raising the grade in different areas of the site from about 2 feet in the northern portion to about 4.5 feet in the southern portion.

If imported soils are used as fill, the soils shall be free of vegetation organic materials, expansive clay, debris, or rocks greater than 3 inches in any dimension, and shall be approved by the project Geotechnical Engineer. Imported soils shall have an expansion index of less than 50 and a plasticity index of less than 15.

5.5.3 Grading Recommendations
All grading should conform to the City of Long Beach requirements, and the general grading recommendations outlined below.

1. The grading contractor is responsible for notifying the project geotechnical engineer of a pregrading meeting prior to the start of grading operations and anytime that the operations are resumed after an interruption.

2. Prior to the start of earthwork, existing improvements will require demolition. Existing utilities should be removed, relocated, or protected, as appropriate.

3. At the subgrade level, any loose or soft soils should be removed and recompacted, as directed by the project geotechnical engineer. The actual limits for removals should be determined by the project geotechnical engineer depending on the actual conditions encountered.

4. The bottom of the completed excavation should be observed and evaluated by the project geotechnical engineer, as it is proof rolled with heavy equipment. Any loose or unstable soils should be over-excavated to the limits determined by the project geotechnical engineer.

5. All fill and backfill should be placed in maximum 8-inch lifts, moisture conditioned to the optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557.

Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 13
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx

6. If the construction is performed during the rainy season, the spoil pile should be covered and protected from becoming wet. During construction, provisions should be made to prevent surface runoff from draining into the excavation.

7. All earthwork and grading should be performed under the observation of the project geotechnical engineer, including approval of the bottom of excavations, foundation excavations, and placement of fill and backfill.

8. Compaction testing of the fill soils shall be performed at the discretion of the project geotechnical engineer. Testing should be performed for approximately every 2 feet in fill thickness or 2,000 cubic yards of fill placed, whichever occurs first. If specified compaction is not achieved, additional compaction effort, moisture conditioning, and/or removal and recompaction of the fill soils will be required.

9. If in the opinion of the project geotechnical engineer, contractor, or owner, an unsafe condition is created or encountered during grading, all work in the area shall be stopped until measures can be taken to mitigate the unsafe condition. An unsafe condition shall be considered any condition that creates a danger to workers, on-site structures, on-site construction, or any off-site properties or persons.

10. All materials used for asphalt, concrete, and base shall conform to the "Green Book" and shall be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction.

5.6 Deep (Pile) Foundation Recommendations
The proposed buildings and the parking structure should be supported on pile foundations and structural slabs.

Both driven piles and a combination of auger-cast displacement (ACD) and auger-cast nondisplacement piles (hybrid piles) may be utilized in supporting the proposed structures. These piles were selected due to environmental concerns associated with retrieving landfill materials from the drilled holes, as well as the presence of shallow groundwater.

The abovementioned pile types each pose their constructability challenges, as well.

The contents of the landfill material, if large debris is present, could create challenges for the drivability of driven piles. Furthermore, due to the presence of dense to very dense sandy soils at an approximate depth of 50 feet below grade, longer driven piles may encounter drivability issues within the denser soils at depths greater than 50 feet. In such cases predrilling with augers smaller than (or equal to) two-thirds of the diameter of the driven piles may facilitate pile driving of the longer driven piles.

Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 14
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
For the auger-cast hybrid piles, displacing denser soils (at depths greater than about 50 feet below grade) is not feasible. Therefore, both the installation method and pile capacities assume non-displacement pile construction at depths greater than 50 feet below grade. Additionally, the use of non-displacement pile construction (i.e. using a continuous flight auger at depths more than 50 feet) will result in additional soil spoils which may be mixed with retrieved landfill materials and should be disposed of in accordance with all appropriate environmental disposal requirements.

Pile foundation recommendations for the buildings are provided below.

5.6.1 Axial Pile Capacity
The static allowable axial capacities and seismic ultimate axial capacities for single piles, or piles within groups with a minimum center-to-center spacing of 3 pile diameters, were estimated for the following types of piles.
x 24-Inch diameter driven piles
x 18-Inch diameter driven piles
x 24-Inch diameter augercast displacement (ACD) piles to the depth of 50 feet over nondisplacement augercast (CFA) piles below the depth of 50 feet. x 18-Inch diameter augercast displacement (ACD) piles to the depth of 50 feet over nondisplacement augercast (CFA) piles below the depth of 50 feet.

The static allowable axial capacity of the piles ignores the capacity from the upper 20 feet of soil due to the potential settlement of landfill materials and native clay and assumes the skin friction resistance from the upper 20 feet of soil as downdrag load. The downdrag load reported on the figures should be added to the service level structural loads (dead plus live) to determine the pile length under static loading. The static allowable axial capacities utilize factors of safety of 2, and 3, for skin friction resistance, and end bearing respectively.

The seismic ultimate axial capacity of the piles should be used to determine the controlling pile length under ultimate factored structural loads. Fill and native soil materials in the upper 30 feet have been assumed to impose a downdrag load on the proposed piles due to long-term soil compression and earthquake-induced settlement. The downdrag load reported on the figures should be added to the factored structural loads to determine the pile length under seismic loading.

The axial capacities of the piles are presented in Figures 10 through 17 assuming a pile cut-off elevation of 12 feet.

Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 15
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
Please note that if proprietary auger-cast (hybrid) piles are selected, a static axial pile load testing program (typically 2 test piles) should be completed prior to the installation of production piles to verify the capacities and obtain approvals. Furthermore, Low Strain Integrity Tests should typically be performed on 10 percent of the production piles.

We recommend the piles be installed after substantial completion of the settlement caused by raising the grades within the building pads, as discussed in Section 5.11.2.

5.6.2 Settlement
We estimate the settlement of the pile foundation to be less than ½ inch. The differential settlement between adjacent columns is expected to be ¼ inch or less.

5.6.3 Lateral Pile Capacity
The lateral capacities for the 24-Inch diameter and 18-Inch diameter single piles were estimated for static load conditions and seismic load conditions for both free-head and fixed-head conditions. The lateral capacities were estimated using the computer program LPILE 2019. The shear force and bending moments for the static loading conditions for a single pile are summarized in Table 3-1 below.

Table 3-1: Lateral Pile Capacity Analysis for Single Pile Pile
Diameter
(inches)
Boundary
Condition
Pile Head
Deflection
(inch)
Maximum
Shear (kips)
Maximum
Moment (ftkip)
Depth to
Maximum
Moment (ft)
24-Inch
Free
Head

0.5 42 145 6

1.0 63 248 7
Fixed
Head

0.5 93 389 0

1.0 145 665 0
18-Inch
Free
Head

0.5 23 71 5

1.0 35 125 5
Fixed
Head

0.5 56 193 0

1.0 89 339 0
Lateral pile capacity analysis was performed for a single pile in a group with a maximum of two (2) rows of piles assuming center-to-center spacing between piles as three times the diameter (3D, where D is the diameter of the pile) of the pile. Appropriate lateral capacity reduction factor was accounted for in the analysis and the shear force and bending moments for the static loading conditions are summarized in Table 3-2 below.

Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 16
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
Table 3-2: Lateral Pile Capacity Analysis for Single Pile in a 2-Row Pile Group = Pile Center-to-Center Spacing of 3D
Pile
Diameter
(inches)
Boundary
Condition
Pile Head
Deflection
(inch)
Maximum
Shear (kips)
Maximum
Moment (ftkip)
Depth to
Maximum
Moment (ft)
24-Inch
Free
Head

0.5 31 121 7

1.0 47 207 7
Fixed
Head

0.5 69 321 0

1.0 108 548 0
18-Inch
Free
Head

0.5 17 59 5

1.0 26 107 6
Fixed
Head

0.5 42 162 0

1.0 67 284 0
To evaluate the extreme internal shear and internal moments within the pile, cases with a lateral spreading displacement of 1.4 inches (i.e. soil movement of 1.4 inches) applied in phase and out of phase with structural demands were also considered. The internal shear and moments should be considered in the structural design of the piles under seismic loading, as well. The lateral capacity analysis plots for the static and seismic loading conditions for single piles and single piles in a two-row pile group are presented in Appendix D.

5.7 Shallow Foundation Recommendations

5.7.1 Bearing Capacity
Following proper site grading, minor at-grade and lightly loaded structures (such as canopies, planter walls, and minor retaining walls) that are structurally isolated from the main building structures may be supported on shallow footings carried at least 1½ foot into the lowest adjacent grade or floor level. The footings may be designed to impose a net dead-plus-live load pressure of 1,500 pounds per square foot. The allowable bearing pressure may be increased by one-third for temporary loads associated with wind and seismic loading.

The project geotechnical engineer should perform compaction tests, probing, or use other methods, to verify that the foundations are supported in competent soils. If disturbed, wet, or otherwise unsuitable soils are encountered, or if water saturates the soils, the soils shall be excavated or stabilized as recommended by the project geotechnical engineer.

Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 17
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
All foundation excavations should be checked by the project geotechnical engineer before the placement of reinforcing steel. Any loose or soft soils should be excavated and recompacted with structural fill. The limits for the excavation should be determined by the geotechnical engineer.

5.7.2 Settlement
The total settlement of properly designed shallow foundations is estimated to be less than 1 inch.

The differential settlement is estimated to be less than ½ inch over a horizontal distance of 30 feet.

5.7.3 Lateral Capacity
Resistance to lateral loads can be provided by friction developed between the bottom of footings and the supporting soil, and by the passive soil pressure developed on the face of the footing.

For design purposes, an allowable passive fluid pressure of 300 pcf (above the water table) and a coefficient of friction of 0.3 may be used for lateral sliding resistance of footings. A one-third increase in the passive value can be used for wind or seismic loads. The frictional resistance and the passive resistance of the soils can be combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance.

5.8 Retaining Walls

5.8.1 Earth Pressures
Cantilever retaining walls, which are free to move laterally at least ½ inch, may be designed using equivalent fluid pressure of 40 pcf for level backfill, and 55 pcf for ground sloping up at 2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical).

Buried or basement walls with a level backfill should be designed for at-rest pressure of 60 pcf.

The pressure values assume a triangle distribution and that proper drainage is provided behind the walls to prevent the build-up of hydrostatic pressures. If the walls are to be designed for hydrostatic pressures, the equivalent lateral fluid pressures should be increased to 90 pcf below the design depth of the water.

The finish ground surface behind the top of the wall should be graded to drain away from the back of the wall.

If traffic loading can occur near the top of the wall, an additional uniform lateral pressure of 100 psf of vehicular traffic load should be added in the upper 10 feet of shoring.

According to Section 1803.5.12 of the CBC 2019, for structures assigned to the Seismic Design Category of D through F, walls 6 feet or greater in height should be designed for seismic loading.

Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 18
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
The magnitude of the seismic pressure can be evaluated using the procedures developed by Mononobe-Okabe (Seed and Whitman, 1970).

For this project, the effective ground surface acceleration is 0.23g, corresponding to one-half of аŽĨƚŚĞW'M. Based on this acceleration, we recommend using equivalent fluid pressure of 10 pcf with a triangular distribution. It should be noted that the seismic earth pressures are additive to the active earth pressures specified for permanent static support of the retention system walls.

The resultant seismic pressure should be applied at a height of 1/3 times the wall height above the base of the wall.

5.8.2 Retaining Wall Backfill
We recommend that retaining walls be backfilled with non-expansive soils. A 2-ft thick cap consisting of less previous onsite materials should be used to minimize infiltration of surface water. The finished surface should be graded to drain away from the proposed structures. Heavy compaction equipment operating adjacent to retaining walls can cause excessively high lateral soil pressures to be exerted on the wall. Therefore, soils within 5 feet of the wall should either be compacted with hand-operated equipment or designed to withstand compaction pressure from heavy equipment.

5.8.3 Retaining Wall Drainage
Retaining walls should be constructed with a properly designed drainage system to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressures behind the wall. This may consist of a geocomposite drain board or 12 inches of clean crushed rock encapsulated in filter fabric, discharging to weep holes or drain pipes. Basement walls or walls with architectural facades or coverings should be properly waterproofed to minimize moisture transmission through the walls.

5.9 Slab-on-Grade (Courtyard Area)
The exterior slab on grade for the courtyard area may be supported on a properly compacted subgrade. A methane barrier/venting system and nuisance water drainage system should be installed under the slabs, as designed by a methane consultant. The methane/drainage system will reduce the potential for moisture transmission through the slab. The final design of the methane mitigation and subgrade protection system will be the responsibility of the methane consultant. The geotechnical aspects of the design should be reviewed by Group Delta before incorporation into the final building plans.

A sub-foundation drainage system should be designed to collect and discharge any nuisance water that may enter the gravel portion of the methane collection system. Based on our experience with other similar projects, gravel layers that make up a methane mitigation system have been observed to become accidental collectors of infiltrated surface water from sources such as irrigation and rain waters.

Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 19
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
Expansion joints should be provided between the courtyard slab and the structural slab supported on the piles. The unit vertical modulus of subgrade reaction for the slab-on-grade may be taken as 60 pounds per cubic inch and the size adjusted modulus of subgrade reaction may be taken as 15 pounds per cubic inch.

5.10 Fill Settlement and Preloading

5.10.1 Fill Settlement
The elevation of the project site is proposed to be raised in anticipation of future sea level rise.

In the southeastern portion of the site, due to the presence of trash fill, and compressible natural clayey soils to a depth of about 20 feet below grade, raising the grade by a few feet is anticipated to cause substantial static settlements. The static settlement (elastic and consolidation) of the raised grades by 4.5 feet is estimated to be about 4 inches. The primary consolidation (90 percent consolidation) settlement is anticipated to be completed in approximately 6 months.

In the western portion of the site where the area is outside the landfill area and the northern portion where the depth of the landfill is shallow, the static settlements due to elastic and compression settlement due to 2 feet of the surcharge are estimated to be less than 1 inch. The primary consolidation (90 percent consolidation) settlement in these areas is anticipated to be completed in approximately 1.5 months.

5.10.2 Preloading
Piles should be installed after a minimum of 90 percent of the settlement due to raising the grades has been completed, in order to minimize any potential downdrag loads due to the raised grades. Primary consolidation of subsurface soils is anticipated to be completed in approximately 6 months with the 4.5 feet of surcharge in the southern portion and about 1.5 months with 2 feet of surcharge in the western and northern portions of the site. Therefore, preloading is recommended to be performed for the southeastern portion of the project site as shown in Figure 18 to expedite expected settlements due to the raised grades of the project.

Preloading the area by placing additional fill heights may reduce the time for substantial completion of consolidation settlement. A relation between the preloading fill height and the time to achieve 90 percent of the settlement due to the final raised grade is presented in Figure 19 for the proposed preloading area. For example, as can be seen in Figure 19, placing an additional 2 feet beyond the final grade will reduce the time to substantial completion of the settlement to only 2.5 months in the proposed preloading area. The excess fill soils may be removed and placed in northern and western areas of the site, once substantial settlement in the Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 20
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
proposed preloading area is completed. The settlement in northern and western areas is anticipated to be completed in approximately 1.5 months after fill placement based on the anticipated raised grades.

5.10.3 Settlement Monitoring
We recommend settlement monitoring plates be installed at the base of the fill at the eastern, central, and western portions of the surcharge in the preloading area. The settlement should be surveyed weekly. Care should be taken to prevent damaging the settlement monitoring monuments. In case a monument is irreparably damaged or destroyed, a replacement monument should be immediately installed, and a new survey baseline established for the new monument. Settlement is deemed as complete if less than 0.1 inches of settlement is measured over a period of two weeks after the placement of fill.

5.11 Methane Control System
A properly designed methane collection and venting system are to be developed and installed for the project by the project methane consultant.

5.12 Future Landfill Settlement and Periodic Maintenance Due to the nature of the fill, continued settlement, particularly differential settlements, may continue to manifest at the ground surface in the future in the areas of landfill due to the decomposition of organic matter in the fill. However, the magnitude of such settlement and duration of manifestation of such settlement cannot be estimated due to the nature, depth, and extent of the fill. Therefore, periodic maintenance for surface improvements supported on subgrade in the area of landfill should be anticipated and built into the project planning.

5.13 Infiltration Potential
The design groundwater at the project site is 10 feet below the existing grade. Per the Los Angeles County Administrative Manual (GS200.2) the invert of the stormwater infiltration system should be at least 10 feet above the design groundwater elevation. Therefore, onsite stormwater infiltration is not feasible at the project site. Additionally, a significant portion of the site was a previous landfill, and therefore onsite infiltration is not recommended.

5.14 Site Drainage
Surface drainage during construction should be controlled and directed to appropriate drainage facilities. All surface drainage should be prevented from running down along the face of the excavation. Ponding water should not be allowed within the excavation.

Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 21
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
Additionally, all planters and landscape areas should be lined with impermeable membranes to prevent infiltration into the subsurface soil. Proper site drainage should be designed to collect surface runoff or irrigation water and discharge it properly into a drainage system and carried away from the site.

5.15 Utility Trenches
Excavations for utility trenches should be readily accomplished with conventional excavating equipment. All shoring and excavation should comply with current OSHA regulations and be observed by the designated competent person on site.

The bedding for any new sewer and water service pipelines should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and should consist of clean sand, No. 4 concrete aggregate or gravel, and should have a sand equivalent of not less than 30. The pipe zone material, which extends to a level 12 inches above the pipe should consist of sand and should have a sand equivalent of no less than 30, and a maximum rock size of 1 inch. All imported materials should be approved by the project geotechnical engineer before being brought onsite.

Trench zone backfill extends from a level 12 inches above the pipe to the finished subgrade. The on-site excavated materials may not be suitable for backfill. Any boulders or cobbles larger than 3 inches in any dimensions, or any organics or other deleterious materials, should be removed before backfilling. We recommend that all backfill should be placed in lifts not exceeding six to eight inches in thickness and compacted to at least 90 percent of relative compaction as determined by the ASTM D1557. Mechanical compaction will be required to accomplish compaction above the bedding along the entire pipeline alignments. Jetting or flooding of backfill should not be permitted.

In backfill areas, where mechanical compaction of soil backfill is impractical due to space constraints, 2-sack slurry (CLSM) may be substituted for compacted backfill.

5.16 Expansive Soil
Based on the results of the expansion index test on representative near-surface soil samples from previous investigations (Moore and Taber, 1979, 1982), the near-surface soils have low to very low expansion potential. The previous laboratory test results for the soil expansion index are summarized in Table 4 below.

Table 4: Summary of Soil Expansion Index (Previous Laboratory Testing) Exploration Number (Year) Depth (feet) Expansion Index (EI) 6 (Moore & Taber, 1979) 0-5 7.0
Boring 1 (Moore & Taber, 1982) 6 28.0
Boring 2 (Moore & Taber, 1982) 6 19.0
Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 22
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx

5.17 Soil Corrosivity
Two soil samples from Boring 1 and Boring 2 (Moore and Taber, 1982) from a depth of 6 feet were tested for soluble sulfate content. The samples had soluble sulfate content of 0.02 percent and 0.03 percent respectively. Soil corrosivity testing was not performed on the bulk soil samples collected during the current field investigation due to the presence of hydrocarbon odor in the soil samples.

A significant length of the proposed piles for the project will be under groundwater and exposed to the elements of the marine environment. Furthermore, soils present near seawater may have high chloride content, which is corrosive to buried metals, such as underground metal pipes. A corrosion expert should be consulted for further evaluation and to develop optimum protection.

6.0 LIMITATIONS
This investigation was performed in accordance with generally accepted Geotechnical Engineering principles and practice. The professional engineering work and judgments presented in this report meet the standard of care of our profession at this time. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. This report has been prepared for CP VI Marketplace, LLC and their design consultants. It may not contain sufficient information for other parties or other purposes and should not be used for other projects or other purposes without review and approval by Group Delta.

The recommendations for this project, to a high degree, are dependent upon proper quality control of site grading, fill and backfill placement, and pile foundation installation. The recommendations are made contingent on the opportunity for Group Delta to observe the earthwork operations. This firm should be notified of any pertinent changes in the project, or if conditions are encountered in the field, which differ from those described herein. If parties other than Group Delta are engaged to provide such services, they must be notified that they will be required to assume complete responsibility for the geotechnical phase of the project and must either concur with the recommendations in this report or provide alternate recommendations.

Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 23
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx

7.0 REFERENCES
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). (2017). ASCE Standard, ASCE/SEI 7-16, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. ASCE, Reston, Virginia.

California Building Code (CBC). (2019). California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 2, Volumes 1 and 2. Sacramento, CA.

California Division of Mines and Geology. (1998). Seismic Hazard Zone Report for Los Alamitos

7.5-Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California, Seismic Hazard Zone Report 019, Plate 1.2.

California Division of Mines and Geology. (1998). Seismic Hazard Zone Report for Seal Beach 7.5- Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California, Seismic Hazard Zone Report 020, Plate

1.2. California Geological Survey. (2010). Geologic Compilation of Quaternary Surficial Deposits in Southern California Onshore Portion of the Long Beach 30’x60’ Quadrangle, 2010.

City of Long Beach. (1988). City of Long Beach General Plan, Seismic Safety Element, October 1988.

Dolan, J.F., Gath, E.M., Grant, L.B., Legg, M., Lindvall, S., Mueller, K., Oskin, M., Ponti, D.F., Rubin, C.M., Rockwell, T.K., H.J., Shaw, Treiman, J.A., Walls, C., and Yeats, R.S. (2001). Active Faults in the Los Angeles Metropolitan Region. Southern California Earthquake Center.

Ensoft, Inc. (2019). LPile.

FEMA. (2008). FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer (Official), Panel 06037C1988G, effective April 20, 2021.

Group Delta Consultants, Inc. (2002). Geotechnical Assessment, The Market Place Office Park, 6615, 6621, and 6695 Pacific Coast Hwy, Long Beach, California, GDC Project No. 1712B, October 14, 2002.

Group Delta Consultants, Inc. (2017). Geotechnical Due Diligence Assessment, Proposed Long Beach Market Place Project, 6615, 6621, and 6695 E Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, CA, April 25, 2017.

Moore & Taber. (1979). Foundation Investigation, Two Story Office Building, Long Beach, California, June 11, 1979.

Moore & Taber. (1982). Foundation Investigation, Bank Building, Market Place Office Park, Long Beach, California, September 16, 1982
Geotechnical Investigation Report September 30, 2022
Proposed Long Beach Marketplace Project Page 24
CP VI Marketplace, LLC
Group Delta Project No. LA1583
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
Moore & Taber. (1983). Report of Geotechnical Services, The Market Place, Office Building No. 2, 6695 E. Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, California, July 21, 1983.

SCS Engineers. (2016). Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Market Place Long Beach Office Park, 6615, 6621, AND 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, California, 90803, APNS:
7237-020-040, -041, AND -050, June 13, 2016.

Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC). (2022). UGMS MCER Tool https://data2.scec.org/ugms-mcerGM-tool_v18.4/, accessed 9/23/2022.

U.S. Geological Survey. (2022). Earthquake Catalog,
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/search/, last accessed September 2022.

United States Geological Survey. (2010). Quaternary Faults in Google Earth, http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults/google.php
Wright, T.L. (1991). Structural geology and tectonic evolution of the Los Angeles basin, California, in Biddle, K.T., ed., Active margin basins: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 52, p. 35–134.

LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx

FIGURES
SCALE:

FIGURE NUMBER:

REVIEWED BY:

PREPARED BY:

APPROVED BY:

DATE: DRAWN BY: PROJECT NUMBER:

GROUP DELTA

CONSULTANTS, INC
370 Amapola Ave.

Suite 212
Torrance, CA. 90501
-
-
09/26/2022
-

JMT SITE VICINITY MAP
1 AS SHOWN
LA1583
0 2000' 4000'
REFERENCE: LOS ALAMITOS AND SEAL BEACH QUADRANGLES (USGS, 2018) FILE PATH: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\600 Drafting\LA1583 Figs 1-2-3-4A-4B-4C.dwgPLOTTED DATE: 9/26/2022 5:46:02 AM SAVED BY: josemiguelt

PROPOSED LONG BEACH MARKET PLACE PROJECT
6615, 6621 AND 6695 E PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY

LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA

PROJECT SITE

PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY

STUDEBAKER ROAD
CPT-13
CPT-04A
CPT-06
SCPT-3
B-2
A
A'
CPT-03
B-1
C
C'
B'
B
3 5
6 5
15 25
30 ? 5 ?
?
?
?
?
?
? ? ? ?
5 101
CPT-1
SCPT-2 4
1 CPT-02
CPT-4
CPT-05
2 EXISTING BUILDING 2

EXISTING
BUILDING 1

EXISTING
BUILDING 3
DATE: PROJECT NUMBER:

SCALE:

DRAWN BY:APPROVED BY:

FIGURE NUMBER:

REVIEWED BY:

REVISED:

GROUP DELTA

CONSULTANTS, INC
370 Amapola Ave.Suite 212
Torrance, CA. 90501 -
-
09/27/2022
-

JMT AERIAL VIEW MAP
2 AS SHOWN
LA1583
REFERENCE: GOOGLE EARTH IMAGERY DATE: 10/8/2021
0 80' 160'
FILE PATH: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\600 Drafting\LA1583 Figs 1-2-3-4A-4B-4C.dwg PLOTTED DATE: 9/27/2022 9:04:21 AM SAVED BY: josemiguelt CPT-4 PROPOSED CPT LOCATION
LEGEND:
6 PRIOR BORING LOCATION (MOORE & TABER, 1979)

APPROXIMATE SITE BOUNDARY
B-2 PRIOR BORING (MOORE & TABER, 1982)
101 PRIOR BORING (MOORE & TABER, 1983)
A A'

CROSS SECTION LOCATION
CPT-13 LOCATION OF PRIOR CPT (GDC, 2017)

PROPOSED LONG BEACH MARKET PLACE PROJECT
6615, 6621 AND 6695 E PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY

LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA
? APPROXIMATE DEPTH LANDFILL LOCATION

CONTOUR OF LANDFILL DEPTH
(IT CORPORATION, 1989)
FILL:
5' (5' HA)
FILL: 14'
FILL:
5' (5' BORING)
FILL: 7'
FILL: 7.5'
FILL: 4.5'
FILL: 10'
FILL:
5' (5' HA) FILL: 12.5'
FILL: 14.5'
FILL:

FILL: 4.5' 5' (5' HA)

APPROXIMATE
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6

63$&(6

63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
(
+& +&
+& +&
63$&(6
63$&(6

63$&(6

63$&(6

63$&(6
7 +&

63$&(6
63$&(6
:(7/$1'/,0,76
:(7/$1'/,0,76
:(7/$1'/,0,76
:(7/$1'/,0,76
:(7/$1'$5($
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6

63$&(6
+& 63$&(6
63$&(6

63$&(6
63$&(6
+&
2+(
2+(
2+(
2+(
:(7/$1'$5($
:(7/$1'$5($
63$&(6
63$&(
:/
:/
:/ :/
:/
:/
:/
:/
:/
:/
:/
63$&( 63$&( 63$&( 63$&( 63$&( 63$&(
(/(&50

&% &%
&% &%
&% &%
&% &%
&% &%
&% &% &% &%
&% &%
&% &%
&% &%
&% &%
&% &%
&% &%
&% &%
&% &%
&% &%
&% &%
83 5
'1
5
83 5
'1
5

0$;
*$5$*(
(175<
6 6
$
$
$ $
$ $
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
&% &%
&% &%
&% &%
&% &%
$
&% &%
$
$
(3
'$7$
&% &%
&% &%
$
$
&% &%
6
&%
6
&%
&% &%
$
029(,1
&% &%
$
&% &%
(/(&50
(/(&50
3$66$*( &% &% $
/($6,1*
0$,/
$0(1,7,(6
$0(1,7,(6
$0(1,7,(6),71(66
$

&% &%
$
&%&%
&% &%
5(7$,/
64)7
6
&% &%
$ $
$
83 38
5
1'
5
83 5
'1
5

0$;
83 5

0$;
(/(&50
3$66$*(
83 5

0$;
&% &%
%
% %
% %
%
%
%
%
%
%
% %
%
9,(:&255,'25 64)7 ),5($&&(66
&2857<$5'
64)7
&2857<$5'

64)7
3/$=$

64)7 &2857<$5'

64)7
&2857<$5'
64)7
3$&,),&&2$67+,*+:$<
678'(%$.(552$'
&37
&37$
&37
6&37
%
$
$

&37
%
&
&

%

" "
"
"
"
"
"
" " " "

&37
6&37

&37
&37
&37

'$7(
352-(&7180%(5

6&$/(

'5$:1%<
$33529('%<

),*85(180%(5

5(9,(:('%<

5(9,6('

*5283'(/7$
&2168/7$176,1&
$PDSROD$YH6XLWH
7RUUDQFH&$

-07 (;3/25$7,21/2&$7,210$3

$66+2:1
/$

),/(3$7+
1
?3URMHFWV?

?/$&DUPHO3DUWQHUVB/RQJ%HDFK0DUNHWSODFH*HRWHFKQLFDO?'UDIWLQJ?/$)LJV$%&GZJ 3/277(''$7(

$06$9('%<
MRVHPLJXHOW
&37 $3352;,0$7(&37/2&$7,216
*5283'(/7$

/(*(1'

35,25%25,1*/2&$7,21
0225( 7$%(5

$3352;,0$7(6,7(%281'$5<
% 35,25%25,1*
0225( 7$%(5

35,25%25,1*
0225( 7$%(5

$ $

&52666(&7,21/2&$7,21
&37 /2&$7,212)35,25&37
*'&

352326('/21*%($&+0$5.(73/$&(352-(&7
$1'
(3$&,),&&2$67+,*+:$<
/21*%($&+&$/,)251,$
" $3352;,0$7('(37+/$1'),///2&$7,21
&2172852)/$1'),//'(37+

,7&25325$7,21

),//

%25,1*

),//

+$
),//

),//

),//

+$

ELEVATION (FT)
A
-80
20 0
-20-40-60
-100

ELEVATION (FT)
A'
-80
20 0-20-40-60-100
E.G
E.G
Fs Qt
Sleeve Stress Tip Stress COR
10 Maximum depth: 93.34 (ft)
0 800
Fs Qt
Sleeve Stress Tip Stress COR
10 Maximum depth: 67.92 (ft)
0 80
10 Maximum depth: 67.59 (ft)
0 800
Fs Qt
Sleeve Stress Tip Stress COR
CPT-05 (GDC, 2017)
PROJ ~103' W
CPT-06 (GDC, 2017)
PROJ ~69' E
CPT-03 (GDC, 2017)
B-1
PROJ ~69' E
(MOORE & TABER, 1982)
PROJ ~21' E
B-2 (MOORE & TABER, 1982)
PROJ ~43' W

PROPOSED BUILDING
C-C'

INTERSECTION

STUDEBAKER RD

DENSE TO VERY DENSE SAND

MEDIUM DENSE SILTY SAND (SM)

INTERBEDDED WITH STIFF CLAY (CL)

AND SILT (ML)
SILTY SAND (SM); SANDY SILT (ML);

SILTY-CLAYEY SAND (SC-SM)

SILTY CLAY (CL)

TO CLAYEY SILT (ML) WITH

INTERBEDDED SILTY SAND (SM)
? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ?
??? ?
DATE: PROJECT NUMBER:

SCALE:

DRAWN BY:APPROVED BY:

FIGURE NUMBER:

REVIEWED BY:

REVISED:

GROUP DELTA

CONSULTANTS, INC
370 Amapola Ave.Suite 212
Torrance, CA. 90501 -
-
09/27/2022
-

JMT CROSS SECTION A-A'
4A

AS SHOWN
LA1583
FILE PATH: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\600 Drafting\LA1583 Figs 1-2-3-4A-4B-4C.dwg PLOTTED DATE: 9/27/2022 1:43:03 PM SAVED BY: josemiguelt PROPOSED LONG BEACH MARKET PLACE PROJECT 6615, 6621 AND 6695 E PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY 20' 40' LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA 20' 10'0' H
V
SCALE (FT):

LEGEND:

NOTE: THE BLOWCOUNTS SHOWN ARE RAWBLOWCOUNTS WITHOUT ANY CORRECTION

STANDARD PENETRATION TEST SAMPLE

MODIFIED CALIFORNIA RING SAMPLEBULK SAMPLEDESIGN GROUNDWATER

ELEVATION (FT)
B
-80
20 0
-20-40-60
-100

ELEVATION (FT)
B'
-8020
0 -20-40-60-100

EXISTING PARKING LOT
E.G E.G
Fs Qt
Sleeve Stress Tip Stress COR
10 Maximum depth: 93.34 (ft)
0 800
CPT-05 (GDC, 2017)
PROJ ~55' E
CPT-4
PROJ ~55' E
10 MAXIMUM DEPTH: 50.20 (ft)
0 500
Fs Qt
10 MAXIMUM DEPTH: 96.46 (ft)
0 500
Fs Qt
101
(MOORE & TABER, 1983)
PROJ ~83' E
CPT-1
PROJ ~5' E
10 MAXIMUM DEPTH: 90.22 (ft)
0 500
Fs Qt

PROPOSED BUILDING
SCPT-2
PROJ ~3' W
C-C'

INTERSECTION

STUDEBAKER RD
?
? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ?
?
DATE: PROJECT NUMBER:

SCALE:

DRAWN BY:APPROVED BY:

FIGURE NUMBER:

REVIEWED BY:

REVISED:

GROUP DELTA

CONSULTANTS, INC
370 Amapola Ave.Suite 212
Torrance, CA. 90501 -
-
09/27/2022
-

JMT CROSS SECTION B-B'
4B

AS SHOWN
LA1583
FILE PATH: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\600 Drafting\LA1583 Figs 1-2-3-4A-4B-4C.dwg PLOTTED DATE: 9/27/2022 1:46:25 PM SAVED BY: josemiguelt PROPOSED LONG BEACH MARKET PLACE PROJECT 6615, 6621 AND 6695 E PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY 20' 40' LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA 20' 10'0' H
V
SCALE (FT):

LEGEND:

NOTE: THE BLOWCOUNTS SHOWN ARE RAWBLOWCOUNTS WITHOUT ANY CORRECTION

STANDARD PENETRATION TEST SAMPLE

MODIFIED CALIFORNIA RING SAMPLEBULK SAMPLE

APPROXIMATE DEPTH OF LANDFILL LOCATION
(IT CORPORATION, 1989)

DESIGN GROUNDWATER

SILTY CLAY (CL)

TO CLAYEY SILT (ML) WITH

INTERBEDDED SILTY SAND (SM)

MEDIUM DENSE SILTY SAND (SM)

INTERBEDDED WITH STIFF

CLAY (CL) AND SILT (ML)

DENSE TO VERY DENSE SAND
SILTY SAND (SM);SANDY SILT (ML);SILTY-CLAYEY SAND (SC-SM)

ELEVATION (FT)
C
-80
20 0
-20-40-60
-100

ELEVATION (FT)
C'
-8020
0 -20-40-60-100
E.G E.G
B-1 (MOORE & TABER, 1982)
PROJ ~40' N
101 (MOORE & TABER, 1983)
PROJ ~4' N
SCPT-2
10 MAXIMUM DEPTH: 96.46 (ft)
0 500
Fs Qt
SCPT-3
PROJ ~6' S
10 MAXIMUM DEPTH: 72.83 (ft)
0 500
Fs Qt
4 (MOORE & TABER, 1979)

PACIFIC COAST HWY
PROJ ~5' S

PROPOSED BUILDING EXISTING BUILDING
A-A'

INTERSECTION
B-B'

INTERSECTION
? SILTY CLAY (CL)

TO CLAYEY SILT (ML) WITH

INTERBEDDED SILTY SAND (SM)

MEDIUM DENSE SILTY SAND (SM)

INTERBEDDED WITH STIFF

CLAY (CL) AND SILT (ML)

DENSE TO VERY DENSE SAND
SILTY SAND (SM);
SANDY SILT (ML);

SILTY-CLAYEY SAND (SC-SM)
?
?
?
?
? ?
?
? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
DATE: PROJECT NUMBER:

SCALE:

DRAWN BY:APPROVED BY:

FIGURE NUMBER:

REVISION:
370 Amapola Ave.Suite 212Torrance, CA. 90501

GROUP DELTACONSULTANTS, INC
REVISION:
--
09/27/2022
-

JMT CROSS SECTION C-C'
4C

AS SHOWN
LA1583

PROPOSED LONG BEACH MARKET PLACE PROJECT
6615, 6621 AND 6695 E PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA FILE PATH: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\600 Drafting\LA1583 Figs 1-2-3-4A-4B-4C.dwg PLOTTED DATE: 9/27/2022 1:44:54 PM SAVED BY: josemiguelt 20' 40' 20' 10'0' H
V
SCALE (FT):

LEGEND:

NOTE: THE BLOWCOUNTS SHOWN ARE RAWBLOWCOUNTS WITHOUT ANY CORRECTION

STANDARD PENETRATION TEST SAMPLE

MODIFIED CALIFORNIA RING SAMPLEBULK SAMPLE

APPROXIMATE DEPTH OF LANDFILL LOCATION
(IT CORPORATION, 1989)

DESIGN GROUNDWATER
SCALE:

FIGURE NUMBER:

REVIEWED BY:

PREPARED BY:

APPROVED BY:

DATE: DRAWN BY: PROJECT NUMBER:

GROUP DELTA

CONSULTANTS, INC
370 Amapola Ave.

Suite 212
Torrance, CA. 90501
-
-
09/26/2022
-

JMT HISTORICAL HIGHEST GROUND WATER
5 AS HSOWN
LA1583
FILE PATH: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\600 Drafting\LA1583 Figs 5_7.dwgPLOTTED DATE: 9/26/2022 5:54:42 AM SAVED BY: josemiguelt REFERENCE: CGS, 1998, SEISMIC HAZARD ZONE REPORT,
PLATE 1.2 GROUND WATER, FOR LOS ALAMITOS (SHZR 019)
AND SEAL BEACH (SHZR 020) 7.5-MINUTE QUADRANGLES,
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA.

Base map enlarged from U.S.G.S. 30 x 60-minute series
Plate 1.2 Historically Highest Ground Water Contours and Borehole Log Data Locations, Los Alamitos and Seal Beach Quadrangles.

PROPOSED LONG BEACH MARKET PLACE PROJECT
6615, 6621 AND 6695 E PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY

LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA

PROJECT SITE
0 5000' 10000'
DATE: PROJECT NUMBER:

SCALE:

DRAWN BY:APPROVED BY:

FIGURE NUMBER:

REVIEWED BY:

REVISED:

GROUP DELTA

CONSULTANTS, INC
370 Amapola Ave.Suite 212
Torrance, CA. 90501 -
-
09/26/2022
-

JMT REGIONAL GEOLOGY MAP
6 AS SHOWN
LA-1318

PROJECT SITE
REFERENCE: PETER D. ROFFERS AND TRINDA L. BEDROSSIAN, JULY 2010 GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE LONG BEACH 30' X 60' QUADRANGLE FILE PATH: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\600 Drafting\LA1583 Fig 6.dwg PLOTTED DATE: 9/26/2022 5:56:52 AM SAVED BY: josemiguelt PROPOSED LONG BEACH MARKET PLACE PROJECT 6615, 6621 AND 6695 E PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA

OVERLAND

NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD-ROSE CANYON

ELSINORE

LOWER ELYSIAN PARK

PUENTE HILLS BLIND THRUST

CENTRAL AVE

CHARNOCK

LOS ALAMITOS

SAN PEDRO BASIN

REDONDO CANYON

PALOS VERDES

CABRILLO

PERALTA HILLS

THUMS-HUNTINGTON BEACH

NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD-ROSE CANYON SAN JOAQUIN HILLS
DATE: PROJECT NUMBER:

SCALE:

DRAWN BY:APPROVED BY:

FIGURE NUMBER:

REVIEWED BY:

PREPARED BY:

GROUP DELTACONSULTANTS, INC
370 Amapola Ave.

Suite 212
Torrance, CA. 90501 -
-
09/27/2022
-
JMT

AND SEIMICITY MAP

REGIONAL FAULT
7 AS SHOWN
LA1583
FILE PATH: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\600 Drafting\LA1583 Figs 5_7.dwg PLOTTED DATE: 9/27/2022 6:49:02 AM SAVED BY: josemiguelt PROPOSED LONG BEACH MARKET PLACE PROJECT 6615, 6621 AND 6695 E PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA M5-M4.5
>M6 EQ
M6-M5
Undifferentiated
Quaternary
< 130,000 yrs
REFERENCE:

GOOGLE EARTH, IMAGERY DATE, 10/8/2021
USGS, EARTHQUAKE CATALOG, ACCESSED 09/23/2022USGS & CGS, QUATERNARY FAULT AND FOLD DATABASE, ACCESSED 3/4/2020 4 mi DATE: PROJECT NUMBER:

SCALE:

DRAWN BY:APPROVED BY:

FIGURE NUMBER:

REVIEWED BY:

PREPARED BY:

GROUP DELTACONSULTANTS, INC
370 Amapola Ave.

Suite 212
Torrance, CA. 90501 -
-
09/26/2022
-
JMT

REQUIRED INVESTIGATION MAP

EARTHQUAKE ZONES OF
8 AS SHOWN
LA1583
0 4000' 2000'
FILE PATH: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\600 Drafting\LA1583 Fig 8.dwg PLOTTED DATE: 9/26/2022 6:00:05 AM SAVED BY: josemiguelt PROPOSED LONG BEACH MARKET PLACE PROJECT 6615, 6621 AND 6695 E PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA REFERENCE: CGS, SEISMIC HAZMAP LOS ALAMITOS AND SEAL BEACH QUADRANGLES (1999)

PROJECT SITE
WĞƌŝŽĚ ĞƐŝŐŶ D
Z
;ƐĞĐͿ ^Ă;ŐͿ ^Ă;ŐͿ
Ϭ͘Ϭϭ Ϭ͘ϱϰϰ Ϭ͘ϴϭϲϬ͘ϬϮ Ϭ͘ϱϰϲ Ϭ͘ϴϭϵϬ͘Ϭϯ Ϭ͘ϱϰϱ Ϭ͘ϴϭϳϬ͘Ϭϱ Ϭ͘ϱϵϴ Ϭ͘ϴϵϳ Ϭ͘Ϭϳϱ Ϭ͘ϳϭϳ ϭ͘Ϭϳϲ
Ϭ͘ϭ Ϭ͘ϴϮϭ ϭ͘ϮϯϮ
Ϭ͘ϭϱ Ϭ͘ϵϳϵ ϭ͘ϰϲϴ
Ϭ͘Ϯ ϭ͘ϭϮϴ ϭ͘ϲϵϮ
Ϭ͘Ϯϱ ϭ͘ϮϱϮ ϭ͘ϴϳϴ
Ϭ͘ϯ ϭ͘ϯϰϵ Ϯ͘ϬϮϯϬ͘ϰ ϭ͘ϰϮϮ Ϯ͘ϭϯϰϬ͘ϱ ϭ͘ϯϳϬ Ϯ͘Ϭϱϱ
Ϭ͘ϳϱ ϭ͘ϭϯϳ ϭ͘ϳϬϲ
ϭ Ϭ͘ϵϴϮ ϭ͘ϰϳϯ
ϭ͘ϱ Ϭ͘ϳϱϬ ϭ͘ϭϮϱ
Ϯ Ϭ͘ϱϵϵ Ϭ͘ϴϵϵϯ Ϭ͘ϯϵϴ Ϭ͘ϱϵϴ
ϰ Ϭ͘Ϯϳϴ Ϭ͘ϰϭϴϱ Ϭ͘Ϯϭϳ Ϭ͘ϯϮϱ
ϳ͘ϱ Ϭ͘ϭϯϲ Ϭ͘ϮϬϱ
ϭϬ Ϭ͘ϬϴϮ Ϭ͘ϭϮϰ
^^с ϭ͘ϮϴϬ ^ϭс ϭ͘ϭϵϴ
WZK:
dEhD
Z
^
ϳͲϭϲD
ZĂŶĚ
ĞƐŝŐŶ
ĂƌƚŚƋƵĂŬĞ
WZK:
dED
&/'hZ
ED

ĂƌŵĞůWĂƌƚŶĞƌƐͺ>ŽŶŐĞĂĐŚDĂƌŬĞƚƉůĂĐĞ ^
ϳͲϭϲ^ŝƚĞͲ^ƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĞƐŝŐŶ
ĂƌƚŚƋƵĂŬĞĂŶĚ &/'hZ
EhD
Z
ϲϲϭϱ͕ϲϲϮϭ͕ĂŶĚϲϲϵϱ
WĂĐŝĨŝĐŽĂƐƚ,ǁǇ ^ŝƚĞͲ^ƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĞƐŝŐŶĐĐĞůĞƌĂƚŝŽŶWĂƌĂŵĞƚĞƌƐ >ϭϱϴϯ ϵ Ϭ
Ϭ͘ϮϬ͘ϰϬ͘ϲϬ͘ϴ
ϭ
ϭ͘Ϯϭ͘ϰϭ͘ϲϭ͘ϴ
Ϯ
Ϯ͘ϮϮ͘ϰϮ͘ϲ
Ϭ͘Ϭϭ Ϭ͘ϭ ϭ ϭϬ
^ƉĞĐƚƌĂůĐĐĞůĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ;ŐͿ
WĞƌŝŽĚ;ƐĞĐͿ
^ŝƚĞͲ^ƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĞƐŝŐŶ
ĂƌƚŚƋƵĂŬĞ;^
ϳͲϭϲ͕^ĞĐƚŝŽŶϮϭ͘ϯͿ
ϱйĂŵƉŝŶŐ
^ŝƚĞͲ^ƉĞĐŝĨŝĐD
Z^ŝƚĞͲ^ƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĞƐŝŐŶZĞƐƉŽŶƐĞ^ƉĞĐƚƌƵŵ;^ĞĐƚŝŽŶϮϭ͘ϯͿ
LA1583
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Depth (ft)
Axial Capacities (kips)
24ͲINCHͲDIAMETER DRIVEN PILE

STATIC ALLOWABLE AXIAL CAPACITIES
Allowable Downward Capacities
Allowable Upward Capacities
Notes:
ϭ͘ Axial capacity in the upper 20 feet is ignored due to potential settlement of landfill material and native clays.

Ϯ͘ A downdragůŽĂĚof 104 kips should be added to service level structural load (dead plus live) to determine the pile length under static loading.
ϯ͘ These allowable capacities are based on factor of safety of 2 for skin friction resistance and 3 for end bearing resistance.
ϰ͘ Allowable uplift capacities are based on 70 % of allowable downward skin friction resistance. ϱ͘ Minimum recommended pile embedment is 50 feet.

FIGURE 10
LA1583
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Depth (ft)
Axial Capacities (kips)
24ͲINCHͲDIAMETER DRIVEN PILE

SEISMIC ULTIMATE AXIAL CAPACITIES
Sesimic Ultimate Downward Capacity
Seismic Ultimate Upward Capacity
Notes:

1. The ultimate seismic capacity ignores the resistance within the landfill and significantly liquifiable soil layers.

2. A seismic downdrag load of 140 kips was estimated to the bottom of the significantly liquifiable soil layers.

3. The downdrag load should be added to the factored structural loads for the determination of controlling pile length under the seismic conditions.

4. The ultimate seismic capacity utilizes factor of safety of 1 for both skin friction and end bearing.

5. The seismic uplift capacities are based on 70 % of seismic downward skin friction resistance.

6. The minimum recommended pile embedment is 50 feet.

FIGURE 11
LA1583
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Depth Below Pile Head (ft)
Axial Capacities (kips)
Allowable Downward Capacities
Allowable Upward Capacities
24ͲINCH DIAMETER (DISPLACEMENT & NONͲDISPLACEMENT) PILE

STATIC ALLOWABLE AXIAL CAPACITIES
Notes:
ϭ͘ The axial capacity assumes a displacement pile installation to the depth of 50 feet and a nonͲdisplacmenet pile installation at depths greater than 50 feet.

Ϯ͘ Axial capacity in the upper 20 feet is ignored due to potential settlement of landfill material and native clays.
ϯ͘ A downdragůŽĂĚof 104 kips should be added to service level structural load (dead plus live) to determine the pile length under static loading.
ϰ͘ These allowable capacities are based on factor of safety of 2 for skin friction resistance and 3 for end bearing resistance.
ϱ͘ Allowable uplift capacities are based on 70 % of allowable downward skin friction resistance. ϲ͘ Minimum recommended pile embedment is 50 feet.

FIGURE 12
LA1583
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Depth Below Pile Head (ft)
Axial Capacities (kips)
Seismic Ultimate Downward Capacity
Seismic Ultimate Upward Capacity
24ͲINCH DIAMETER (DISPLACEMENT & NONͲDISPLACEMENT) PILE

SEISMIC ULTIMATE AXIAL CAPACITIES
Notes:

1. The axial capacity assumes displacement pile to the depth of 50 feet and nonͲdisplacement pile below the depth of 50 feet.

2. The ultimate seismic capacity ignores the resistance within the landfill and significantly liquifiable soil layers.

3. A seismic downdrag load of 140 kips was estimated to the bottom of the significantly liquifiable soil layers.

4. The downdrag load should be added to the factored structural loads for the determination of controlling pile length under the seismic conditions.

5. The ultimate seismic capacity utilizes factor of safety of 1 for both skin friction and end bearing.

6. The seismic uplift capacities are based on 70 % of seismic downward skin friction resistance.

7. The minimum recommended pile embedment is 50 feet.

FIGURE 13
LA1583
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Depth (ft)
Axial Capacities (kips)
18ͲINCHͲDIAMETER DRIVEN PILE

STATIC ALLOWABLE AXIAL CAPACITIES
Allowable Downward Capacity
Allowable Upward Capacitiy
Notes:

1. Axial capacity in the upper 20 feet is ignored due to potential settlement of landfill material and native clays.

2. A downdrag load of 78 kips should be added to service level structural load (dead plus live) to determine the pile length under static loading.

3. These allowable capacities are based on factor of safety of 2 for skin friction resistance and 3 for end bearing resistance.

4. Allowable uplift capacities are based on 70 % of allowable downward skin friction resistance.

5. Minimum recommended pile embedment is 50 feet.

FIGURE 14
LA1583
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Depth (ft)
Axial Capacities (kips)
18ͲINCHͲDIAMETER DRIVEN PILE

SEISMIC ULTIMATE AXIAL CAPACITIES
Seismic Ultimate Downward Capacity
Seismic Ultimate Upward Capacity
Notes:

1. The ultimate seismic capacity ignores the resistance within the landfill and significantly liquifiable soil layers.

2. A seismic downdrag load of 106 kips was estimated to the bottom of the significantly liquifiable soil layers.

3. The downdrag load should be added to the factored structural loads for the determination of controlling pile length under the seismic conditions.

4. The ultimate seismic capacity utilizes factor of safety of 1 for both skin friction and end bearing.

5. The seismic uplift capacities are based on 70 % of seismic downward skin friction resistance.

6. The minimum recommended pile embedment is 50 feet.

FIGURE 15
LA1583
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Depth Below Pile Head (ft)
Axial Capacities (kips)
Allowable Downward Capacities
Allowable Upward Capacities
18ͲINCH DIAMETER (DISPLACEMENT & NONͲDISPLACEMENT) PILE

STATIC ALLOWABLE AXIAL CAPACITIES
Notes:

1. The axial capacity assumes a displacement pile installation to the depth of 50 feet and a nonͲdisplacmenet pile installation at depths greater than 50 feet.

2. Axial capacity in the upper 20 feet is ignored due to potential settlement of landfill material and native clays.

3. A downdrag load of 78 kips should be added to service level structural load (dead plus live) to determine the pile length under static loading.

4. These allowable capacities are based on factor of safety of 2 for skin friction resistance and 3 for end bearing resistance.

5. Allowable uplift capacities are based on 70 % of allowable downward skin friction resistance.

6. Minimum recommended pile embedment is 50 feet.

FIGURE 16
LA1583
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Depth Below Pile Head (ft)
Axial Capacities (kips)
Seismic Ultimate Downward Capacity
Seismic Ultimate Upward Capacity
18ͲINCH DIAMETER (DISPLACEMENT & NONͲDISPLACEMENT) PILE

SEISMIC ULTIMATE AXIAL CAPACITIES
Notes:

1. The axial capacity assumes displacement pile to the depth of 50 feet and nonͲdisplacement pile below the depth of 50 feet.

2. The ultimate seismic capacity ignores the resistance within the landfill and significantly liquifiable soil layers.

3. A seismic downdrag load of 106 kips was estimated to the bottom of the significantly liquifiable soil layers.

4. The downdrag load should be added to the factored structural loads for the determination of controlling pile length under the seismic conditions.

5. The ultimate seismic capacity utilizes factor of safety of 1 for both skin friction and end bearing.

6. The seismic uplift capacities are based on 70 % of seismic downward skin friction resistance.

7. The minimum recommended pile embedment is 50 feet.

FIGURE 17
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6

63$&(6

63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
(
+& +&
+& +&
63$&(6
63$&(6

63$&(6

63$&(6

63$&(6
7 +&

63$&(6
63$&(6
:(7/$1'/,0,76
:(7/$1'/,0,76
:(7/$1'/,0,76
:(7/$1'/,0,76
:(7/$1'$5($
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6
63$&(6

63$&(6
+& 63$&(6
63$&(6

0$; 83 5

0$; (/(&50 3$66$*(
83 5

0$;
&% &%
%
% %
% %
%
%
%
%
%
%
% %
%
9,(:&255,'25 64)7 ),5($&&(66
&2857<$5'
64)7
&2857<$5'

64)7
3/$=$

64)7 &2857<$5'

64)7
&2857<$5'
64)7
3$&,),&&2$67+,*+:$<
678'(%$.(552$'
&37
&37
$
&

%

" "
"
"
"
"
"
" "

&37
&37

7 63$&( 63$&( 63$&(

63$&(6
&% &%
$
6 6
(/(&50
&% &%
&% &%
&% &%
83 5
$;

0$;

0$;
$
$
$
$
$
$
63$&(
&% &%
$ $ $
$&( 63$&(
&% 6 &%
$
&% &%
$
63$
83 5
*$5$*(
(175< 9(,1
&% &%
/($6,1*
0$,/
$0(1,7,(6
$0(1,7,(6
$0(1,7,(6),71(66

&% &%
$
&%&%
&% &%
$ $
83 5
$; 0 % % % % % &2857<$5' 2857<$5'

64)7
4 )7 &2857<$5' 64)7 4 6 )7 &37$ 6&37 % $

&37
%
&
%

" "
&37
6&37
&37
'$7(
352-(&7180%(5

6&$/(

'5$:1%<
$33529('%<

),*85(180%(5

5(9,(:('%<

5(9,6('

*5283'(/7$
&2168/7$176,1&
$PDSROD$YH6XLWH
7RUUDQFH&$

-07 35(/2$',1*$5($

$66+2:1
/$

),/(3$7+
1
?3URMHFWV?

?/$&DUPHO3DUWQHUVB/RQJ%HDFK0DUNHWSODFH*HRWHFKQLFDO?'UDIWLQJ?/$)LJV$%&GZJ 3/277(''$7(

$06$9('%<
MRVHPLJXHOW
&37 $3352;,0$7(&37/2&$7,216
*5283'(/7$

/(*(1'

35,25%25,1*/2&$7,21
0225( 7$%(5

$3352;,0$7(6,7(%281'$5<
% 35,25%25,1*
0225( 7$%(5

35,25%25,1*
0225( 7$%(5

$ $

&52666(&7,21/2&$7,21
&37 /2&$7,212)35,25&37
*'&

352326('/21*%($&+0$5.(73/$&(352-(&7
$1'
(3$&,),&&2$67+,*+:$<
/21*%($&+&$/,)251,$
" $3352;,0$7('(37+/$1'),///2&$7,21
&2172852)/$1'),//'(37+

,7&25325$7,21

),//

%25,1*

),//

+$
),//

),//

),//

+$

5(&200(1'('$3352;,0$7(35(/2$',1*$5($
9(

*$5$*(
(175< (,1
/($6,1
0$,/
$0(1,7

(
5 83
5
&% &%
1*
7,(6
$0(1,7,(6

83 5
),7
$0(1,7,(

7 $
71(66
63$
(6
$ $
&% &%
$ $ $
%
$&( 63$&(
&% 6 &%
&% &%
$
$
6 &( (
$
$
$
$
7 63$&( 63$&( 63$&(
63$
(6 & 6 6
6 6
&% &%
&% &%
&% &%

$
&% &%
$
(/(&50 83
5
$; 0 $;

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
&% &%
$
&%%&
$
63$&(
$

$; 0
% %
% %
%
&2857<$5'

64)7
&2857<$5'
46 )7 &37$
6&37
%
%
" "
&37
6&37
&37 $
),//

+$
),//
),//

/
/

),//

),//
),//

+$

%
9 /

RECOMMENDEDPRELOADING AREA
LA1583
3456789
10 0123456
Preloading Fill Height (Feet)
Time to 90 % Settlement (Months)

PRELOADING
FIGURE 19
Additional Fill Height Reduction in Time to Substantial Settlement Completion LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
APPENDIX A – PREVIOUS FIELD INVESTIGATION AND LABORATORY TESTING DKKZ
Θd
Z;ϭϵϳϵͿ

DKKZ
Θd
Z;ϭϵϴϮͿ

DKKZ
Θd
Z;ϭϵϴϯͿ

'ZKhW
>dKE^h>dEd^͕/E͘;ϮϬϭϳͿ
*URXS'HOWD
3URMHFW /RQJ%HDFK0DUNHWSODFH 2SHUDWRU 5&-0 )LOHQDPH 6')
FSW-RE1XPEHU /$ &RQH1XPEHU ''* *36+ROH1XPEHU &37 'DWHDQG7LPH
$0 0D[LPXP'HSWK IW(67*:'HSWK'XULQJ7HVW IW 1HW$UHD5DWLR&RQH6L]HFPVTXDUHG 6RLO%HKDYLRU5HIHUDQFH 6RLOEHKDYLRUW\SHDQG637EDVHGRQGDWDIURP8%&

7,3
76)
)5,&7,21
76)
)V4W

6371

VHQVLWLYHILQHJUDLQHGRUJDQLFPDWHULDOFOD\ VLOW\FOD\WRFOD\FOD\H\VLOWWRVLOW\FOD\VDQG\VLOWWRFOD\H\VLOW VLOW\VDQGWRVDQG\VLOWVDQGWRVLOW\VDQG VDQG
JUDYHOO\VDQGWRVDQGYHU\VWLIIILQHJUDLQHG

VDQGWRFOD\H\VDQG

&37'$7$
'(37+

62,/
%(+$9,25
7<3(
*URXS'HOWD
3URMHFW /RQJ%HDFK0DUNHWSODFH 2SHUDWRU 5&-0 )LOHQDPH 6')
FSW-RE1XPEHU /$ &RQH1XPEHU ''* *36+ROH1XPEHU &37 'DWHDQG7LPH
30 0D[LPXP'HSWK
IW(67*:'HSWK'XULQJ7HVW IW
1HW$UHD5DWLR&RQH6L]HFPVTXDUHG 6RLO%HKDYLRU5HIHUDQFH 6RLOEHKDYLRUW\SHDQG637EDVHGRQGDWDIURP8%&

7,3
76)
)5,&7,21
76)
)V4W

6371

VHQVLWLYHILQHJUDLQHGRUJDQLFPDWHULDOFOD\ VLOW\FOD\WRFOD\FOD\H\VLOWWRVLOW\FOD\VDQG\VLOWWRFOD\H\VLOW VLOW\VDQGWRVDQG\VLOWVDQGWRVLOW\VDQG VDQG
JUDYHOO\VDQGWRVDQGYHU\VWLIIILQHJUDLQHG

VDQGWRFOD\H\VDQG

&37'$7$
'(37+

62,/
%(+$9,25
7<3(
*URXS'HOWD
3URMHFW /RQJ%HDFK0DUNHWSODFH 2SHUDWRU 5&-0 )LOHQDPH 6')
FSW-RE1XPEHU /$ &RQH1XPEHU ''* *36+ROH1XPEHU &37$ 'DWHDQG7LPH
$0 0D[LPXP'HSWK IW(67*:'HSWK'XULQJ7HVW IW 1HW$UHD5DWLR&RQH6L]HFPVTXDUHG 6RLO%HKDYLRU5HIHUDQFH 6RLOEHKDYLRUW\SHDQG637EDVHGRQGDWDIURP8%&

7,3
76)
)5,&7,21
76)
)V4W

6371

VHQVLWLYHILQHJUDLQHGRUJDQLFPDWHULDOFOD\ VLOW\FOD\WRFOD\FOD\H\VLOWWRVLOW\FOD\VDQG\VLOWWRFOD\H\VLOW VLOW\VDQGWRVDQG\VLOWVDQGWRVLOW\VDQG VDQG
JUDYHOO\VDQGWRVDQGYHU\VWLIIILQHJUDLQHG

VDQGWRFOD\H\VDQG

&37'$7$
'(37+

62,/
%(+$9,25
7<3(
*URXS'HOWD
3URMHFW /RQJ%HDFK0DUNHWSODFH 2SHUDWRU 5&-0 )LOHQDPH 6')

FSW-RE1XPEHU /$ &RQH1XPEHU ''* *36+ROH1XPEHU &37 'DWHDQG7LPH
30 0D[LPXP'HSWK
IW(67*:'HSWK'XULQJ7HVW IW
1HW$UHD5DWLR&RQH6L]HFPVTXDUHG 6RLO%HKDYLRU5HIHUDQFH 6RLOEHKDYLRUW\SHDQG637EDVHGRQGDWDIURP8%&

7,3
76)
)5,&7,21
76)
)V4W

6371

VHQVLWLYHILQHJUDLQHGRUJDQLFPDWHULDOFOD\ VLOW\FOD\WRFOD\FOD\H\VLOWWRVLOW\FOD\VDQG\VLOWWRFOD\H\VLOW VLOW\VDQGWRVDQG\VLOWVDQGWRVLOW\VDQG VDQG
JUDYHOO\VDQGWRVDQGYHU\VWLIIILQHJUDLQHG

VDQGWRFOD\H\VDQG

&37'$7$
'(37+

62,/
%(+$9,25
7<3(
*URXS'HOWD
3URMHFW /RQJ%HDFK0DUNHWSODFH 2SHUDWRU 5&-0 )LOHQDPH 6')

FSW-RE1XPEHU /$ &RQH1XPEHU ''* *36+ROH1XPEHU &37 'DWHDQG7LPH
30 0D[LPXP'HSWK IW(67*:'HSWK'XULQJ7HVW IW 1HW$UHD5DWLR&RQH6L]HFPVTXDUHG 6RLO%HKDYLRU5HIHUDQFH 6RLOEHKDYLRUW\SHDQG637EDVHGRQGDWDIURP8%&

7,3
76)
)5,&7,21
76)
)V4W

6371

VHQVLWLYHILQHJUDLQHGRUJDQLFPDWHULDOFOD\ VLOW\FOD\WRFOD\FOD\H\VLOWWRVLOW\FOD\VDQG\VLOWWRFOD\H\VLOW VLOW\VDQGWRVDQG\VLOWVDQGWRVLOW\VDQG VDQG
JUDYHOO\VDQGWRVDQGYHU\VWLIIILQHJUDLQHG

VDQGWRFOD\H\VDQG

&37'$7$
'(37+

62,/
%(+$9,25
7<3(
*URXS'HOWD
3URMHFW /RQJ%HDFK0DUNHWSODFH 2SHUDWRU 5&-0 )LOHQDPH 6')
FSW-RE1XPEHU /$ &RQH1XPEHU ''* *36+ROH1XPEHU &37 'DWHDQG7LPH
$0 0D[LPXP'HSWK IW(67*:'HSWK'XULQJ7HVW IW
1HW$UHD5DWLR&RQH6L]HFPVTXDUHG 6RLO%HKDYLRU5HIHUDQFH 6RLOEHKDYLRUW\SHDQG637EDVHGRQGDWDIURP8%&

7,3
76)
)5,&7,21
76)
)V4W

6371

VHQVLWLYHILQHJUDLQHGRUJDQLFPDWHULDOFOD\ VLOW\FOD\WRFOD\FOD\H\VLOWWRVLOW\FOD\VDQG\VLOWWRFOD\H\VLOW VLOW\VDQGWRVDQG\VLOWVDQGWRVLOW\VDQG VDQG
JUDYHOO\VDQGWRVDQGYHU\VWLIIILQHJUDLQHG

VDQGWRFOD\H\VDQG

&37'$7$
'(37+

62,/
%(+$9,25
7<3(
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
APPENDIX B – CURRENT FIELD INVESTIGATION

APPENDIX B

CURRENT FIELD INVESTIGATION
B.1 Introduction
A geotechnical subsurface investigation was conducted by Group Delta for the project at the 6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway in Log Beach on September 6 of 2022 for providing a design-level geotechnical report for the project. The investigation consisted of four (4) hand auger borings and four (4) cone penetration test (CPT) soundings. The exploration locations and numbers are shown in Figures 2 and 3 of the main report. A summary table of Group Delta’s investigation is provided in Table B-1.

B.2 Soil Boring
Four (4) hand auger borings were advanced to the depth of 5 feet below the existing grade. The hand auger borings were performed at the CPT locations. Subsurface materials were visually classified and recorded by Group Delta’s field engineer in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS).

Bulk samples of the encountered materials were obtained from the boring and recorded on the boring log. Bulk samples were obtained by a shovel and placed into polyethylene bags.

A key for soil classification and a boring record legend are presented in Figures B-1a to B-1c and B-2a to B-2b, respectively. The boring log is presented in Figures B-3 to B-6.

B.3 Cone Penetration Test (CPT) Sounding
Four (4) cone penetration test (CPT) soundings were conducted at the site with shear wave velocity measurements in two of the CPTs. The CPT was advanced to a depth of about 50.2 feet to 96.5 feet below the existing grade. The seismic CPT (SCPT) was performed in general accordance with ASTM D3441, using a CPT Truck.

The CPT was hand augered to the depth of 5 feet before advancing the CPT. The CPT truck pushes a steel rod with a conical tip and a cylindrical friction sleeve into the ground. The conical tip has a 60-degree apex angle and a projected cross-sectional area of 1.55 square inches. The cylindrical friction sleeve has a surface area of 23.25 square inches. Both the tip and the sleeve have outside diameters of 1.4 inches.

As the rod advanced, electronic instruments measured and recorded both the tip resistance and the frictional resistance on the sleeve. The tip and frictional resistance were then analyzed, using available correlations, to estimate soil classification, density, strength, and compressibility of the subsurface materials. Unlike soil borings, in which drive samples are typically taken at discrete intervals, the CPT provides a continuous record of soil properties with depth. Hence, the CPT can define the subsurface soil profile with a much higher resolution than a soil boring, often detecting thin layers that are easily missed with conventional drilling and sampling.

Shear wave velocity measurements versus depth were made in SCPT-2 and SCPT-3 to the depth of 95 feet and 70 feet respectively, at 5 feet intervals. After every 5 ft of penetration, the probe was stopped, a shear wave was generated at the ground surface, and the arrival of the shear wave was detected by the CPT probe. The arrival times of the shear waves were used to calculate the shear wave velocity versus depth.

The CPT logs are presented in Figures B-7 to B-10. The shear wave velocity data is presented in Figures B-11 and B-14.

B.4 List of Attached Tables and Figures
The following table and figures are attached and complete this appendix:

Table B-1 Summary of Group Delta’s Current Field Explorations Figures B-1A to B-1C Boring Record Legend
Figures B-2A to B-2B Key for Soil Classification
Figures B-3 to B-6 Hand Auger Boring Logs
Figures B-7 to B-10 CPT Logs
Figures B-11 to B-14 Shear wave measurements
TABLE
Table B-1
Summary of Group Delta’s Current Field Explorations
Exploration No. Date
Performed
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Total Depth
(ft)
Groundwater
Depth (ft) Exploration Type
HA-1 9/9/2022 11.0 5.0 NE HA
HA-2 9/9/2022 13.0 5.0 NE HA
HA-3 9/9/2022 12.0 5.0 NE HA
HA-4 9/9/2022 13.5 5.0 NE HA
CPT-1 9/9/2022 11.0 90.2 NE CPT
SCPT-2 9/9/2022 13.0 96.5 NE SCPT
SCPT-3 9/9/2022 12.0 72.8 NE SCPT
CPT-4 9/9/2022 13.5 50.2 NE CPT
Notes:

1. NE = not encountered; HA = hand auger; CPT = cone penetration test; SCPT = seismic cone penetration test.

2. Ground surface elevations are approximate and obtained via plans provided by CP VI Marketplace.

FIGURES

HOLE IDENTIFICATION
Where:

H: Hole Type Code
YY: 2-digit year
NNN: 3-digit number (001-999)
Holes are identified using the following
convention:

Where:

H: Hole Type Code
YY: 2-digit year
NNN: 3-digit number (001-999)

SOIL IDENTIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION SEQUENCE
Describe the soil using descriptive terms
in the order shown
Minimum Required Sequence:

USCS Group Name (Group Symbol); Consistency or
Density; Color; Moisture; Percent or Proportion of Soil; Particle Size; Plasticity (optional).
= optional for non-Caltrans projects
Description Sequence Examples:

SANDY lean CLAY (CL); very stiff;
yellowish brown; moist; mostly fines;
some SAND, from fine to medium; few
gravels; medium plasticity; PP=2.75.

Well-graded SAND with SILT and
GRAVEL and COBBLES (SW-SM);
dense; brown; moist; mostly SAND,
from fine to coarse; some fine GRAVEL;
few fines; weak cementation; 10%
GRANITE COBBLES; 3 to 6 inches;
hard; subrounded.

Clayey SAND (SC); medium dense,
light brown; wet; mostly fine sand,; little
fines; low plasticity.

GROUP
DELTA

CONSULTANTS
BORING RECORD LEGEND #1
#-1B
GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC.

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS

AND GEOLOGISTS

FIGURE NUMBER

PROJECT NAME PROJECT NUMBER
Ref.: Caltrans Soil and Rock Logging Classification, and Presentation Manual (2010) Refer to
Section
Sequence
Identification
Components
FieldLabRequiredOptional
1 Group Name 2.5.2 3.2.2 ●
2 Group Symbol 2.5.2 3.2.2 ●
Description
Components
3 Consistency of
Cohesive Soil 2.5.3 3.2.3 ●
4 Apparent Density
of Cohesionless
Soil

2.5.4 ●
5 Color 2.5.5 ●
6 Moisture 2.5.6 ●
Percent or
Proportion of Soil 2.5.7 3.2.4 ●
Particle Size 2.5.8 2.5.8 ●
Particle Angularity 2.5.9 ○
7 Particle Shape 2.5.10 ○
8 Plasticity (for finegrained soil) 2.5.11 3.2.5 ○
9 Dry Strength (for
fine-grained soil) 2.5.12 ○
10 Dilatency (for finegrained soil) 2.5.13 ○
11 Toughness (for
fine-grained soil) 2.5.14 ○
12 Structure 2.5.15 ○
13 Cementation 2.5.16 ●
Percent of
Cobbles and
Boulders

2.5.17 ●
14 Description of
Cobbles and
Boulders

2.5.18 ●
15 Consistency Field
Test Result 2.5.3 ●
16 Additional
Comments 2.5.19 ○
Hole Type
Code
A Auger boring (hollow or solid stem,
bucket)
R Rotary drilled boring (conventional)
RC Rotary core (self-cased wire-line,
continuously-sampled)
RW Rotary core (self-cased wire-line, not
continuously sampled)
P Rotary percussion boring (Air)
HD Hand driven (1-inch soil tube)
HA Hand auger
D Driven (dynamic cone penetrometer)
CPT Cone Penetration Test
O Other (note on LOTB)

H-YY-NNN
Description
Cementation; % cobbles & boulders;
Description of cobbles & boulders;
Consistency field test result
Where applicable:
/RQJ%HDFK0DUNHWSODFH /$
SILTY, CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL
CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL

COBBLES
Well-graded GRAVEL with SAND
Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
Well-graded GRAVEL with SILT
Well-graded GRAVEL with CLAY and SAND
(or SILTY CLAY and SAND)
Well-graded SAND with CLAY (or SILTY CLAY)
Poorly graded GRAVEL
Poorly graded GRAVEL with CLAY
(or SILTY CLAY)
Poorly graded SAND with SILT
Poorly graded SAND with CLAY (or SILTY CLAY)
Poorly graded SAND with CLAY and GRAVEL
(or SILTY CLAY and GRAVEL)
Lean CLAY
ORGANIC elastic SILT with SAND
SANDY ORGANIC elastic SILT with GRAVEL
GRAVELLY ORGANIC elastic SILT
GRAVELLY ORGANIC elastic SILT with SAND
GW-GC
GP-GM
GP-GC
GM

GROUP SYMBOLS AND NAMES

DRILLING METHOD SYMBOLS
Auger Drilling
Term

FIELD AND LABORATORY TESTS

WATER LEVEL SYMBOLS
Dynamic Cone
or Hand Driven Rotary Drilling Diamond Core Static Water Level Reading (after drilling, date) Ref.: Caltrans Soil and Rock Logging Classification, and Presentation Manual (2010) Shelby Tube
NX Rock Core
Bulk Sample
Piston Sampler
HQ Rock Core
Other (see remarks)
First Water Level Reading (during drilling)

SAMPLER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS
OL
OL
CH
MH
OH
OL/OH

ORGANIC SOIL
ORGANIC SOIL with SAND
ORGANIC SOIL with GRAVEL

SANDY ORGANIC SOIL
SANDY ORGANIC SOIL with GRAVEL

GRAVELLY ORGANIC SOIL
GRAVELLY ORGANIC SOIL with SAND
OH
SM
SC
GW
GW-GM
CL
CL-ML
ML
COBBLES and BOULDERS

BOULDERS
PT

SILTY GRAVEL

CLAYEY GRAVEL

SILTY, CLAYEY GRAVEL

SILTY SAND

CLAYEY SAND

SILTY CLAY
SILTY CLAY with SAND
SILTY CLAY with GRAVEL

SANDY SILTY CLAY
SANDY SILTY CLAY with GRAVEL

GRAVELLY SILTY CLAY
GRAVELLY SILTY CLAY with SAND
SILT with SAND
SILT with GRAVEL

SANDY SILT
SANDY SILT with GRAVEL
PEAT
Well-graded GRAVEL with SILT and SAND
Well-graded GRAVEL with CLAY (or SILTY
CLAY)
Well-graded SAND
Well-graded SAND with GRAVEL
Well-graded SAND with SILT and GRAVEL
Poorly graded GRAVEL with SAND
Poorly graded GRAVEL with SILT and SAND
Poorly graded GRAVEL with CLAY and SAND
(or SILTY CLAY and SAND)
Poorly graded SAND
Poorly graded SAND with GRAVEL
Poorly graded SAND with SILT and GRAVEL
SANDY lean CLAY
GRAVELLY lean CLAY
SANDY ORGANIC fat CLAY with GRAVEL
GRAVELLY ORGANIC fat CLAY
GRAVELLY ORGANIC fat CLAY with SAND
Elastic SILT
ORGANIC elastic SILT with GRAVEL
SANDY elastic ELASTIC SILT

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND
Group Names
SC-SM
Graphic / Symbol Graphic / Symbol Group Names
GC
GP
GC-GM
SP-SC
SW
SP
SW-SM
SILTY, CLAYEY GRAVEL with SAND
CLAYEY GRAVEL with SAND
SILTY GRAVEL with SAND
Standard California Sampler
Modified California Sampler
Well-graded SAND with SILT
SW-SC
SP-SM
Consolidation (ASTM D 2435-04)
Compaction Curve (CTM 216 - 06)
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, Plasticity Index
(AASHTO T 89-02, AASHTO T 90-00)
Collapse Potential (ASTM D 5333-03)
Sand Equivalent (CTM 217 - 99)
Corrosion, Sulfates, Chlorides (CTM 643 - 99;
CTM 417 - 06; CTM 422 - 06)

GRAVELLY SILT
GRAVELLY SILT with SAND
SILT
ORGANIC SILT with SAND
ORGANIC SILT with GRAVEL

SANDY ORGANIC SILT
C
Consolidated Undrained Triaxial (ASTM D 4767-02)
Lean CLAY with SAND
Lean CLAY with GRAVEL
SANDY lean CLAY with GRAVEL
ORGANIC lean CLAY
GRAVELLY ORGANIC lean CLAY
GRAVELLY ORGANIC lean CLAY with SAND
Fat CLAY
Elastic SILT with GRAVEL
SANDY elastic SILT
SANDY elastic SILT with GRAVEL
GRAVELLY elastic SILT
GRAVELLY elastic SILT with SAND
ORGANIC elastic SILT
SANDY ORGANIC SILT with GRAVEL

GRAVELLY ORGANIC SILT
GRAVELLY ORGANIC SILT with SAND

ORGANIC SILT
PI
Particle Size Analysis (ASTM D 422-63 [2002])
Point Load Index (ASTM D 5731-05)
R-Value (CTM 301 - 00)
Specific Gravity (AASHTO T 100-06)
Shrinkage Limit (ASTM D 427-04)
Swell Potential (ASTM D 4546-03)
Pocket Torvane
Unconfined Compression - Soil (ASTM D 2166-06)
Unconfined Compression - Rock (ASTM D
2938-95)
CL
CU
PL
PM Pressure Meter
Pocket Penetrometer
SG
SW
TV
UC
Well-graded SAND with CLAY and GRAVEL
(or SILTY CLAY and GRAVEL)
ORGANIC lean CLAY with SAND
ORGANIC lean CLAY with GRAVEL
SANDY ORGANIC lean CLAY
SANDY ORGANIC lean CLAY with GRAVEL
Fat CLAY with SAND
Fat CLAY with GRAVEL
SANDY fat CLAY
SANDY fat CLAY with GRAVEL
GRAVELLY fat CLAY
GRAVELLY fat CLAY with SAND
ORGANIC fat CLAY
ORGANIC fat CLAY with SAND
ORGANIC fat CLAY with GRAVEL
SANDY ORGANIC fat CLAY
Elastic SILT with SAND
UU Unconsolidated Undrained Triaxial
(ASTM D 2850-03)
UW Unit Weight (ASTM D 4767-04)
VS Vane Shear (AASHTO T 223-96 [2004])
CP
PP
R
SL
CR
SE
DS Direct Shear (ASTM D 3080-04)
EI Expansion Index (ASTM D 4829-03)
M Moisture Content (ASTM D 2216-05)
OC Organic Content (ASTM D 2974-07)
P Permeability (CTM 220 - 05)
PA
Well-graded GRAVEL
Poorly graded GRAVEL with SILT
GRAVELLY lean CLAY with SAND
GROUP
DELTA

CONSULTANTS
BORING RECORD LEGEND #2
GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC.

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS

AND GEOLOGISTS

FIGURE NUMBER

PROJECT NAME PROJECT NUMBER
Material
Change
Estimated
Material
Change
Soil/Rock
Boundary
Change in material is observed in the
sample or core, and the location
of change can be accurately measured.

Change in material cannot be accurately
located because either the change is
gradational or because of limitations in the
drilling/sampling methods used.

Material changes from soil characteristics
to rock characteristics.

Definition

DEFINITIONS FOR CHANGE IN MATERIAL
Symbol
#-1C
/$ /RQJ%HDFK0DUNHWSODFH
Very Loose
Loose
SPT N - Value (blows / foot) 60

PLASTICITY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS
Cobble
Coarse
Fine 1/5 - 3/4
Coarse 1/16 - 1/5
Medium 1/64 - 1/16
Fine 1/300 - 1/64
Stiff 1.0 - 2.0 0.50 - 1.0

CONSISTENCY OF COHESIVE SOILS
Descriptor Size (in)
Silt and Clay < 1/300
Dry No discernable moisture
Moisture present, but no free water
Descriptor
Dense
Medium Dense
5 - 10
10 - 30
0 - 5
30 - 50
Descriptor
Moist

APPARENT DENSITY OF COHESIONLESS SOILS MOISTURE
Wet
Very Dense > 50
Criteria
Visible free water
Descriptor Shear Strength (tsf)

PERCENT OR PROPORTION OF SOILS
Sand
Boulder
Criteria
Trace
Gravel
Descriptor
> 12
3/4 - 3
3 - 12
Few 5 to 10%
Little 15 to 25%
Some 30 to 45%
Mostly 50 to 100%
Nonplastic
High
Descriptor Criteria
A 1/8-inch thread cannot be rolled at any water content.

The thread can barely be rolled, and the lump cannot be formed when drier than the plastic limit.

The thread is easy to roll, and not much time is required to reach the plastic limit; it cannot be rerolled after reaching the plastic limit. The lump crumbles when drier than the plastic limit.

CONSISTENCY OF COHESIVE SOILS VS. N60 CEMENTATION
Description
Medium
Particles are present but estimated
to be less than 5%
0 - 2

PARTICLE SIZE
It takes considerable time rolling and kneading to reach the plastic limit. The thread can be rerolled several times after reaching the plastic limit. The lump can be formed without crumbling when drier than the plastic limit.

Very Soft < 0.12

1.0 - 2.0
> 4.0 > 2.0

2.0 - 4.0
Pocket Penetrometer, PP
Measurement (tsf)
Soft 0.25 - 0.50 0.12 - 0.25
< 0.25
Medium Stiff 0.50 - 1.0 0.25 - 0.50
Hard
Very Stiff
Low
GROUP
DELTA

CONSULTANTS
BORING RECORD LEGEND #3
GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC.

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS

AND GEOLOGISTS

FIGURE NUMBER

PROJECT NAME PROJECT NUMBER
Vane Shear, VS.

Measurement (tsf)

0.50 - 1.0
< 0.12

1.0 - 2.0
> 2.0

0.12 - 0.25

0.25 - 0.50
Torvane, TV.

Measurement (tsf)

0.50 - 1.0
< 0.12

1.0 - 2.0
> 2.0

0.12 - 0.25

0.25 - 0.50
Descriptor Criteria
Strong
Moderate
Weak
Crumbles or breaks with considerable
finger pressure.

Will not crumble or break with finger
pressure.

Crumbles or breaks with handling or
little finger pressure.

SPT N (blows / foot) 60
Very Soft
Soft
Medium Stiff
2 - 4
4 - 8
Stiff 8 - 15
Very Stiff 15 - 30
Hard > 30
Ref.: Caltrans Soil and Rock Logging Classification, and Presentation Manual (2010), with the exception of consistency of cohesive soils vs. N . 60 Ref: Peck, Hansen, and Thornburn, 1974, “Foundation Engineering”, Second Edition Note: Only to be used (with caution) when pocket penetrometer or other data on undrained shear strength are unavailable. Not allowed by Caltrans Soil and Rock Logging and Classificaton Manual, 2010
#-1D
/$ /RQJ%HDFK0DUNHWSODFH
*URXS 'HOWD 3URMHFW 1R /$
/RQJ%HDFK0DUNHWSODFH
.(< )25 62,/ &/$66,),&$7,21
)LJXUH%D
&/$66,),&$7,212),125*$1,&),1(*5$,1(' 62,/6
6RLOVZLWK!ILQHUWKDQ1R6LHYH

&/
//
DERYH$/LQH&+
//!
DERYH$/LQH
0/
//
EHORZ$/LQHRU3,
RU1RQ3ODVWLF
0+
//!
EHORZ$/LQH
&/0/
DERYH$/LQHDQG3, WR&/&+0/0+
DWRUQHDU// 0/&/0+&+
DWRUQHDUWKH$/LQH
/DERUDWRU\&ODVVLILFDWLRQRI&OD\DQG6LOW )LHOG,GHQWLILFDWLRQRI&OD\VDQG6LOWV 5()(5(1&( &DOWUDQV6RLODQG5RFN/RJJLQJ &ODVVLILFDWLRQDQG3UHVHQWDWLRQ0DQXDO

5HIHUHQFH
$670'DQG
)LJXUH
%E
1RWH
9DOXHVHVWLPDWHGWRQHDUHVWWREHXVHGIRUYLVXDOLGHQWLILFDWLRQYDOXHVLQSDUHQWKHVHVWREH XVHGIRUFODVVLILFDWLRQZKHQEDVHGRQODERUDWRU\JUDLQVL]HGDWD 5HIHUHQFH
$670'DQG
5()(5(1&(
&DOWUDQV6RLODQG5RFN/RJJLQJ&ODVVLILFDWLRQDQG3UHVHQWDWLRQ0DQXDO

&/$66,),&$7,212)&2$56(*5$,1('62,/6
6RLOVZLWK³ILQHV´SDVVLQJ1R6LHYH

ILQHV

!ILQHV

ILQHV

*UDQXODU6RLO*UDGDWLRQ3DUDPHWHUV&RHIILFLHQWRI8QLIRUPLW\
&X ''
&RHIILFLHQWRI&XUYDWXUH
&F '
' ['

' RIVRLOLVILQHUWKDQWKLVGLDPHWHU
' RIVRLOLVILQHUWKDQWKLVGLDPHWHU' RIVRLOLVILQHUWKDQWKLVGLDPHWHU *URXS6\PERO *UDGDWLRQRU3ODVWLFLW\5HTXLUHPHQW
6:«««««&X !DQG
&F
*:««««&X !DQG
&F
*3RU63«««&OHDQJUDYHORUVDQGQRWPHHWLQJ
UHTXLUHPHQWIRU6:RU*:
60RU*0««1RQSODVWLFILQHVRUEHORZ$/LQHRU3,6&RU*&«««3ODVWLFILQHVRUDERYH$/LQHDQG3,! *URXS 'HOWD 3URMHFW 1R /$
.(< )25 62,/ &/$66,),&$7,21
/RQJ%HDFK0DUNHWSODFH
$63+$/7

21%$6(

6,/7<6$1'ZLWK*5$9(/
60 OLJKWROLYH
JUHHQ
PRLNVW
PRVWO\ILQH
IHZWROLWWOH*5$9(/

ILQH
VXEURXQGHG
6,/7<&/$<(<6$1'
6&60

GDUNJUD\
PRLVW

PRVWO\ILQH
WUDFH&/$<SRFNHWV
WUDFH*5$9(/

ILQH
VXEURXQGHG
RUJDQLFV
K\GURFDUERQRGRU
%RULQJZDVWHUPLQDWHGDWWKHSODQQHGGHSKWRI
IHHW
1RJURXQGZDWHUZDVHQFRXQWHUHGWRWKHGHSWKRI
IHHW
&37ZDVDGYDQFHGLQWKHKROH
7KHKROHZDVEDFNILOOHGZLWKFHPHQWJURXWDQG
VXUIDFHUHSDLUHGZLWKFROGSDWFKDVSKDOW
%XON
%XON
'(37+(/(9*:
IW

6$03/(12
'5<'(16,7<

SFI

6371

27+(5
7(676
67$57'$7(
02,6785(

$77(5%(5*
/,0,76
//
3,

7+,66800$5<$33/,(621/<$77+(/2&$7,21
2)7+,6%25,1*$1'$77+(7,0(2)'5,//,1*
68%685)$&(&21',7,2160$<',))(5$727+(5
/2&$7,216$1'0$<&+$1*($77+,6/2&$7,21
:,7+7+(3$66$*(2)7,0(7+('$7$
35(6(17(',6$6,03/,),&$7,212)7+($&78$/
&21',7,216(1&2817(5('
352-(&7)($785( 6+((712
6HH3ODQ
&HPHQW*URXW
),1,6+'$7(
$)7(5'5,//,1*

'5,//,1*&203$1<
RI
352-(&7180%(5
'5,//,1*
0(7+2'
$PDSROD$YH6XLWH
7RUUDQFH&$

352-(&71$0( +2/(,'
6HH3ODQ
+$00(57<3(
:(,*+7'523

54'

'5,//,1*0(7+2'
%XON &37SHUIRUPHG
%25,1*',$
LQ

),*85(
%
&39,0DUNHWSODFH//&
(/(9$7,21

IHHW

0L[HG8VH'HYHORSPHQW

*5283'(/7$&2168/7$176,1&
'$780

'5,//5,*
1$
+$
6$03/(7<3(
127(6 %25(+2/(%$&.),// &203/(7,21
%25(+2/(/2&$7,21
2IIVHW6WDWLRQ/LQH

&DUPHO3DUWQHUVB/RQJ%HDFK
+DQG$XJHU
+$00(5()),&,(1&<
(5L

3(1(75$7,21
5(6,67$1&(

%/2:6,1

%25,1*5(&25'

%25(+2/(/2&$7,21
/DWLWXGH
/RQJLWXGH

/2**('%<
727$/'(37+
IW

'85,1*'5,//,1*

1$
*UHJJ'ULOOLQJ

%/2:6)7
2:1(5
6(*0(1712
/$
'5,9(6$03/(57<3(
6 6,=(
,'

*5$3+,&
/2*
'(6&5,37,21$1'&/$66,),&$7,21
1$ 3.
1(1(
7+,66800$5<$33/,(621/<$77+(/2&$7,21
2)7+,6%25,1*$1'$77+(7,0(2)'5,//,1*
68%685)$&(&21',7,2160$<',))(5$727+(5
/2&$7,216$1'0$<&+$1*($77+,6/2&$7,21
:,7+7+(3$66$*(2)7,0(7+('$7$
35(6(17(',6$6,03/,),&$7,212)7+($&78$/
&21',7,216(1&2817(5('
1$
5(&29(5<

*5281'(/(9
IW

&+(&.('%<

'(37+
IHHW

$3
%25,1*/2*B$3B
/$35(9,28667,&./2*6$1'&855(17/2*6*3-*'&*'7
$63+$/7

21%$6(

6,/7<6$1'
60 WR6,/7<&/$<(<6$1'

6&60

GDUNJUD\
PRLVW
PRVWO\ILQH
WUDFH
&/$<SRFNHWV
WUDFH*5$9(/
ILQH
VXEDQJXODU

RUJDQLFV
GHEULV
K\GURFDUERQRGRU
%RULQJZDVWHUPLQDWHGDWWKHSODQQHGGHSKWRI
IHHW
1RJURXQGZDWHUZDVHQFRXQWHUHGWRWKHGHSWKRI
IHHW
6&37ZDVDGYDQFHGLQWKHKROH
7KHKROHZDVEDFNILOOHGZLWKFHPHQWJURXWDQG
VXUIDFHUHSDLUHGZLWKFROGSDWFKDVSKDOW
%XON
'(37+(/(9*:
IW

6$03/(12
'5<'(16,7<

SFI

6371

27+(5
7(676
67$57'$7(
02,6785(

$77(5%(5*
/,0,76
//
3,

54'

'5,//,1*0(7+2'
%XON 6&37SHUIRUPHG
%25,1*',$
LQ

),*85(
%
&39,0DUNHWSODFH//&
(/(9$7,21

IHHW

0L[HG8VH'HYHORSPHQW

*5283'(/7$&2168/7$176,1&
'$780

'5,//5,*
1$
+$
6$03/(7<3(
127(6 %25(+2/(%$&.),// &203/(7,21
%25(+2/(/2&$7,21
2IIVHW6WDWLRQ/LQH

&DUPHO3DUWQHUVB/RQJ%HDFK
+DQG$XJHU
+$00(5()),&,(1&<
(5L

3(1(75$7,21
5(6,67$1&(

%/2:6,1

%25,1*5(&25'

%25(+2/(/2&$7,21
/DWLWXGH
/RQJLWXGH

/2**('%<
727$/'(37+
IW

'85,1*'5,//,1*

1$
*UHJJ'ULOOLQJ

%/2:6)7
2:1(5
6(*0(1712
/$
'5,9(6$03/(57<3(
6 6,=(
,'

*5281'(/(9
IW

&+(&.('%<

'(37+
IHHW

$3
%25,1*/2*B$3B
/$35(9,28667,&./2*6$1'&855(17/2*6*3-*'&*'7
$63+$/7

21%$6(

6,/7<&/$<(<6$1'
6&60

GDUNROLYHJUHHQ

PRLVW
PRVWO\ILQH
IHZWROLWWH*5$9(/
ILQH

VXEURXQGHG
UHGEULFNGHEULV
K\GURFDUERQRGRU
%RULQJZDVWHUPLQDWHGDWWKHSODQQHGGHSKWRI
IHHW
1RJURXQGZDWHUZDVHQFRXQWHUHGWRWKHGHSWKRI
IHHW
6&37ZDVDGYDQFHGLQWKHKROH
7KHKROHZDVEDFNILOOHGZLWKFHPHQWJURXWDQG
VXUIDFHUHSDLUHGZLWKFROGSDWFKDVSKDOW
%XON
'(37+(/(9*:
IW

6$03/(12
'5<'(16,7<

SFI

6371

27+(5
7(676
67$57'$7(
02,6785(

$77(5%(5*
/,0,76
//
3,

54'

'5,//,1*0(7+2'
%XON 6&37SHUIRUPHG
%25,1*',$
LQ

),*85(
%
&39,0DUNHWSODFH//&
(/(9$7,21

IHHW

0L[HG8VH'HYHORSPHQW

*5283'(/7$&2168/7$176,1&
'$780

'5,//5,*
1$
+$
6$03/(7<3(
127(6 %25(+2/(%$&.),// &203/(7,21
%25(+2/(/2&$7,21
2IIVHW6WDWLRQ/LQH

&DUPHO3DUWQHUVB/RQJ%HDFK
+DQG$XJHU
+$00(5()),&,(1&<
(5L

3(1(75$7,21
5(6,67$1&(

%/2:6,1

%25,1*5(&25'

%25(+2/(/2&$7,21
/DWLWXGH
/RQJLWXGH

/2**('%<
727$/'(37+
IW

'85,1*'5,//,1*

1$
*UHJJ'ULOOLQJ

%/2:6)7
2:1(5
6(*0(1712
/$
'5,9(6$03/(57<3(
6 6,=(
,'

*5281'(/(9
IW

&+(&.('%<

'(37+
IHHW

$3
%25,1*/2*B$3B
/$35(9,28667,&./2*6$1'&855(17/2*6*3-*'&*'7
$63+$/7

21%$6(

6,/7<6$1'
60 OLJKWJUD\WRGDUNJUD\
PRLVW

PRVWO\ILQH
WUDFH*5$9(/
ILQH
VXEURXQGHG

WUDFH&/$<
RUJDQLFV
K\GURFDUERQRGRU
%RULQJZDVWHUPLQDWHGDWWKHSODQQHGGHSKWRI
IHHW
1RJURXQGZDWHUZDVHQFRXQWHUHGWRWKHGHSWKRI
IHHW
&37ZDVDGYDQFHGLQWKHKROH
7KHKROHZDVEDFNILOOHGZLWKFHPHQWJURXWDQG
VXUIDFHUHSDLUHGZLWKFROGSDWFKDVSKDOW
%XON
'(37+(/(9*:
IW

6$03/(12
'5<'(16,7<

SFI

6371

27+(5
7(676
67$57'$7(
02,6785(

$77(5%(5*
/,0,76
//
3,

54'

'5,//,1*0(7+2'
%XON &37SHUIRUPHG
%25,1*',$
LQ

),*85(
%
&39,0DUNHWSODFH//&
(/(9$7,21

IHHW

0L[HG8VH'HYHORSPHQW

*5283'(/7$&2168/7$176,1&
'$780

'5,//5,*
1$
+$
6$03/(7<3(
127(6 %25(+2/(%$&.),// &203/(7,21
%25(+2/(/2&$7,21
2IIVHW6WDWLRQ/LQH

&DUPHO3DUWQHUVB/RQJ%HDFK
+DQG$XJHU
+$00(5()),&,(1&<
(5L

3(1(75$7,21
5(6,67$1&(

%/2:6,1

%25,1*5(&25'

%25(+2/(/2&$7,21
/DWLWXGH
/RQJLWXGH

/2**('%<
727$/'(37+
IW

'85,1*'5,//,1*

1$
*UHJJ'ULOOLQJ

%/2:6)7
2:1(5
6(*0(1712
/$
'5,9(6$03/(57<3(
6 6,=(
,'

*5281'(/(9
IW

&+(&.('%<

'(37+
IHHW

$3
%25,1*/2*B$3B
/$35(9,28667,&./2*6$1'&855(17/2*6*3-*'&*'7
3URMHFW
/$
*URXS'HOWD&RQVXOWDQWV$PDSROD$YH6XLWH
7RUUDQFH&DOLIRUQLD

ZZZJURXSGHOWDFRP
DQG
(3DFLILF&RDVW+LJKZD\ 7RWDOGHSWK

IW'DWH

&37
&37

/RFDWLRQ

6%7,QGH[ HAND AUGER
,F6%7

'HSWK
IW

&RQHUHVLVWDQFHTW 6%7,QGH[

HAND AUGER
7LSUHVLVWDQFH
WVI

'HSWK
IW

&RQHUHVLVWDQFHTW 3RUHSUHVVXUHX HAND AUGER
3UHVVXUH
SVL

'HSWK
IW

3RUHSUHVVXUHX
6%7OHJHQG
6HQVLWLYHILQHJUDLQHG2UJDQLFPDWHULDO&OD\WRVLOW\FOD\ &OD\H\VLOWWRVLOW\FOD\6LOW\VDQGWRVDQG\VLOW&OHDQVDQGWRVLOW\VDQG *UDYHO\VDQGWRVDQG9HU\VWLIIVDQGWRFOD\H\VDQG 9HU\VWLIIILQHJUDLQHG
)ULFWLRQUDWLR HAND AUGER
5I

'HSWK
IW

)ULFWLRQUDWLR 6RLO%HKDYLRXU7\SH

HAND AUGER
6%7
5REHUWVRQ

'HSWK
IW

6RLO%HKDYLRXU7\SH
&OD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW &OD\ VLOW\ FOD\
&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
&OD\&OD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6DQG6DQG6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
6DQG6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
6DQG6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
6DQG6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6DQG
&3H7,7Y
&378GDWDSUHVHQWDWLRQ LQWHUSUHWDWLRQVRIWZDUH5HSRUWFUHDWHGRQ

30 3URMHFWILOH
1
?3URMHFWV?

?/$&DUPHO3DUWQHUVB/RQJ%HDFK0DUNHWSODFH*HRWHFKQLFDO?&DOFXODWLRQVDQG$QDO\VHV?/$&3H7,7FSW Figure B-7
3URMHFW
/$
*URXS'HOWD&RQVXOWDQWV$PDSROD$YH6XLWH
7RUUDQFH&DOLIRUQLD

ZZZJURXSGHOWDFRP
DQG
(3DFLILF&RDVW+LJKZD\ 7RWDOGHSWK

IW'DWH

&37
6&37

/RFDWLRQ

6%7,QGH[ HAND AUGER
,F6%7

'HSWK
IW

&RQHUHVLVWDQFHTW 6%7,QGH[

HAND AUGER
7LSUHVLVWDQFH
WVI

'HSWK
IW

&RQHUHVLVWDQFHTW 3RUHSUHVVXUHX HAND AUGER
3UHVVXUH
SVL

'HSWK
IW

)ULFWLRQUDWLR 6RLO%HKDYLRXU7\SH

HAND AUGER
6%7
5REHUWVRQ

'HSWK
IW

6RLO%HKDYLRXU7\SH
&OD\&OD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\&OD\6DQG VLOW\ VDQG &OD\ VLOW\ FOD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
&OD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
&OD\&OD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
&OD\6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
6DQG6DQG6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
6DQG6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
6DQG6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
6DQG6DQG6DQG6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
6DQG6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
&3H7,7Y
&378GDWDSUHVHQWDWLRQ LQWHUSUHWDWLRQVRIWZDUH5HSRUWFUHDWHGRQ

30
3URMHFWILOH
1
?3URMHFWV?

?/$&DUPHO3DUWQHUVB/RQJ%HDFK0DUNHWSODFH*HRWHFKQLFDO?&DOFXODWLRQVDQG$QDO\VHV?/$&3H7,7FSW Figure B-8
3URMHFW
/$
*URXS'HOWD&RQVXOWDQWV$PDSROD$YH6XLWH
7RUUDQFH&DOLIRUQLD

ZZZJURXSGHOWDFRP
DQG
(3DFLILF&RDVW+LJKZD\ 7RWDOGHSWK
IW'DWH

&37
6&37

/RFDWLRQ

6%7,QGH[ HAND AUGER
,F6%7

'HSWK
IW

&RQHUHVLVWDQFHTW 6%7,QGH[

HAND AUGER
7LSUHVLVWDQFH
WVI

'HSWK
IW

&RQHUHVLVWDQFHTW 3RUHSUHVVXUHX HAND AUGER
3UHVVXUH
SVL

'HSWK
IW

)ULFWLRQUDWLR 6RLO%HKDYLRXU7\SH

HAND AUGER
6%7
5REHUWVRQ

'HSWK
IW

6RLO%HKDYLRXU7\SH
&OD\&OD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\9HU\ GHQVHVWLII VRLO6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW 6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
&OD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
&OD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\
&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
&OD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW &OD\ VLOW\ FOD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW 6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
&3H7,7Y
&378GDWDSUHVHQWDWLRQ LQWHUSUHWDWLRQVRIWZDUH5HSRUWFUHDWHGRQ

30 3URMHFWILOH
1
?3URMHFWV?

?/$&DUPHO3DUWQHUVB/RQJ%HDFK0DUNHWSODFH*HRWHFKQLFDO?&DOFXODWLRQVDQG$QDO\VHV?/$&3H7,7FSW Figure B-9
3URMHFW
/$
*URXS'HOWD&RQVXOWDQWV$PDSROD$YH6XLWH
7RUUDQFH&DOLIRUQLD

ZZZJURXSGHOWDFRP
DQG
(3DFLILF&RDVW+LJKZD\ 7RWDOGHSWK
IW'DWH

&37
6&37

/RFDWLRQ

1RUPFRQHUHVLVWDQFH

HAND AUGER
4WQ

'HSWK
IW

1RUPFRQHUHVLVWDQFH 1RUPSRUHSUHVVXUHUDWLR HAND AUGER %T

'HSWK
IW

1RUPIULFWLRQUDWLR HAND AUGER 1RUPSRUHSUHVVXUHUDWLR )U

'HSWK
IW

1RUPIULFWLRQUDWLR 6%7Q,QGH[ HAND AUGER
,F

'HSWK
IW

6%7Q,QGH[ 1RUP6RLO%HKDYLRXU7\SH

HAND AUGER
6%7Q
5REHUWVRQ

'HSWK
IW

1RUP6RLO%HKDYLRXU7\SH
&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\9HU\ GHQVHVWLII VRLO6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW 6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
&OD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
&OD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\ &OD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW
&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW &OD\ VLOW\ FOD\&OD\ VLOW\ FOD\6LOW\ VDQG VDQG\ VLOW 6DQG VLOW\ VDQG
6%7QOHJHQG
6HQVLWLYHILQHJUDLQHG2UJDQLFPDWHULDO&OD\WRVLOW\FOD\ &OD\H\VLOWWRVLOW\FOD\6LOW\VDQGWRVDQG\VLOW&OHDQVDQGWRVLOW\VDQG *UDYHO\VDQGWRVDQG9HU\VWLIIVDQGWRFOD\H\VDQG 9HU\VWLIIILQHJUDLQHG
&3H7,7Y
&378GDWDSUHVHQWDWLRQ LQWHUSUHWDWLRQVRIWZDUH5HSRUWFUHDWHGRQ

30 3URMHFWILOH
1
?3URMHFWV?

?/$&DUPHO3DUWQHUVB/RQJ%HDFK0DUNHWSODFH*HRWHFKQLFDO?&DOFXODWLRQVDQG$QDO\VHV?/$&3H7,7FSW Figure B-10
Geophone Offset: 0.66 Feet
Source Offset: 1.67 Feet 09/06/22
Test Depth
(Feet)
Geophone
Depth (Feet)
Waveform
Ray Path
(Feet)
Incremental
Distance
(Feet)
Characteristic
Arrival Time
(ms)
Incremental
Time Interval
(ms)
Interval
Velocity
(Ft/Sec)
Interval
Depth
(Feet)

5.09 4.43 4.73 4.73 8.4000

10.01 9.35 9.49 4.76 18.3500 9.9500 478.9 6.89

15.09 14.43 14.53 5.03 31.3000 12.9500 388.7 11.89

20.01 19.35 19.42 4.90 43.7500 12.4500 393.3 16.89

25.10 24.44 24.50 5.07 53.7500 10.0000 507.0 21.90

30.02 29.36 29.41 4.91 60.7000 6.9500 706.7 26.90

35.10 34.44 34.49 5.08 68.7000 8.0000 634.8 31.90

40.03 39.37 39.40 4.92 77.1500 8.4500 581.8 36.91

45.44 44.78 44.81 5.41 83.6500 6.5000 832.2 42.07

50.03 49.37 49.40 4.59 90.6500 7.0000 655.8 47.08

55.12 54.46 54.48 5.08 97.6000 6.9500 731.3 51.92

60.04 59.38 59.40 4.92 103.8500 6.2500 787.1 56.92

65.29 64.63 64.65 5.25 109.8500 6.0000 874.6 62.00

70.05 69.39 69.41 4.76 116.3000 6.4500 737.3 67.01

75.13 74.47 74.49 5.08 121.5500 5.2500 968.4 71.93

80.05 79.39 79.41 4.92 127.0500 5.5000 894.6 76.93

85.14 84.48 84.49 5.08 132.2500 5.2000 977.7 81.93

90.06 89.40 89.41 4.92 137.2500 5.0000 984.1 86.94

95.14 94.48 94.50 5.08 141.5000 4.2500 1196.3 91.94

96.46 95.80 95.81 1.31 142.3000 0.8000 1640.2 95.14
SCPT-2
Shear Wave Velocity Calculations

CARMEL PARTNERS
SCPT-2
Figure B-11
0 20406080
100120
.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 300.0 350.0 400.0
Depth (Feet)
Time (ms)
Waveforms for Sounding SCPT-2
Figure B-12
Geophone Offset: 0.66 Feet
Source Offset: 1.67 Feet 09/06/22
Test Depth
(Feet)
Geophone
Depth (Feet)
Waveform
Ray Path
(Feet)
Incremental
Distance
(Feet)
Characteristic
Arrival Time
(ms)
Incremental
Time Interval
(ms)
Interval
Velocity
(Ft/Sec)
Interval
Depth
(Feet)

5.25 4.59 4.88 4.88 11.6000

10.01 9.35 9.49 4.61 22.1000 10.5000 439.1 6.97

15.26 14.60 14.69 5.20 31.8000 9.7000 535.7 11.97

20.18 19.52 19.59 4.90 38.3000 6.5000 753.4 17.06

25.10 24.44 24.50 4.91 43.7500 5.4500 900.4 21.98

30.02 29.36 29.41 4.91 49.2500 5.5000 893.0 26.90

35.10 34.44 34.49 5.08 56.5000 7.2500 700.5 31.90

40.03 39.37 39.40 4.92 62.4500 5.9500 826.3 36.91

45.11 44.45 44.48 5.08 70.7000 8.2500 615.9 41.91

50.03 49.37 49.40 4.92 76.7000 6.0000 819.7 46.91

55.12 54.46 54.48 5.08 82.1500 5.4500 932.6 51.92

60.04 59.38 59.40 4.92 87.9000 5.7500 855.5 56.92

65.12 64.46 64.49 5.08 94.8500 6.9500 731.4 61.92

70.21 69.55 69.57 5.08 100.3500 5.5000 924.3 67.01
SCPT-3
Shear Wave Velocity Calculations

CARMEL PARTNERS
SCPT-3
Figure B-13
0 1020304050607080
.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 300.0 350.0 400.0
Depth (Feet)
Time (ms)
Waveforms for Sounding SCPT-3
Figure B-14
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
APPENDIX C – LIQUEFACTION AND LATERAL SPREADING ANALYSIS This software is licensed to: Group Delta Consultants, Inc. CPT name: CPT-02 (2017) CRR plot

CRR & CSR
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
CRR plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction analysis overall plots
FS Plot
Factor of safety
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
FS Plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction potential
LPI
0 5 10 15 20
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements
Settlement (in)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Vertical settlements Lateral displacements
Displacement (in)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Lateral displacements
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 9/30/2022, 9:12:00 AM 5Project file: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\500 Calculations and Analyses\LA1583 CLiq_AP.clq Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeAnalysis method:

Fines correction method:Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu):

NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value7.000.7010.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height:

10.00 ft32.60Based on SBTNoN/A
Fill weight:

Transition detect. applied:

Kı applied:

Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth:

N/A
YesYes
Sands only
Yes

50.00 ft
Almost certain it will liquefy
Very likely to liquefyLiquefaction and no liq. are equally likelyUnlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy
Very high riskHigh riskLow risk
Figure C-1
This software is licensed to: Group Delta Consultants, Inc. CPT name: CPT-03 (2017) CRR plot

CRR & CSR
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
CRR plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction analysis overall plots
FS Plot
Factor of safety
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
FS Plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction potential
LPI
0 5 10 15 20
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements
Settlement (in)
0 0.5 1 1.5
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Vertical settlements Lateral displacements
Displacement (in)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Lateral displacements
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 9/30/2022, 9:12:00 AM 15Project file: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\500 Calculations and Analyses\LA1583 CLiq_AP.clq Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeAnalysis method:

Fines correction method:Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu):

NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value7.000.7010.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height:

10.00 ft32.60Based on SBTNoN/A
Fill weight:

Transition detect. applied:

Kı applied:

Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth:

N/A
YesYes
Sands only
Yes

50.00 ft
Almost certain it will liquefy
Very likely to liquefyLiquefaction and no liq. are equally likelyUnlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy
Very high riskHigh riskLow risk
Figure C-2
This software is licensed to: Group Delta Consultants, Inc. CPT name: CPT-04A (2017) CRR plot

CRR & CSR
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
CRR plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction analysis overall plots
FS Plot
Factor of safety
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
FS Plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction potential
LPI
0 5 10 15 20
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements
Settlement (in)
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Vertical settlements Lateral displacements
Displacement (in)
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Lateral displacements
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 9/30/2022, 9:12:01 AM 25Project file: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\500 Calculations and Analyses\LA1583 CLiq_AP.clq Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeAnalysis method:

Fines correction method:Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu):

NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value7.000.7010.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height:

10.00 ft32.60Based on SBTNoN/A
Fill weight:

Transition detect. applied:

Kı applied:

Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth:

N/A
YesYes
Sands only
Yes

50.00 ft
Almost certain it will liquefy
Very likely to liquefyLiquefaction and no liq. are equally likelyUnlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy
Very high riskHigh riskLow risk
Figure C-3
This software is licensed to: Group Delta Consultants, Inc. CPT name: CPT-05 (2017) CRR plot

CRR & CSR
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Depth (ft)
9085807570656055504540353025201510
50 CRR plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction analysis overall plots
FS Plot
Factor of safety
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Depth (ft)
9085807570656055504540353025201510
50 FS Plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction potential
LPI
0 5 10 15 20
Depth (ft)
9085807570656055504540353025201510
50 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements
Settlement (in)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Depth (ft)
9085807570656055504540353025201510
50 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements
Displacement (in)
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Depth (ft)
9085807570656055504540353025201510
50 Lateral displacements
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 9/30/2022, 9:12:02 AM 35Project file: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\500 Calculations and Analyses\LA1583 CLiq_AP.clq Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeAnalysis method:

Fines correction method:Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu):

NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value7.000.7010.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height:

10.00 ft32.60Based on SBTNoN/A
Fill weight:

Transition detect. applied:

Kı applied:

Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth:

N/A
YesYes
Sands only
Yes

50.00 ft
Almost certain it will liquefy
Very likely to liquefyLiquefaction and no liq. are equally likelyUnlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy
Very high riskHigh riskLow risk
Figure C-4
This software is licensed to: Group Delta Consultants, Inc. CPT name: CPT-06 (2017) CRR plot

CRR & CSR
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
CRR plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction analysis overall plots
FS Plot
Factor of safety
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
FS Plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction potential
LPI
0 5 10 15 20
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements
Settlement (in)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Vertical settlements Lateral displacements
Displacement (in)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Lateral displacements
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 9/30/2022, 9:12:02 AM 45Project file: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\500 Calculations and Analyses\LA1583 CLiq_AP.clq Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeAnalysis method:

Fines correction method:Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu):

NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value7.000.7010.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height:

10.00 ft32.60Based on SBTNoN/A
Fill weight:

Transition detect. applied:

Kı applied:

Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth:

N/A
YesYes
Sands only
Yes

50.00 ft
Almost certain it will liquefy
Very likely to liquefyLiquefaction and no liq. are equally likelyUnlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy
Very high riskHigh riskLow risk
Figure C-5
This software is licensed to: Group Delta Consultants, Inc. CPT name: CPT-13 (2017) CRR plot

CRR & CSR
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
CRR plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction analysis overall plots
FS Plot
Factor of safety
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
FS Plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction potential
LPI
0 5 10 15 20
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements
Settlement (in)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Vertical settlements Lateral displacements
Displacement (in)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Depth (ft)
6664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Lateral displacements
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 9/30/2022, 9:12:03 AM 55Project file: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\500 Calculations and Analyses\LA1583 CLiq_AP.clq Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeAnalysis method:

Fines correction method:Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu):

NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value7.000.7010.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height:

10.00 ft32.60Based on SBTNoN/A
Fill weight:

Transition detect. applied:

Kı applied:

Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth:

N/A
YesYes
Sands only
Yes

50.00 ft
Almost certain it will liquefy
Very likely to liquefyLiquefaction and no liq. are equally likelyUnlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy
Very high riskHigh riskLow risk
Figure C-6
This software is licensed to: Group Delta Consultants, Inc. CPT name: CPT-1 (2022) CRR plot

HAND AUGER

CRR & CSR
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Depth (ft)
9085807570656055504540353025201510
50 CRR plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction analysis overall plots
FS Plot

HAND AUGER
Factor of safety
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Depth (ft)
9085807570656055504540353025201510
50 FS Plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction potential

HAND AUGER
LPI
0 5 10 15 20
Depth (ft)
9085807570656055504540353025201510
50 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements

HAND AUGER
Settlement (in)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Depth (ft)
9085807570656055504540353025201510
50 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements

HAND AUGER
Displacement (in)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Depth (ft)
9085807570656055504540353025201510
50 Lateral displacements
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 9/30/2022, 9:12:04 AM 65Project file: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\500 Calculations and Analyses\LA1583 CLiq_AP.clq Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeAnalysis method:

Fines correction method:Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu):

NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value7.000.7010.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height:

10.00 ft32.60Based on SBTNoN/A
Fill weight:

Transition detect. applied:

Kı applied:

Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth:

N/A
YesYes
Sands only
Yes

50.00 ft
Almost certain it will liquefy
Very likely to liquefyLiquefaction and no liq. are equally likelyUnlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy
Very high riskHigh riskLow risk
Figure C-7
This software is licensed to: Group Delta Consultants, Inc. CPT name: SCPT-2 (2022) CRR plot

HAND AUGER

CRR & CSR
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Depth (ft)
959085807570656055504540353025201510
50 CRR plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction analysis overall plots
FS Plot

HAND AUGER
Factor of safety
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Depth (ft)
959085807570656055504540353025201510
50 FS Plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction potential

HAND AUGER
LPI
0 5 10 15 20
Depth (ft)
959085807570656055504540353025201510
50 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements

HAND AUGER
Settlement (in)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Depth (ft)
959085807570656055504540353025201510
50 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements

HAND AUGER
Displacement (in)
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Depth (ft)
959085807570656055504540353025201510
50 Lateral displacements
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 9/30/2022, 9:12:05 AM 75Project file: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\500 Calculations and Analyses\LA1583 CLiq_AP.clq Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeAnalysis method:

Fines correction method:Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu):

NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value7.000.7010.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height:

10.00 ft32.60Based on SBTNoN/A
Fill weight:

Transition detect. applied:

Kı applied:

Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth:

N/A
YesYes
Sands only
Yes

50.00 ft
Almost certain it will liquefy
Very likely to liquefyLiquefaction and no liq. are equally likelyUnlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy
Very high riskHigh riskLow risk
Figure C-8
This software is licensed to: Group Delta Consultants, Inc. CPT name: SCPT-3 (2022) CRR plot

HAND AUGER

CRR & CSR
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Depth (ft)
7270686664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
CRR plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction analysis overall plots
FS Plot

HAND AUGER
Factor of safety
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Depth (ft)
7270686664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
FS Plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction potential

HAND AUGER
LPI
0 5 10 15 20
Depth (ft)
7270686664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements

HAND AUGER
Settlement (in)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Depth (ft)
7270686664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Vertical settlements Lateral displacements

HAND AUGER
Displacement (in)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Depth (ft)
7270686664626058565452504846444240383634323028262422201816141210 86420
Lateral displacements
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 9/30/2022, 9:12:05 AM 85Project file: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\500 Calculations and Analyses\LA1583 CLiq_AP.clq Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeAnalysis method:

Fines correction method:Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu):

NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value7.000.7010.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height:

10.00 ft32.60Based on SBTNoN/A
Fill weight:

Transition detect. applied:

Kı applied:

Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth:

N/A
YesYes
Sands only
Yes

50.00 ft
Almost certain it will liquefy
Very likely to liquefyLiquefaction and no liq. are equally likelyUnlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy
Very high riskHigh riskLow risk
Figure C-9
This software is licensed to: Group Delta Consultants, Inc. CPT name: CPT-4 (2022) CRR plot

HAND AUGER

CRR & CSR
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Depth (ft)
504846444240383634323028262422201816141210
86420
CRR plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction analysis overall plots
FS Plot

HAND AUGER
Factor of safety
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Depth (ft)
504846444240383634323028262422201816141210
86420
FS Plot
During earthq.

Liquefaction potential

HAND AUGER
LPI
0 5 10 15 20
Depth (ft)
504846444240383634323028262422201816141210
86420
Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements

HAND AUGER
Settlement (in)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Depth (ft)
504846444240383634323028262422201816141210
86420
Vertical settlements Lateral displacements

HAND AUGER
Displacement (in)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Depth (ft)
504846444240383634323028262422201816141210
86420
Lateral displacements
CLiq v.3.3.1.14 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 9/30/2022, 9:12:06 AM 95Project file: N:\Projects\1500-1599\LA1583 Carmel Partners_Long Beach Marketplace Geotechnical\500 Calculations and Analyses\LA1583 CLiq_AP.clq Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeAnalysis method:

Fines correction method:Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:

Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu):

NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value7.000.7010.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height:

10.00 ft32.60Based on SBTNoN/A
Fill weight:

Transition detect. applied:

Kı applied:

Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth:

N/A
YesYes
Sands only
Yes

50.00 ft
Almost certain it will liquefy
Very likely to liquefyLiquefaction and no liq. are equally likelyUnlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy
Very high riskHigh riskLow risk
Figure C-10
LA1583 Long Beach Market Place Geotech RPT_Final.docx
APPENDIX D – PILE LATERAL CAPACITY ANALYSIS

SINGLE PILE
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Bending Moment (in-kips) Shear Force (kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-8000-6000-4000-2000 0 2000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 1000 50 100 150 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Sand
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Curvature (rad/in) Bending Moment (in-kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) 0 0.5 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-0.0002-0.0001 0 0.00010.00020.0003 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-4000-2000 0 2000400060008000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Soil movement: In the direction of pile head deflection Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Soft Clay
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Bending Moment (in-kips) Shear Force (kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) 0 0.5 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-4000-2000 0 2000400060008000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-150 -100 -50 0 50 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Soft Clay
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Curvature (rad/in) Bending Moment (in-kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-0.0008 -0.0006 -0.0004 -0.00020 0.00020.0004 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-8000-6000-4000-2000 0 20004000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Soil movement: In the opposite direction of pile head deflection Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Soft Clay
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Bending Moment (in-kips) Shear Force (kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-8000-6000-4000-2000 0 20004000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 1000 50 100 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head delfection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Soft Clay
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Bending Moment (in-kips) Shear Force (kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-4000 -2000 0 2000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-20 0 20 40 60 80 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Sand
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Curvature (rad/in) Bending Moment (in-kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) 0 0.5 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-0.0002 0 0.0002 0.0004 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-2000 0 2000 4000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Soil movement: In the direction of pile head deflection Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Soft Clay
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Bending Moment (in-kips) Shear Force (kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) 0 0.5 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-2000 0 2000 4000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Soft Clay
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Curvature (rad/in) Bending Moment (in-kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-0.0008 -0.0006 -0.0004 -0.00020 0.00020.0004 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-8000-6000-4000-2000 0 20004000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Soil movement: In the opposite direction of pile head deflection Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Soft Clay
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Bending Moment (in-kips) Shear Force (kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-8000-6000-4000-2000 0 20004000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 1000 50 100 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Soft Clay
Sand
Sand

PILE IN A TWO ROW PILE GROUP
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Bending Moment (in-kips) Shear Force (kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-6000 -4000 -2000 0 2000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Sand
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Curvature (rad/in) Bending Moment (in-kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) 0 0.5 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-0.0002-0.0001 0 0.00010.00020.0003 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-4000-2000 0 2000 4000 6000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Soil movement: In the direction of pile head deflection Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Soft Clay
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Bending Moment (in-kips) Shear Force (kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) 0 0.5 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-4000-2000 0 2000 4000 6000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-100 -50 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Soft Clay
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Curvature (rad/in) Bending Moment (in-kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-0.0006-0.0004-0.0002 0 0.0002 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-6000 -4000 -2000 0 2000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Soil movement: In the opposite direction of pile head deflection Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Soft Clay
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Bending Moment (in-kips) Shear Force (kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-6000 -4000 -2000 0 2000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflecion = 1.0 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Soft Clay
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Bending Moment (in-kips) Shear Force (kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-4000 -2000 0 2000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-20 0 20 40 60 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Sand
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Curvature (rad/in) Bending Moment (in-kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) 0 0.5 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-0.0002 0 0.0002 0.0004 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-2000 0 2000 4000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Soil movement = In the direction of pile head deflection Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Soft Clay
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Bending Moment (in-kips) Shear Force (kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) 0 0.5 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-2000 0 2000 4000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-60 -40 -20 0 20 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed_head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Soft Clay
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Bending Moment (in-kips) Shear Force (kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-6000 -4000 -2000 0 2000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Soft Clay
Sand
Sand
Lateral Pile Deflection (inches) Curvature (rad/in) Bending Moment (in-kips) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-0.0006-0.0004-0.0002 0 0.0002 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100-6000 -4000 -2000 0 2000 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Free-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Free-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 0.5 inch
Fixed-head: Pile head deflection = 1.0 inch
Soil movement: In the opposite direction of pile head deflection Sand
Stf. Cl. NW
Soft Clay
Sand
Sand
MARKETPLACE MIXED - USE PROJECT AT 6615 E. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY

CITY OF LONG BEACH
Appendix
July 2023
Appendix F LID Feasibility Screening
Memorandum
MARKETPLACE MIXED - USE PROJECT AT 6615 E. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY

CITY OF LONG BEACH
Appendix
PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.

August 1, 2022
To: Jose Ho
Project Director
AO Architects
[email protected]
(714) 639-9860
From: Evan Cochran
Senior Engineer I
[email protected]
(213) 542-5636
RE: Long Beach Marketplace – LID Feasibility Screening

The following memorandum will discuss the feasibility of low impact development (LID) measures per the City of Long Beach Low Impact Development Design Manual for the Project at 6615 Pacific Coast Highway.

Ultimately, the site constraints, irrigation demand, and soil characteristics preclude the use of LID BMP measures, and the Project will instead implement flow-based SUSMP measures—i.e. pretreatment filters—and pay the City off-site runoff mitigation fee at $3.00 per square foot of non-infiltrated or non-treated storm water.

Infiltration Feasibility:

Although a soils report is still pending for this project, the high water table and adjacency to the coastline will likely prevent the project from implementing an infiltration BMP solution.

Capture and Use Feasibility:

Per the capture and use calculations included in this memo, the project will have a 7-month wet season irrigation demand volume of 42,988 gallons (5,747 cubic feet). This is less than the ¾” storm event volume of 65,635 gallons (8,775 cubic feet). Therefore, per the Long Beach LID manual, capture and use will be infeasible.

Biofiltration Feasibility:

Per the included biofiltration calculation, the Project would have to accommodate 13,162 square feet of biofiltration planter area (1 foot ponding depth) to mitigate the ¾” storm event volume of 8,775 cubic feet.

Thus, the planter box area exceeds the actual pervious area on-site by 4,999 square feet. Given these hardship constraints, biofiltration is not feasible.

Offsite Runoff Mitigation Fee:

Given infiltration, capture and use, and biofiltration are all infeasible, the Project will pay the offsite mitigation fee of $3.00 per square foot of non-infiltration or non-treated storm water. That translates to $3.00 multiplied by 155,087 square feet of impervious area on-site resulting in a mitigation fee of $465,261 paid to City of Long Beach’s Stormwater Pollution Abatement Fund for offsite mitigation. Please see the included LID Project Information Form for further details.

END OF MEMORANDUM
Project: Long Beach Marketplace (Capture and Use)
Harvest and Reuse Calculations (as it relates to Water Quality volume holding and drawdown time)

DESIGNER INPUTS

RESULTS
Site Charateristics:

Total Site Area 163,250 SF
Impervious Area 155,087 SF
Pervious Area 8,163 SF
95%
Low Water Hydrozone Area 0 SF
Moderate Water Hydrozone Area 8,163
85th Percentile or 0.75-inch Storm (P) 0.75 in
Long Beach Evapotranspiration (ETo) Values
City JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC TOTAL Long Beach 1.8 2.1 3.3 3.9 4.5 4.3 5.3 4.7 3.7 2.8 1.8 1.5 39.7 Eto Wet Season (Oct-April) 17.2
Avg Eto/month Watering Season 3.3
Low Water Use Planting Factor 0.2
Moderate Water Use Planting Factor 0.4
Irrigation Efficiency 0.81
SWQDv = 8,775 CF
SWQDv = 65,634 Gallons
PF = Planting Factor x Hydrozone Area
PF = 0 SF
PF = Planting Factor x Hydrozone Area
PF = 3,265 SF
ETWUwet= Eto(wet) x 0.62 x ((PF x HA)/ IE))
ETWUwet(low)= 0 gallons
ETWUwet(moderate)= 42,988
ETWUwet(total)= 42,988
Is SWQDv < or = ETWUwet
SWQDv = 65,634 Gallons
ETWUwet= 42,988 Gallons

NOT FEASIBLE
Legend:

Step 2: Determine Low Water Use Planting Factor Area (PF x HA) Step 3: Determine Moderate Water Use Planting Factor Area (PF x HA) Step 5: Detrmine if Captured Volume is Equal of Less then Irrigation Demand (ETWUwet) Step 1: Calculate Water quality volume(SWQDv)- Use LID Hydrocalc Step 4: Determine 7 month (Oct 1-April 30) Wet Season Estimated Total Water Use (ETWUwet) Step 1: Determine WQ (SUSMP) Volume
1-1 Impervious Area (Ai) 155087 SF Inputs
1-2 Undeveloped Area (Au) 0 SF Results
1-3 Pervious Area (Ap) 8163 SF
1-4 Total Area 163250 SF
1-4 85th Percentile or 0.75-inch (P) 0.75 IN
1-5 VM 8,775 CF Vm = (P/12 ft) x [(Ai)(0.9)+(Ap+Au)(0.1)] 1-6 WQ DESIGN VOLUME REQUIRED (VP) 8,775
1-7 PLANTERS WQ DESIGN VOLUME REQUIREMENT, VP X 1.5 13,162 CF Step 2: Design Inflitration Rate
2-1 DESIGN PERCOLATION RATE (f Design): 2.5 INCHES PER HOUR (5 INCHES PER HOUR WITH SAFETY FACTOR OF 2) Step 3: Calculate Bio-retention Surface Area
3-1 THICKNESS OF PLANTING MATERIAL (I): 24 INCHES
THICKNESS OF GRAVEL MATERIAL (I): 12 INCHES
3-2 PONDING DEPTH ABOVE SOIL MEDIUM (D): 12.0 INCHES
3-4 DETENTION TIME FOR SURFACE PONDING (TP) 5 96 HOUR MAXIMUM 3-5 MINIMUM PLANTER AREA REQUIRED, Amin = VB/d 13,162 SQUARE FEET Long Beach Marketplace - 6615 Pacific Coast Hwy

WATER QUALITY BMP SIZING - BIOFILTRATION PLANTER 'BMP' FACILITY (PER CITY OF LONG BEACH LID MANUAL)
This calculation is intended to determine the equivialent amount of SWQDv provided, based on the "provided" flow-thru planter area identified in that given sub area.

MARKETPLACE MIXED - USE PROJECT AT 6615 E. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY

CITY OF LONG BEACH
Appendix
July 2023
Appendix G Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment
MARKETPLACE MIXED - USE PROJECT AT 6615 E. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY

CITY OF LONG BEACH
Appendix
PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT

MARKET PLACE LONG BEACH OFFICE PARK
6615, 6621, AND 6695 EAST PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90803
(A SSES S OR’S PARCEL NUMBERS : 7237 - 020 - 040, - 041, AND - 050 ) Prepared for:

Carmel Partners Realty Investors, LLC
c/o Preston W. Brooks
Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP
2029 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, California 90067
(310) 284-2223
Prepared by:

SCS ENGINEERS
3900 Kilroy Airport Way, Suite 100
Long Beach, California 90806
(562) 426-9544
May 2018
File No. 01217048.01, Task 1
1 Table of Contents
Section Page
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..........................................................................................................................3 2 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................................6 Scope of Services.............................................................................................................................6 Special Terms and Conditions........................................................................................................7 Limitations and Assumptions ...........................................................................................................7 3 SITE DESCRIPTION..................................................................................................................................8 Location and Legal Description .....................................................................................................8 Site and Vicinity Characteristics ....................................................................................................8 Adjoining Property Use ..............................................................................................................8 Structures, Roads, and Other Relevant Site Improvements ......................................................9 Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations...................................................................9 Current Site Use................................................................................................................................9 Site Map ............................................................................................................................................9 4 HISTORICAL USE ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................. 10 Historical Use Summary................................................................................................................ 13 Historical Use of Adjoining Sites................................................................................................. 14 5 PHYSICAL SETTING ANALYSIS ......................................................................................................... 14 Physiographic Setting ...............................................................................................................14 Geology and Soils ....................................................................................................................14 Groundwater..............................................................................................................................15 6 SITE INSPECTION ................................................................................................................................ 15 Interior and Exterior Observations ............................................................................................ 15 Drinking Water..........................................................................................................................16 Wastewater ...............................................................................................................................16 Natural Drainage......................................................................................................................17 Hazardous Substances ................................................................................................................. 17 Elevators and Other Hydraulic Equipment ...........................................................................17 Hazardous Substance Handling and Storage ......................................................................... 17 Storage Tanks................................................................................................................................ 17 Polychlorinated Biphenyls............................................................................................................ 17 Solid Waste Disposal Issues and Disturbed Areas.................................................................. 18 Other Conditions of Potential Concern...................................................................................... 18 Underground Hazardous Materials Pipelines......................................................................18 Active, Plugged, or Abandoned Oil and Gas Wells and Infrastructure.........................18 Historic Mining Activity or Ore Processing Facilities ...........................................................18 Electromagnetic Field Concerns ..............................................................................................18 Wetlands and/or Endangered Species................................................................................18 Historic Landmarks and Structures..........................................................................................19 Radon ..........................................................................................................................................19 2 Wells............................................................................................................................................19 Asbestos-Containing Materials and Lead-Based Paint......................................................19 Interviews........................................................................................................................................ 20 Commonly Known or Reasonably Ascertainable Information ............................................... 20 Previous Environmental Reports..............................................................................................20 Regulatory Agency Records....................................................................................................22 5 PUBLIC RECORD REVIEW SECTION................................................................................................. 27 Property Listings............................................................................................................................ 28 Adjacent Site Listings.................................................................................................................... 28 Other Database Sites................................................................................................................... 28 Unmappable or Orphan Sites.................................................................................................29 Landfills........................................................................................................................................... 29 Oil and Gas Wells........................................................................................................................ 29 National Pipeline Mapping System (NPMS) ............................................................................ 30 7 USER PROVIDED INFORMATION..................................................................................................... 30 Title Records................................................................................................................................... 31 Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations................................................................ 31 Specialized Knowledge............................................................................................................... 31 Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues .......................................................................... 31 8 DEGREE OF OBVIOUSNESS OF THE PRESENCE/LIKELY PRESENCE OF CONTAMINATION ON THE PROPERTY........................................................................................................................................ 31 9 DATA GAPS.......................................................................................................................................... 32 10 CONFLICT CERTIFICATION................................................................................................................ 32 11 SIGNATURES OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS ............................................................... 33 12 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS...................................................................................................... 29 13 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................................... 31 13 GLOSSARY/DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................................. 33 Appendices
A Figures 1 and 2
B Title Report
C Google Earth Aerial Image and Site Photographs
D Historical Site Use Information
E Previous Environmental Reports and Regulatory Agency File Review Information F EDR Database Report
G Owner and User Questionnaires
H Resumes of Project Personnel
3 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
SCS Engineers (SCS) was retained by the Carmel Partners Realty Investors, LLC (Carmel Partners) to prepare a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of the Market Place Long Beach Office Park located at 6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, California (the “Property”). This assessment was performed in a manner which complies with 40 CFR 312, Standards for Conducting All Appropriate Inquiries, in conformance with ASTM E1527-13, and in conformance with the Master Services Agreement between SCS and Carmel Partners dated March 2017. At Carmel Partners’ request, this Phase I ESA also addresses the scope of work described in a JPMC Phase I Environmental Site Assessment scope/guidance document revised September 2017, as provided to SCS. This Phase I ESA report was prepared by Christopher Romanowski and Justin Rauzon and reviewed by Julio Nuno. Mr. Romanowski performed the site inspection on May 1, 2018.

The Property is located on the northeastern side of East Pacific Coast Highway, to the north of the intersection with Studebaker Road. The Property is an approximately 5.5-acre office park comprising three office buildings (6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway) and associated parking lots. It was previously used for oil production and as a landfill. The past presence of the landfill, two oil sumps, one or two oil wells, and oil-related infrastructure at the Property constitute recognized environmental conditions (RECs). Oil wells and associated oil pipeline/storage tank infrastructure located to the north and east of the Property also constitute a REC. During the site inspection, small superficial oil stains were noted on the concrete floor at the base of the hydraulic oil tanks inside the mechanical rooms at 6621 and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway. Based on the size of the stains and condition of the concrete floor observed, SCS considers the staining to be a de minimis environmental condition.

Current tenants include commercial business offices including real estate, medical counseling, chiropractic/acupuncture, accounting, insurance, legal, an exercise studio, and a physical therapy office (no X-Ray equipment onsite). There are no indications of contamination issues associated with the current use of the Property, although, historical developments at the Property have included both oil/gas infrastructure and a landfill. Past investigations at the Property conducted under Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB) oversight indicate that industrial waste may have been disposed at the Property. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), pesticides, and metals have been detected in groundwater and are attributable to the historical oil and gas exploration and potentially the historical landfill operations. Another ongoing concern at the Property relates to landfill gas (LFG) and migration of methane from adjoining oil field properties. A passive landfill gas control system supplemented by an intermittently operated air blower is present at the Property. In the 20+ years since this system was installed, no methane has been detected in any of the on-site buildings. As long as Property use does not change and the gas control system remains operational, SCS does not anticipate any methane-related concerns at the Property.

Although the landfill was closed in accordance with regulations in effect at the time of closure (1961), current landfill closure standards are more stringent. Both the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) and the County Department of Health Services (the LEA) must approve any major development or redevelopment on older landfills. In granting approval for major new developments, the CIWMB may require that the entire former landfill site be brought 4 up to current standards. There is, however, no systematic enforcement of the current landfill closure standards in the absence of major new development.

The Property owner of the adjoining site to the south-southeast, the “Pumpkin Patch” site, has proposed new development that has resulted in updated regulatory oversight of the former landfill. In response to the proposed redevelopment, the LARWQCB has indicated that it will impose new Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) to the Pumpkin Patch site. Because the same landfill underlying the Pumpkin Patch site extends beneath the Property and the adjoining site to the north, the LARWQCB may impose new regulatory post-closure landfill monitoring requirements on these sites as well.

Regulatory database information identified known and suspected contamination sites in the area surrounding the Property that may have contributed to groundwater contamination beneath the Property. The oil and gas operations located to the north and east of the Property are also a likely source of groundwater contamination and/or methane.

SCS performed a Phase II site investigation at the Property on April 8, 2017 consisting of soil, soil vapor, and groundwater sampling. Based on the results of the sampling, SCS concluded that there are areas with elevated concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons and petroleum-related VOCs in soil to the southeast of building 6621 East Pacific Coast Highway, in the vicinity of the former oil well sumps. Benzene and naphthalene were detected in groundwater at concentrations above their California drinking water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). Arsenic, barium, and lead were also detected in groundwater at concentrations equal to or greater than their MCLs or secondary water standards. However, the concentrations of VOCs and metals detected in groundwater during the 2017 Phase II investigation were significantly lower than concentrations reported during groundwater sampling conducted in the late 1980s.

SCS further concluded that VOCs were present in soil vapor at the Property at concentrations generally below the commercial/industrial regulatory screening levels. One sample had a concentration of chloroform slightly above the commercial/industrial screening level.

Conclusions and Recommendations
In summary, SCS has performed a Phase I Environmental Assessment in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Standard Practice E1527 and the requirements of our Master Services Contract with Carmel Partners concerning the Market Place Long Beach Office Park Property located at 6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, California.

SCS concludes that the historical uses of the Property for oil drilling and production and as a landfill constitute RECs. There is not currently a regulatory requirement to conduct further investigation of soil or groundwater at the Property. The most recent communication from the LARWQCB regarding the Property was the 1996 letter approving the SWAT investigation. No further action was required at that time. In general, the Post-Closure Maintenance General WDRs adopted on January 24, 2002 for “closed, abandoned, or inactive (CAI) landfills” apply when there is a proposed site development or land use change; if water quality impairment is found, or if nuisance conditions warrant action. Because a change in land use is not currently proposed and the LARWQCB has not imposed new WDRs, additional investigation of the Property is not 5 recommended at this time. SCS recommends that Carmel Partners continue to maintain and operate the methane mitigation system in place at the Property.

Based on the results of the April 2017 soil vapor investigation, the VOC concentrations in soil vapor would not likely be a concern to a regulatory agency under a continued commercial/industrial land use scenario. Additional investigation of soil vapor is not recommended at this time.
6 2 INTRODUCTION
SCS Engineers (SCS) was retained by Carmel Partners Realty Investors, LLC (Carmel Partners or the “User”) to prepare a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I ESA) of the Market Place Long Beach Office Park located at 6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, California (the “Property”). A location map for the Property is presented as Figure 1 in Appendix A.

The purpose of this Phase I ESA is to identify recognized environmental conditions (RECs) in connection with the Property. The term ‘recognized environmental conditions’, as defined in ASTM Standard Practice E1527-13, means the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on, at, in, or to a property under conditions that indicate an existing release, past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures on the property or into the ground, groundwater, or surface water of the Property. The term includes hazardous substances or petroleum products even under conditions in compliance with environmental laws. This assessment was performed in a manner which complies with 40 CFR 312, Standards for Conducting All Appropriate Inquiries, in conformance with ASTM E1527-13, and in conformance with the Master Services Agreement between SCS and Carmel Partners dated March 2017 (Work Order for proposal dated April 20, 2018). At Carmel Partners’ request, this Phase I ESA also addresses the scope of work described in a JPMC Phase I Environmental Site Assessment scope/guidance document revised September 2017, as provided to SCS.

This Phase I ESA is intended to constitute appropriate inquiry into the previous ownership and uses of the property, as required to support the assertion of the innocent landowner, contiguous property owner, and/or bona fide prospective purchaser defenses to liability (collectively the landowner liability protections, or LLPs) under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA a.k.a. Superfund), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) and the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2002.

If known or suspected contamination is identified, Users seeking to maintain LLPs have responsibilities in addition to completion of an AAI-compliant Phase I ESA. These “continuing obligations” include taking “appropriate care” and “reasonable steps” with respect to known or suspected releases of hazardous substances during the term of property ownership. In addition to these requirements under Federal law, there are different requirements under state law with respect to liability protections. On request, SCS Engineers can provide support for clients with continuing obligations, as appropriate.

SCOPE OF SERVICES
This Phase I ESA is based on:
• Interviews with past and/or present owners, operators, and/or occupants of the Property.
• Reviews of federal, tribal, state, and local government records. • Visual inspections of the Property and adjoining properties performed on May 1, 2018. 7 • Review of historical Property use information (topographic maps, aerial photographs, fire insurance maps, existing reports, etc.).
• Commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information about the Property (e.g., interviews with appropriate regulatory agency personnel and review of agency files review of available documents, interviews with other knowledgeable persons). • Degree of obviousness of the presence or likely presence of contamination at the Property, and the ability to detect the contamination by appropriate investigation. • Information provided as a result of the additional inquiries conducted by the User.

S PECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
This Phase I ESA for the Market Place Long Beach Office Park located at 6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, California has been prepared for the review by legal counsel of Carmel Partners, LLC. SCS’ performance of the Phase I ESA is specifically intended to develop information which Carmel Partners’ legal counsel will use in advising the company of its legal rights and/or in advancing its interests in litigation.

The report has been prepared in accordance with the care and skill generally exercised by reputable professionals, under similar circumstances, in this or similar localities. No other warranty, express or implied, is made as to the professional opinions presented herein.

No other party, known or unknown to SCS, is intended as a beneficiary of this work product, its content or information embedded therein. Third parties use this report at their own risk. Third party reliance letters may be issued on request to SCS subject to approval of the Carmel Partners, subject to the terms of the Master Services Agreement between SCS and Carmel Partners. As noted in the JPMC scope of work guidance document, this Phase I ESA report may be relied upon by the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) and a participating Community Development Corporation, if applicable.

LIMITATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS
The investigation focused on releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances or petroleum products that could be considered a REC and/or a liability due to their possible presence in significant concentrations (e.g., above acceptable limits set by the Federal or state government) or due to the potential for contaminant migration through exposure pathways (e.g., groundwater). Materials that may contain substances which are not currently deemed hazardous by the federal or state of California EPA are not considered as part of this study.

Unless specifically included in our scope of services, formal surveys for asbestos-containing materials, lead-based paints, fire safety, vapor intrusion, indoor air quality, mold, and similar matters were not part of this assessment. The Property was not evaluated for compliance with land use, zoning, wetlands, or similar laws. This report is not intended to be an environmental compliance audit.

Hazardous substances naturally occurring in plants, soils, and rocks (e.g., heavy metals, naturally occurring asbestos, or radon) are not typically considered in these investigations. Similarly, 8 construction debris (e.g., discarded concrete, asphalt) is not considered to be of concern unless observations suggest that hazardous substances are likely to be present in significant concentrations.

Unless otherwise noted, sampling and laboratory analyses of soil, water, air, building materials, or other media, were not performed as part of this investigation. Positive identification of hazardous substances can only be accomplished through sampling and appropriate laboratory analysis.

SCS Engineers assumes no responsibility for the accuracy of information obtained from, compiled by, or provided by third-party sources, such as regulatory agency listings. Unless obviously inaccurate or if information exists to the contrary, SCS assumes that information collected during this environmental site assessment is accurate and correct. Unless warranted, information collected has not been independently validated as part of this assessment. 3 SITE DESCRIPTION

LOCATION AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The Property is located on the northeastern side of East Pacific Coast Highway, to the north of the intersection with Studebaker Road. The Property has been assigned Los Angeles County Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 7237-020-040, -041, and -050. The Property consists of three addresses 6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, California, 90803, located within Los Angeles County. An APN map is provided as Figure 2. A legal description of the Property is included in a preliminary title report presented in Appendix B.

SITE AND VICINITY CHARACTERISTICS
Adjoini ng Property Use
• North – The Property is bounded to the northwest by the United Artists Long Beach 6 movie theater (6601 East Pacific Coast Highway) and a vacant building most recently occupied by El Torito Mexican Restaurant (6605 East Pacific Coast Highway). City of Long Beach property comprising a portion of the greater Los Cerritos Wetlands borders the Property to the northeast. An oil field and supporting infrastructure (a portion of the Seal Beach Oil Field) is currently within the wetland area to the northeast of the Property. • East – Los Cerritos Wetlands area owned by the City of Long Beach and developed with oil infrastructure also adjoin the Property to the east. • South – Studebaker Road extends partway along the southern side of the Property.

Landscaped areas, a small asphalt-paved parking area, and an undeveloped lot seasonally used as a pumpkin patch or Christmas tree lot are also located to the south of the Property. • West – East Pacific Coast Highway borders the Property immediately to the west. The Marina Shores Shopping Center is located across the street. Tenants in this adjoining shopping center include Mimi’s Café (6670 East Pacific Coast Highway), other restaurants, commercial offices, a Whole Foods grocery market, and a vacant tenant space formerly occupied by Paradise Cleaners (6608 East Pacific Coast Highway). 9 Oil wells and associated oil pipeline/storage tank infrastructure to the north and east of the Property constitute a REC. While they are a possible source of combustible gas migration onto the Property, an existing landfill gas (LFG) control system as currently operated is adequately protecting the site buildings.

With the exception of the former Paradise Cleaners located in the shopping center across the street to the west of the Property, no other environmental issues of concern were noted on the adjoining sites. Dry cleaning operations are commonly associated with releases of solvent that can affect subsurface soil, soil vapor, and groundwater. As discussed in Section 5, there are no indications that there has been a solvent release at the former Paradise Cleaners site. Based on the distance (approximately 350 feet west) and the absence of information about past releases, the former Paradise Cleaners is not likely to affect the environmental condition of the Property.

STRUCTURES, ROADS, AND OTHER RELEVANT SI TE

IMPROVEMENTS
The Property is an approximately 5.5-acre office park comprising three office buildings (6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway) and associated parking lots. A small area at the southeastern corner of the Property extends beyond the office park fence line to an area of historical oil field development. Limited landscaping is present around the perimeters of the buildings and portions of the parking area.

ENVIRONMENTAL LIENS OR ACTIVITY AND USE LIMITATIONS
No information regarding environmental liens or activity and use limitations was identified in a preliminary title report provided in Appendix B and discussed in Section 7. No environmental liens or activity/use limitations were identified by SCS during the course of this assessment.

CURRENT SITE USE
Tenants at the office buildings included the following:
• 6615 East Pacific Coast Highway – Commercial business offices including real estate, medical counseling, chiropractic/acupuncture (no X-ray equipment onsite), accounting, etc.
• 6621 East Pacific Coast Highway – Commercial business offices including insurance, legal, real estate, medical counseling, etc.
• 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway – A Remax real estate office, a Bar Method exercise studio, and a physical therapy office (no X-Ray equipment onsite).

SITE MAP
A Google Earth aerial image and photographs of the Property are provided in Appendix C. 10 4 HISTORICAL USE ANALYSIS
Site history was evaluated from the following sources:
• Historical U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps provided by Environmental Data Resources (EDR) (April 23, 2012).
• Historical aerial photographs dating from 1928, 1938, 1947, 1952, 1968, 1976, 1989, 1994, and 2005 provided by EDR (April 24, 2012) and Google Earth historical aerial imagery available online.
• City of Long Beach Department of Building and Safety building permit information. • A search was made of EDR-Sanborn collection and no maps of the Property were found (April 23, 2012).
• City Directory review report provided by EDR (April 23, 2012). • Previous environmental reports and regulatory file information (discussed in depth in Sections 5 and 6).

Copies of topographic maps, aerial photos, selected building permits, and the EDR City Directory Report are included in Appendix F.

Year Description Source
1902
The Property and surrounding area were undeveloped
wetlands depicted at the northeastern side of Alamitos Bay, where the San Gabriel River flowed to the Pacific Ocean.

Topographic
map
1925
The Property and immediately surrounding areas were
depicted as wetlands along the northern side of the San Gabriel River.

Topographic
map
1928
The Property was mostly vacant, undeveloped land to the north of bends in the San Gabriel River. Two oil sumps and oilrelated infrastructure were located on the southeastern corner of the Property.

Oil field development, including oil wells, open pits/sumps, and ASTs were present to the north, east, and southeast of the Property. Small structures were also present across a dirt road to the west of the Property.

Aerial photo
1935
The Property was not depicted on this map.

The San Gabriel River was located 500 feet to the south of the Property.

Topographic
map
11 Year Description Source
1938
The oil sumps were no longer visible on the Property. One oil well was located at the southeastern side of the Property. The rest of the Property appeared to be undeveloped, degraded wetland.

The San Gabriel River to the south of the Property had been straightened and channelized. The oil field operations were further developed on surrounding land, but there were no longer visible indications of sumps.

Aerial photo
1947
Depending on the delineation of the Property boundary, one or two oil wells were depicted on the southeastern portion of the Property on the map, but only one was visible on the aerial photo.

Dozens of oil wells were present to the west, north, and east of the Property, along with dirt access roads to service them. One structure was present across Pacific Coast Highway to the southwest of the Property.

Aerial photo and
Topographic
map
1950-51
One oil well was depicted on, or just outside, the southeastern part of the Property. The rest of the Property was
undeveloped, vacant land.

Fewer oil wells were depicted on the surrounding area, but the general area was still an oil field. A few additional small structures were depicted across the street to the west.

Topographic
map
1952 No significant changes from the 1947 aerial photo were noted on the Property or surrounding area. Aerial photo
1960
Previous reports indicated that portions of the Property were used as a landfill between mid-1960 and early 1961.

Continental Oil Company was listed under the address 6601 East Pacific Coast Highway, to the north of the Property.

Previous reports
and City
directories
1964
Oil wells were no longer depicted on the Property.

No significant changes to the surrounding areas from the 1951 map were noted.

Topographic
map
12 Year Description Source
1968
The oil wells no longer appeared to be present on the
Property, which was still mostly undeveloped land.

The marina to the west was developed in its current
configuration. Fewer oil ASTs were noted to the northeast of the Property.

Aerial photo
1972 No significant changes from the 1964 map were noted on the Property or surrounding areas.

Topographic
map
1976
The Property was undeveloped vacant land. Some dark areas of soil were noted on the southeastern portion of the Property.

The structures previously located across the street to the west were no longer present.

Aerial photo
1978 A building permit was issued for a new office building at 6615 East Pacific Coast Highway. Building Permits
1980
Various office building tenants were listed at addresses associated with the Property. Building permits were issued for construction activities and tenant improvements at the Property.

Numerous permits were issued following the first construction.

El Torito Restaurant was listed at 6605 East Pacific Coast Highway, to the north of the Property.

City directories
1981
No significant changes from the 1972 map were noted on the Property or surrounding areas. A certificate of occupancy was issued for a two-story office building at 6615 East Pacific Coast Highway.

Building Permits
and Topographic
map
1983 Building permits were first issued for the construction of 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway. Building permits
1985
Various office building tenants were listed at addresses associated with the Property.

United Artist Theater was listed as a tenant at 6601 East Pacific Coast Highway, to the north of the Property.

City directories
1987
Building permits were issued for tenant improvements.

Certificates of occupancy noted that the Property was
developed with commercial office buildings.

Building permits
13 Year Description Source
1989
The Property was developed with three office buildings in its current configuration.

The movie theater and other shopping center buildings were constructed to the north-northwest. An office building was constructed across the street to the south-southwest.

Aerial photo
1991 Various office building tenants were listed at addresses associated with the Property. City directories
1994 No significant changes from the 1989 aerial photo were noted on the Property or surrounding areas. Aerial photo
2001 Building permits were issued for tenant improvements at the Property buildings. Building permits
2002 The shopping center buildings across the street to the west were present.

Google Earth
aerial photo
2005
No changes were noted on the Property from the 1994 aerial photo.

The shopping center buildings were present across the street to the west.

Aerial photo
2006
Various shopping center tenants, including Paradise Cleaners, were listed at addresses across the street to the west of the Property.

Snowy Pines Xmas and Pumpkin Patch were listed at 6701 East Pacific Coast Highway, to the south of the Property.

City directories
2011
No changes were noted on the Property.

Christmas Tree lot activities were present on the lot to the south of the Property.

Google Earth
aerial photo

HISTORICAL USE SUMMAR Y
The Property was undeveloped wetland located to the northeast of Alamitos Bay and north of the San Gabriel River until the mid-1920s. By 1928, two oil sumps and oil-related infrastructure were present on the southeastern part of the Property. The rest of the Property was undeveloped land, no longer identifiable as wetland. The oil sumps were no longer visible by 1938, when one oil well was present on the southeastern portion of the Property. In 1947, possibly two oil wells 14 were depicted on a historical topographic map, but only one was visible in an historical aerial photo. Portions of the Property were used as a landfill between mid-1960 and early 1961. Oil wells were no longer visible in aerial photos of the Property by 1964. A dark spot (possibly vegetation or dark soil) was visible at the southeastern corner of the Property in a 1976 aerial photo, a short distance to the west of the historical oil sumps and oil wells. The Property was developed with three office buildings in their current configuration between 1978 and the early 1980s. Numerous tenant improvements have been performed at the office buildings since that time.

The past presence of the landfill, two oil sumps, one or two oil wells, and oil-related infrastructure at the Property constitute a REC.

HISTORICAL USE OF ADJOINING SITES
The surrounding area was also undeveloped wetland prior to the mid-1920s. By 1928, oil field development was occurring to the north, east, and southeast of the Property. The San Gabriel River, located approximately 500 feet to the south of the Property, was channelized by 1938. Oil field operations expanded in surrounding areas in the 1930s and 1940s, including across the street to the west. By the 1950s, some of the oil wells had been plugged and a group of buildings was expanded across the street to the west. Continental Oil Company was listed at an address to the north of the Property in 1960. Oil operations have continued to the northeast and east of the Property through today.

The shopping center to the north was developed in the late-1970s and early 1980s, around the same time as the Property. The shopping center across the street to the west was constructed in the early 2000s.
5 PHYSICAL SETTING ANALYSIS
Physiographic Setting
The Property is located the Los Angeles Coastal Plain in Section 11, Range 12 W, Township 5 S at an elevation of approximately 10 feet above mean sea level. The San Gabriel River is located approximately 550 feet to the southeast, and the Long Beach Marina is about 775 feet to the southwest.

Geology and Soils
The Property is located within the Alamitos Gap, an area of seawater intrusion. The Gap is an alluvial-filled, southwesterly trending feature which transects the northwesterly trending NewportInglewood Uplift and Fault Zone (Seal Beach segment). The banks of the Gap, Bixby Ranch Hill and Landing Hill, are the erosional remnants of an eroded anticlinal fold, which locally is the surface expression of the Newport-Inglewood Uplift. The fold is comprised of Pleistocene and older sediments.

The upper portion of the stratigraphic section that underlies the Property and vicinity consists of unnamed alluvial deposits consisting of interbedded gravels, sandy silts, and clays, approximately 15 80 to 100 feet thick of recent geological age. This is underlain by 200 feet of the Pleistocene Lakewood Formation consisting of marine and continental gravels, sands, sandy silts, silts, and clays. This in turn is underlain by over 1,000 feet of sands and gravelly sands of the Pleistocene San Pedro Formation.

Groundwater
The Property is located in the San Gabriel River Watershed, in the Los Angeles Coastal Plain, and was historically within the Los Cerritos Wetlands. The Property lies within an area of sea water intrusion. The recent alluvial sediments are in direct communication with sea water and act as a conduit for inland migration of saline water. Two additional important conduits for the inland migration of sea water are the Los Cerritos Channel and the San Gabriel River because of their direct contact with the ocean.

During a 1990 groundwater investigation conducted within the adjoining oil fields, groundwater was encountered at a depth of approximately five feet below ground surface (bgs). A 1989 investigation of former landfill areas located on the Property determined that the groundwater flow direction was northeasterly and influenced by tidal movement. The groundwater beneath the Property is saline with a total dissolved solids (TDS) content of over 30,000 milligrams per liter (mg/L).
6 SITE INSPECTION

INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR OBSERVATIONS
Christopher Romanowski of SCS performed an inspection of the Property and surrounding area on May 1, 2018.

Access to the Property was provided by Ms. Amy Rasilla, a Property Manager with Newmark Knight Frank. Robert, the maintenance engineer, was also present during the site inspection. At the time of the site visits, SCS visually inspected the exterior areas of the Property, interior common areas of each office building, and representative office spaces inside each of the buildings. SCS also reviewed tenant lists and type of operations (office work) for tenant spaces not visually inspected.

During the site inspection, asphalt borehole patches and Underground Service Alert markings were observed in parking areas throughout the Property. These were associated with soil, groundwater, and geotechnical borings conducted in 2017.

Since portions of the Property were historically used as a residential/commercial refuse landfill, a LFG control system is currently operating at the Property. Buildings at 6615 and 6621 East Pacific Coast Highway are constructed with sub-floor crawl spaces, in part to assist with the LFG control systems. Access hatches are located in all utility closets on the first floor. Both passive and air injection LFG control systems are installed at the Property to protect these two buildings.

The 6695 East Coast Highway building is a slab-on-grade construction. 16 Asphalt-paved parking covers approximately 65 percent of the Property. In general, the parking lot was observed to be in fair condition. Some evidence of settlement cracks and one area of differential settling was noted in the parking area at the center of the Property.

A network of methane monitoring wells, vent pipes, and trench vent pipes are present on the Property, particularly on the eastern side of 6615 and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway and in landscaped areas. A ventilation blower associated with the methane gas protection system at 6621 East Pacific Coast Highway is located within a fenced area offsite immediately to the north of the Property.

As discussed in Section 5, SCS Field Services provides Operations, Monitoring, and Maintenance (OM&M) services for the landfill gas control system at the Property (SCS, April 26, 2018).

According to Mr. Steve Croasdale of SCS, the gas control system has been functioning satisfactorily for a number of years, and no methane has been detected beneath any of the buildings on the Property. Hazardous levels of methane have never been detected in sub-slab probes and monitoring wells. The quarterly visual observation of the landfill surface conducted on March 23, 2018 noted the cracking and settlement in the parking lot areas. Some of the most significant cracking is located in the parking area offsite to the north of the Property boundary.

The cracking does not adversely affect the landfill gas control (LFG) facilities, it was cited as a violation by the Los Angeles County Solid Waste Local Enforcement Agency (LEA), because it affects the Property as a whole.

In addition to the main office park area of the Property, a portion of Parcel 7237-020-041 extends beyond the fence line to the southeast. This portion of the Property was not directly accessible, but could be observed through the fence. This area is situated approximately five feet lower in elevation than the parking lot of the office park. Electrical equipment, trees, a concrete stormwater drain tunnel, and metal pipeline saddles associated with historical oil infrastructure were observed in this portion of the Property.

No industrial or manufacturing activities, railroad spurs, paint booths, emergency generators, sources of air emissions, or automobile hydraulic lifts were noted on the Property.

Drinking Water
Drinking water is supplied to the Property by the City of Long Beach. No drinking water wells are located on the Property. All large public water suppliers in California have been required to test their water and comply with federal and state drinking water standards since the mid-1980s.

Consequently, lead and other contaminants of concern are not expected to be present above applicable primary and secondary drinking water standards.

Wastewater
Industrial wastewater is not currently generated at the Property. Sanitary wastewater is directed to the municipal sanitary sewer system.
17 Natural Drainage
Natural waterways are not currently located on the Property. Site drainage is directed to on-site stormwater collection drains in the parking area or to the surrounding streets. No staining was noted around stormwater drains. As noted above, a concrete stormwater drainage tunnel was noted on the lower, southeastern portion of the Property. Stormwater drains to the wetlands/oil field to the east of the Property through this tunnel.

No standing surface water, ponds, farm tanks, lagoons, swamps, lakes, rivers, springs, or surface impoundments were noted on the Property.

HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
Individual tenants and building maintenance personnel store small quantities of household janitorial chemicals in the office buildings.

Elevators and Other Hydraulic Equipment
Each of the three buildings has a hydraulic elevator. SCS observed the interior of the mechanical room behind each of the elevators. Small superficial oil stains were noted on the concrete floor at the base of the hydraulic oil tanks inside the mechanical rooms at 6621 and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway. Additionally a 55-gallon drum of hydraulic fluid was observed in the mechanical room of 6615 East Pacific Coast Highway. Photos showing the staining are included in Appendix B. During the inspection by SCS, the maintenance engineer stated that he was not aware of any problems with the elevator equipment. Based on the size of the stains and condition of the concrete floor observed, SCS considers the staining to be a de minimis environmental condition.

HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE HANDLING AND STORAGE
No evidence of mishandling of the janitorial chemicals was noted during the site inspection. No evidence of a release from the 55-gallon drum of hydraulic fluid in the elevator room at 6615 East Pacific Coast Highway was noted either.

STORAGE TANKS
Other than the elevator hydraulic oil tanks described above, no aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) are located at the Property. No evidence of underground storage tanks (USTs), such as vent pipes, fill ports, etc. was noted during the site inspection.

POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS
Three pad-mounted Southern California Edison (SCE) electrical transformers were noted on the Property, one outside of each building. SCE has stated that they have never specified the purchase of distribution transformers utilizing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) as the insulating/cooling fluid. SCE transformers currently utilize mineral oil exclusively. However, in a statistically valid test of over 20,000 SCE distribution transformers, SCE determined that the 18 concentrations of PCBs in the mineral oils in its transformers was less than 50 parts per million (ppm) in over 96 percent of the units. The transformers on the Property have not been tested.

Based on the available information, no significant environmental impact to the subject site is expected from any of the transformers. Any release from the transformers would be SCE’s responsibility. No other potentially PCB-containing equipment was noted during the inspection.

SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL ISSUES AND DISTURBED AREAS
A solid waste dumpster is situated within a small walled compound near each of the three buildings. Since the Property is entirely paved except for limited landscaping around the buildings, no obvious disturbed areas were noted. However, as mentioned above, cracked asphalt in the parking lots is an indication of fill material in the subsurface undergoing differential settling. No distressed, discolored, or stained vegetation was observed. No farm waste, feed lot spoils, or manure stockpiles were noted on the Property.

OTHER CONDITIONS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN
Undergroun d Hazardous Materials Pipelines
No obvious aboveground evidence of hazardous materials pipelines was visible on the Property during the site inspection. As discussed in Section 5, there are abandoned and in-service crude oil pipelines located along East Pacific Coast Highway, within 0.1 miles of the Property.

Active, Plugged, or Abandoned Oil and Gas Wells and
Infrastructure
Active oil and gas wells, associated tank batteries, and/or other oil or gas production facilities are not currently located on the Property. As mentioned above, active oil field equipment is located in the wetland area immediately to the northeast of the Property. Electrical equipment associated with the adjoining oil field operations is constructed on the southeastern portion of the Property.

Metal pipeline saddles associated with historical oil infrastructure were observed on and adjacent to the southeastern portion of the Property. As discussed in Section 5, a plugged oil well may have been located on this portion of the Property in the past. The historical oil operations at the Property are considered to be a REC.

Historic Mining Activity or Ore Processing Facilities
No evidence of on-site mining or ore processing facilities was observed during the site inspection.

Electromagne tic Field Concerns
No suspect sources of aboveground electromagnetic fields (e.g., high voltage power lines or electrical substations) identified on, or in close proximity to, the Property.

Wetlands and/or Endangered Species
As noted above, the Property was historically part of the Los Cerritos Wetlands. While a wetlands delineation study is outside the scope of this Phase I ESA, the lower southeastern 19 portion of the Property is situated at a lower elevation than the rest of the Property. According to a review the National Wetlands Inventory Wetland Mapper V2, this portion of the Property may be classified as Freshwater Pond wetland. The adjoining area to the east comprises degraded wetlands developed with oil infrastructure. As shown in the EDR database report (Appendix D) discussed in Section 5, the Property is located within a 500-year flood zone and area designated as State Wetlands.

An endangered species assessment is outside the scope of this Phase I ESA. According to the Los Cerritos Wetlands Stewards, Inc. website, the California least tern (Sternula antillarum browni), a federally-listed endangered migratory bird subspecies, is known to visit the adjoining wetlands.

The brown pelican (Pelecanuas occidentalis), a bird species listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act from 1970 to 2009 is also documented to visit the adjoining wetlands. Other animal and plant species protected under other acts are also known to inhabit the adjoining wetlands. No endangered species were observed on the Property at the time of the site inspection.

Historic Landmarks and Structures
According to a review of the City of Long Beach Planning Department’s Historic Landmarks website, no historic landmarks or structures are located on the Property. A map showing the locations of landmarks in the southeastern portion of Long Beach is provided in Appendix E.

Radon
According to the California Department of Health Service’s February 2016 Radon Program report, screening in the area of the Property (90803 zip code) found no locations (out of 60) where buildings had radon levels greater than or equal to 4 picocuries per liter (pCi/L; the EPA action level). The maximum result reported within the boundaries of the zip code was 1.9 pCi/L). The alluvial geology of the Long Beach area is not normally associated with elevated radon levels.

Note that elevated radon levels may also be attributed to other radon sources such as leaking natural gas or numerous building products such as drywall, cinderblock, concrete floors, brick, or stone products. Based on the available information, elevated radon gas is not expected in the area of the Property. No basements and/or subsurface vaults were noted on the Property.

Wells
Several combustible gas monitoring wells were noted on the Property. No drinking water or groundwater monitoring wells were observed on the Property during the site inspection.

Asbestos - Containing Materials and Lead - Based Paint
In general, buildings constructed before 1985 have a high potential for asbestos-containing materials (ACMs). The manufacture of most ACMs (except roofing tars/mastics) ended in the late 1970s. However, existing inventories of products could still be used. In addition, roofing tars and mastics can still contain asbestos. Thus, ACMs can be present in building materials regardless of age or date of construction (for example, in roofing felt, vinyl flooring, dry wall mud, etc.). Without sampling and analysis, it is not possible to definitely identify ACMs. 20 Based on known or likely original construction date for structures on the Property (late 1970s/early 1980s, as discussed above), it is possible that ACMs are present.

Lead-based paint (LBP) has been used on structures since the late 1800s. LBP use peaked in the 1920s and gradually fell off until its ban. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) estimates that about 3 of 4 houses built before 1980 contain LBP. In 1973, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) established a maximum lead content in paint of 0.5 percent by weight (or 1.0 mg/cm2) in a dry film of newly applied paint. In 1978, the CPSC lowered the allowable lead level in paint to 0.06 percent. The use of LBP was not prohibited until 1980. Buildings constructed or renovated between 1940 and 1980 have a much higher probability of having LBP.

The presence of LBP cannot be determined without testing. As discussed in this report, the buildings were constructed in the late 1970s and early 1980s, so the presence of LBP cannot be ruled out.

INTERVIEWS
During the site inspection, SCS also interviewed the office park property manager and the maintenance engineer. Information provided by these individuals is discussed where appropriate throughout this report.

COMMONLY KNOWN OR REASONABLY ASCERTAINABLE

INFORMATION
In order to identify commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information about the Property, SCS reviewed previous environmental reports and various regulatory agency files and interviewed regulatory agency personnel. The following information was identified.

Previous Environmental Reports
The following previous environmental reports were provided to SCS for review as part of this Phase I ESA.

SCS conducted a Phase I ESA on the Property on behalf of Bixby Ranch Company in 2001 (SCS, June 15, 2001). At that time, the Property was developed in its current configuration. No use or storage of potentially hazardous chemicals was noted on the Property during the site inspection.

While SCS no longer has copies, the 2001 Phase I ESA report included the following summary of a 1986 environmental report prepared by Moore & Taber, Inc.:

Moore & Taber (1986) – This report presented the results of a soil and foundation investigation for the “proposed office and restaurant buildings” planned for Phase II of the Market Place Office Park development. The Property was described as a vacant lot covered with piles of soil, asphalt pavement, concrete, and clay roofing tile. It was bordered to the northeast by an existing oil field owned by Bixby Ranch Company. The oil field was situated about 9 to 14 feet lower in elevation than the surface of the vacant lot with a ten-foot fill slope separating the oil field from the vacant lot.
21 Test excavation on the Property indicated that the Property was underlain by fill soils and household refuse. The refuse consisted predominantly of paper (newspapers and magazines) with smaller amounts of plastic, metal, tires, wood, glass, and green waste. All of the newspapers observed dated from 1960. Groundwater was generally encountered about 13 to 18 feet bgs. The vertical extent of the trashy fill varied from about 5 feet to approximately 33 feet below the existing ground surface.

SCS Engineers Phase I (April 2017) – SCS Engineers conduced a Phase I ESA on the Property on behalf of Carmel Partners Realty Investors, LLC in 2017 (SCS, April 26, 2017). The Property was developed in the same configuration it is in today and with similar tenants and tenant operations. SCS noted that the Property was historically used as a residential/commercial refuse landfill and as a result there is a landfill gas control system monitoring the Property. The Phase I ESA found that the quarterly monitoring program was operating as intended and the site buildings are adequately protected. There was evidence of small stress cracks and an area of settling noted in the central part of the parking lot, likely related to the landfill.

No indications of contamination were identified with the respect to the then current use of the Property. Historical developments on the Property had included both oil/gas infrastructure and a landfill. Past investigation performed by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB) found that volatile organic compounds (VOCs), pesticides, and metals were detected in the groundwater.

The Phase I determined that the Property was historically used for oil drilling and production operations, including former oil sumps and oil-related infrastructure. Also from mid-1960 through early 1961 the Property was used as a landfill. All these former operations were identified as RECs. SCS recommended that a soil vapor survey be performed at perimeter probe locations outside the footprint of the landfill, soil sampling be performed in the area of historic oil operations, and groundwater be sampled in five locations.

SCS Engineers Phase II (May 2017) – SCS performed a Phase II site investigation at the Property on April 8, 2017. The investigation consisted of soil, soil vapor, and groundwater sampling.

Based on the results of the sampling, SCS concluded that elevated concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons (up to 10,800 milligrams per kilogram [mg/kg]) were identified in soil at the 10 foot depth of boring B1, installed to the east of the eastern building (6621 East Pacific Coast Highway). Additional borings to the south and east of boring B1 identified petroleum hydrocarbons, but at relatively low concentrations. The presence of the building prevented any further characterization to the west and northwest. This area corresponds to a location identified in historical aerial photographs where sumps were present. The petroleum-related compound 1,2,3-Trichloropropane was detected in soil at the 10 foot depth of boring B2 at a concentration that represents a potential risk to groundwater, but it was not detected in groundwater samples.

Benzene and naphthalene were each detected in one groundwater sample at concentrations above their California drinking water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). Arsenic, barium, and lead were detected in one or more groundwater sample at concentrations (or estimated concentrations) equal to or greater than their MCLs or secondary water standard.

SCS further concluded that VOCs were present in soil vapor at the Property at concentrations which may represent a risk of vapor intrusion under a residential land use scenario. With one 22 exception, all VOC concentrations were detected at concentrations below the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) recommended screening levels. Chloroform was detected in one of 15 samples at a concentration of 1.3 micrograms per liter (µg/l), narrowly above the DTSC-recommended screening level of 1.1 µg/l for commercial/industrial sites.

Benzene was detected in two of 15 samples at concentrations above the residential DTSCrecommended screening level, but below the screening level for a commercial/industrial land use scenario. SCS noted that, if brought to the attention of a regulatory agency, further investigation and/or a monitoring program may be required if the proposed land use were to change.

SCS recommended that any further investigation at the Property be conducted with regulatory agency oversight. This recommendation was supported by a finding that the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB) has already determined that the PostClosure Maintenance General Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) adopted on January 24, 2002 for post-closure of “closed, abandoned, or inactive (CAI) landfills” should apply to the Pumpkin Patch site adjoining the Property to the south-southeast. The same landfill extends beneath the Property and it is likely that the LARWQCB would also function as the lead regulatory agency for further investigation of the Property.

SCS Field Services (2018) – SCS Engineers has been monitoring the methane system at the Property for more than 20 years. SCS reviewed the most recent quarterly methane control system operation report for the Property prepared by SCS Field Services (SCS, April 26, 2018).

Cracking and settlement was observed in the parking lot areas. This report indicated that the methane gas control facilities were performing satisfactorily, preventing the buildup of combustible levels of methane in the buildings on the Property. Combustible gas was not detected in monitoring wells or sub-floor probes during sampling on March 23, 2018.

Combustible gas was detected at passive vent pipe monitoring location VP-2 (18.1 percent by volume in air) located in the parking lot area at the center of the Property. The vent pipe is designed to provide a preferential pathway for methane to flow to the atmosphere rather than accumulate in the subsurface or in structures. A copy of this report is included in Appendix E.

Previous environmental reports obtained through the State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker and CalRecycle websites are summarized in the section below.

Regulatory Agency Records
Local regulatory agencies and other sources were contacted in an effort to identify any known or suspected contamination sites or incidents of hazardous waste storage or disposal which might have resulted in soil or groundwater contamination within a one-mile radius of the Property.

Within the City of Long Beach, the Long Beach Fire Department (LBFD) generally acts as the lead enforcement agency for underground storage tank compliance. In the event of potential site contamination, the Long Beach Department of Health and Human Services (LBDHHS) assumes oversight. SCS contacted both the LBFD and the LBDHHS and neither reported having files pertaining to the Property. If a tank has leaked and/or groundwater contamination is suspected, the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB) generally becomes the lead agency in supervising contaminant characterization and cleanup. 23 The following is a summary of selected environmental reports for the former Market Place Landfill available on the State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker website (LARWQCB Case No. 60-089, GeoTracker ID No. T10000004438). Note that the former Market Place Landfill (also known as City Dump Salvage No. 2) extended onto the adjoining undeveloped parcel to the south-southeast (referred to as the Pumpkin Patch) and to the adjoining movie theater site to the northwest. It was a Class II waste disposal facility that operated from mid-1960 through early 1961. The GeoTracker file includes correspondence letters and permitting information from 1960 about the former landfill. Relevant information from those documents, including types of waste the landfill was permitted to receive, were summarized in reports below. The GeoTracker file also includes various correspondence letters from the late 1980s and early 1990s, when a Solid Waste Assessment Test review of the former landfill was conducted.

IT Corporation (1987) – This report presented the results of a 1987 site investigation conducted by IT which included 10 borings for soil and refuse sampling and placement of two groundwater monitoring wells.

Historical information presented in this report indicated that City Dump Salvage No. 2 (City of Long Beach) began disposing of refuse on this site in mid-1960 and ceased operations in early 1961. According to IT, the landfill roughly paralleled Pacific Coast Highway and extended from beyond the northwestern side of the Property southeasterly onto the vacant lot located across Studebaker Road to the south-southeast (the Pumpkin Patch). The operating permit allowed for the excavation and subsequent filling with refuse of a trench below the groundwater table.

Permitted wastes included inert solids, household and commercial refuse, and garbage and market refuse. Final cover of the landfill was in place by May 16, 1961. At the time of IT’s investigation, the Property was vacant and Studebaker Road was only proposed.

IT encountered groundwater at an average depth of 15 feet below grade. The groundwater was characterized as essentially seawater with no discernable gradient. Water-level measurements conducted over several days indicated that groundwater levels fluctuated with oceanic tides.

Based on their investigation, IT concluded that contaminants from the landfill did not appear to be migrating from the landfill. With the exception of lead, no hazardous substances were detected in landfill samples at concentrations above regulatory limits. Total lead concentrations up to 386 ppm and soluble lead levels up to 26 ppm were detected in refuse samples. Based on the presence of lead and trace (non-hazardous) concentrations of other metals and cyanide, IT speculated that some plating wastes may have been illegally disposed of in the landfill.

IT Corporation (1989) – In 1988, IT conducted a Solid Waste Assessment Test (SWAT) of the Market Place Sanitary Landfill under the oversight of the California Regional Water Quality Board. The SWAT consisted of the installation of five groundwater monitoring wells at the site, including upgradient and downgradient locations. Groundwater was encountered at depths of 6 to 14 feet below ground surface; refuse was detected to approximately 30 feet below grade at two areas of the landfill.

Based on the information presented in this report, the landfill was permitted to accept garbage and market refuse, household and commercial refuse (including dry mud cake from oil well sumps, paint sludge from spray booths, oil-soaked excelsior, dried paint in drums, residue and grit from 24 the Hyperion sludge plant), and inert solids (including steel-mill slag and asbestos). Additionally, ash residue from a fire at the site in October 1961 was buried in the southern portion of the landfill. The site received wastes from the City of Long Beach, B-Z Disposal Service, J and S Disposal (serving the City of Lakewood), the Veteran’s Administration Hospital, the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, and the general public.

The SWAT investigation identified benzene (up to 800 micrograms per liter [µg/L]), ethylbenzene (up to 100 µg/L), toluene (up to 10 µg/L), xylenes (up to 3.8 µg/L), bis (2- ethylhexyl) phthalate (up to 42 µg/L), di-n-octylphthalate (up to 66 µg/L), methyl ethyl ketone (up to 8.4 µg/L), methyl isobutyl ketone (up to 26 µg/L), trans-1,2-dichloroethylene (up to 0.6 µg/L), and acetone (up to 130 µg/L) in groundwater. Benzene was detected at concentrations above the MCL for drinking water in California. For all other detected VOCs, there either is not an established MCL or the concentrations were below their corresponding MCLs. IT noted that the benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylenes may be attributable to a service station located 1,000 feet northwest of the Property, though SCS disagrees with this conclusion given the distance of that service station from the Property. Considering the history of the area, on-site oil and gas activities is a more likely source of the benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene and xylenes. The two phthalates were believed to be from the PVC well casings. The ketone compounds were thought to be from the decomposition of fats and plastics in the landfill. Although several metals (iron, manganese) were detected at levels above MCLs, the concentrations were consistent with background groundwater samples collected in the same area.

Conclusions regarding the leakage and migration of hazardous substances from the former landfill site were reserved pending further quarterly groundwater sampling.

SCS Engineers (1990) – This report presented the results of an Air Solid Waste Assessment Test (Air SWAT) conducted over the landfill site during May, June, and July 1989. The report noted that approximately half of the landfill had been paved and was being used for parking with the footprint of one office building overlying buried refuse. The remainder of the landfill was undeveloped land.

Active and passive subsurface gas migration control measures had been installed by the Bixby Ranch Company to prevent landfill gas migration into site structures. In addition, a network of subsurface gas monitoring wells and subsurface gas probes had been installed in natural soils surrounding the landfill and below threatened structures. These probes were (and continue to be) monitored on a quarterly basis.

The Air SWAT test program consisted of the collection of one internal landfill gas sample and 15 ambient air samples. These samples were analyzed for methane and various volatile chlorinated organic compounds.

Methane was detected in the landfill gas sample at a concentration of approximately 40 percent by volume. A surface scan of the unpaved areas of the landfill surface failed to detect methane above ambient air concentrations.

No volatile chlorinated organic compounds were detected in the landfill gas. However, tetrachloromethane, trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, and 1,1,1-trichloroethane were 25 detected in ambient air samples. As these compounds appeared to be present in both upwind and downwind samples, the report concluded that it was questionable whether the contaminants were of landfill origin.

IT Corporation (1991) – This report presented the results of one year of quarterly monitoring and sampling at the landfill. Elevated concentrations of general chemical parameters, metals, and several organic compounds were detected in groundwater from downgradient wells. However, elevated concentrations of several chemical constituents, mainly VOCs, were also detected in groundwater from upgradient wells. In addition, the report noted that a property located directly west of the site across Pacific Coast Highway, had severe soil and groundwater contamination. In addition, a leaking underground storage tank site was identified 1,000 feet northwest of the site.

LARWQCB (1994) – This April 20, 1996 letter from the LARWQCB to the Bixby Ranch Company summarizes the results of the SWAT reports discussed above. The LARWQCB noted that “in most cases, upgradient VOC concentrations exceed downgradient concentrations, suggesting that there is an upgradient, offsite source.” This letter also summarizes maximum concentrations of base/neutral/acid extractable compounds (BNAs) detected in groundwater. The BNAs included the pesticides (alpha-BHC, delta-BHC, 4,4’-DDE, 4,4’-DDT, Endosulfan I, gamma-BHC, and Heptachlor). The concentrations were generally higher in upgradient designated groundwater wells than those in downgradient locations. Of the metals detected in groundwater, lead was identified at a maximum concentration of 0.20 milligrams per liter (mg/L), above the drinking MCL at the time of 0.05 mg/L. The MCL has since been lowered to 0.015 mg/L. Arsenic was also detected in upgradient and downgradient wells at concentrations equal to, or greater than, current MCLs. The LARWQCB concluded that leachate indicators in groundwater suggest possible releases affecting groundwater. The agency conditionally approved the SWAT report, but requested two additional semi-annual groundwater monitoring events for VOCs, BNAs, metals, and general minerals.

IT Corporation (1995 and 1996) – These reports presented the results of the additional semiannual groundwater sampling and analyses. At this time, groundwater was determined to be flowing to the east and northeast. Groundwater samples for downgradient wells contained detectable concentrations of several aromatics and halocarbons. With the exception of benzene and vinyl chloride, all of the concentrations were below drinking water MCLs.

LARWQCB (1996) – This January 30, 1996 letter from the LARWQCB to the Bixby Ranch Company marked the conclusion of the SWAT reporting. It notes that nickel was detected in upgradient and downgradient wells at concentrations below the California MCL for drinking water. Based on the additional semi-annual reporting, the LARWQCB concluded that the groundwater monitoring network was capable of detecting a release at the landfill and that the landfill had not adversely impacted groundwater quality beneath the Property. It therefore approved the SWAT reporting.

Although the landfill was closed in accordance with regulations in effect at the time of closure (1961), current landfill closure standards are more stringent. Both the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) and the County Department of Health Services must approve any major development or redevelopment on older landfills. In granting approval, the CIWMB may require that the entire former landfill site be brought up to current standards. There is, however, 26 no systematic enforcement of the current landfill closure standards in the absence of major new development.

LARWQCB (2015) – The LARWQCB file is for the former landfill, and that landfill was located both on the Property and the adjoining sites to the northwest and south-southeast. The file also includes a November 25, 2015 letter from the LARWQCB to Lyon Housing (Pumpkin Patch) XLV, LLC. In it, the agency indicates that it has received a Report of Waste Discharge dated October 10, 2015 (not available to SCS for review) conducted in preparation of proposed development at 7001 East Pacific Coast Highway. In their letter, the LARWQCB states that the general Postclosure Maintenance WDRs adopted on January 24, 2002 for postclosure maintenance of CAI landfills applied to the former Market Place Landfill. While this letter is directed at proposed redevelopment of the adjoining Pumpkin Patch site to the south-southeast, the application of the WDRs would likely be extended to the former landfill in its entirety. The letter specifically states that proposed investigation at the Pumpkin Patch is deemed to update the SWAT report approved in 1996. As a result, proposed soil and groundwater investigations at the Pumpkin Patch site could trigger new landfill monitoring and reporting requirements for the portion of the landfill on the Property. In general, the WDRs for postclosure maintenance of CAI landfills is applied when there is a proposed site development or land use change that jeopardizes the integrity of the existing cover; if water quality impairment is found, as part of a groundwater monitoring program; or if nuisance conditions warrant such activity (LARWQCB, 2002).

LARWQCB (2016) – Following delays encountered while obtaining Coastal Commission approval to conduct additional investigation, Advanced Environmental Concepts Inc. (AEC) conducted a soil and groundwater assessment at the Pumpkin Patch site (AEC, July 2016). The objective of the investigation was to evaluate the vertical and horizontal extent of TPH, VOCs, PNAs, mercury, and PCBs associated with the former landfill. Five groundwater monitoring wells were installed to assess groundwater quality within and around the perimeter of the former landfill footprint. AEC indicated that groundwater would be monitored quarterly from the five wells for one year to potential contamination trends. Gasoline-, diesel-, and oil-range TPH and VOCs were detected in soil samples collected at the site. Groundwater samples exhibited detectable concentrations of TPH, 1,4-dichlorobenzene, benzene, ethylbenzene, naphthalene, tert-butyl alcohol (TBA), and PCBs. AEC recommended conducting additional groundwater sampling as outlined in LARWQCB Order No. R4-2002-022 and Monitoring and Reporting Program CI2767. Following review of a year’s sampling results additional recommendations would be made.

Cal Recycle SWIS (2017) – Quarterly inspections of the facility are performed by the County of Los Angeles. Violations were noted for all four quarterly inspections for site maintenance.

According to inspection reports there was significant landfill settling that cause depressions, slopes, cracks, and pot holes that required repair. No other violations were reported.

LARWQCB (2017) – AEC performed semiannual groundwater monitoring at the Pumpkin Patch site. During the first semiannual event six groundwater monitoring wells were monitored.

Results from the sampling indicated that trace to moderate detection of gasoline, diesel, and oil were in monitoring wells AEC-1, AEC-2, AEC-3, and AEC-4, which are located nearest the landfill trench. There was detectable concentrations of PCB in AEC-2 attributed to decomposing light ballasts or automotive switches. Chloride, sulfate, and total dissolved solids were also detected above secondary MCLs in all wells except AEC-1 and AEC-2. AEC recommended that 27 an additional groundwater monitoring well be installed at the southern boundary of the property which is downgradient. The RWQCB approved a workplan on June 9, 2017 for the installation of the downgradient well, which was installed by AEC on July 6, 2017. AEC performed second semiannual monitoring on August 17, 2017. Once again, the highest concentrations of PCBs were detected in AEC-2. Results from the second semiannual monitoring report were similar to the first semiannual monitoring report. AEC recommend to continue groundwater monitoring at the site.

Cal Recycle SWIS (2018) – First quarter inspection from 2018 was the only inspection available for review. The facility was in violation for significant areas of settling and ponding in the parking lot area as reported in the previous inspections.

Copies of selected previous reports and letters from the LBFD, LBHHS, and DTSC indicating that they do not have files pertaining to the Property are included in Appendix E. In SCS’ opinion, the regulatory records reviewed were sufficient to fulfill the objectives of ASTM E1527-

13. Based on the available information, it is unlikely that the Environmental Protection Agency, County Vector Control, or Department of Public Works would have additional information necessary to evaluate the environmental condition of the Property. 5 PUBLIC RECORD REVI EW SECTION
A database search for sites listed on various federal, state, tribal, and local databases in the area around the Property was obtained from EDR (February 16, 2017). A description of each of the databases searched is included in the report, which is attached as Appendix F. Among the databases included in the EDR report are NPL (federal, tribal, and state-equivalent), proposed and delisted NPL, CORRACTS (RCRA facilities subject to corrective actions), hazardous waste sites identified for investigation or remediation (CERCLIS, State CERCLIS, VCP, Brownfields Calsites, etc.), LUST, sites with engineering controls, former CERCLIS (NFRAP), RCRA and state hazardous waste generators, ERNS, SWLF, USTs, and Toxic Pits.

Review of these records satisfies all requirements as set forth in 40 CFR Section 312.26 (b) and (c) with regard to the review of federal, tribal, and state government records of databases of such government records and local government records and databases of such records pertaining to both the Property and the nearby or adjoining properties. Further, the search distances for each particular database are as specified in 40 CFR 312.26 and ASTM E1527-13.

Any known or suspected contaminated sites included on these lists within 0.25 miles of the Property likely to affect the environmental condition of the Property are discussed in the following text. As a general rule, sites beyond 0.25 miles are not likely to impact a site significantly. Any sites beyond 0.25 miles with a high potential to impact the Property are also discussed. (Please note: the distances and directions listed in this report have been field verified and might not always match those in the EDR report.)
Sites such as TSD facilities, hazardous waste generators, HAZNET, FINDS, SQGs, LQGs, USTs, HIST UST, RCRA violations, and TRIS facilities with toxic chemical releases (generally in accordance with permitting requirements - into the air, water, or land as reported under SARA 28 Title III) use or store hazardous materials and thus may pose a potential problem in the event of a spill or leak. However, unless these sites also appear in an agency list of contaminated sites, there is no evidence of any problems at this time. Therefore, sites on these lists will not be discussed unless on or in close proximity to the Property. In SCS’ professional judgement, the databases reviewed as part of this Phase I ESA are sufficiently complete and sufficiently current to evaluate the Property in accordance with the requirements of ASTM E1527-13 and AAI.

Please refer to Appendix F for further information on these sites.

PROPERTY LISTINGS
The Property address of 6615 East Pacific Coast Highway appears in the EDR Hist Auto database, as the location of an Ultramar historical auto station from 2005 through 2009. Since historical information does not indicate there was an auto station at the Property, this database listing may refer to Ultramar offices in one of the tenant spaces.

City Dump & Salvage #2 appears in the database report under the address 7001-7199 PCH North of San Gabriel River (CA SWF/LF and CA WMUDS/SWAT). The SWF/LF database is maintained by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). It contains information about solid active, closed, and inactive landfills. The landfill was located on the Property and the adjoining land to the southeast and northwest. The history of the landfill is discussed in greater detail in Section 6 of this report.

ADJACENT SITE LISTINGS
Paradise Cleaners appears in the database report (EDR Hist Cleaner and CA DRYCLEANERS) at 6608 East Pacific Coast Highway, across the street to the west of the Property. The database information indicates that the cleaners, which is still present today, began dry cleaning and laundry services at the site in 2002. There are no indications of past releases at Paradise Cleaners.

Based on the distance from the Property and the absence of known releases, this site is not likely to negatively affect the environmental condition of the Property.

OTHER DATABASE SITES
The EDR report provides a summary table of regulatory database sites within specified distances of the Property, including: 1. standard environmental records, 2. additional environmental records, and 3. high risk historical records. This summary table is provided beginning on Page 4 of the EDR report (Appendix F). In addition to the Property and adjacent sites listings discussed above, SCS identified the following sites of concern within 0.25 miles of the Property:
• Circle K Stores Inc. Site #2211310/Exxon RIS #73047/Mobil SS # 18-BT7, 6401 East Pacific Coast Highway (approximately 0.22 miles north-northwest) (RCRA-SQG, CA

LUST, FINDS, CA HIST CORTESE, CA SWEEPS UST, CA FID UST, CA FID UST, and ECHO).
29 Based on distance and anticipated groundwater gradient the Circle K/Exxon/Mobil site is not likely to negatively affect the environmental condition of the Property.

The other sites within 0.25 miles of the Property with known releases are down- or cross-gradient or based on distance and/or case status are not likely to affect the Property. In addition, other sites within 0.25 miles do not have known releases such as RCRA small quantity generators, HAZNET, FINDS, ECHO, DRYCLEANERS, and UST sites. None are known to have any contamination at this time; therefore, none are likely to have impacted the Property. The Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station appears in the database as a DOD facility. While defense sites have a potential for significant environmental concerns, this facility is located nearly one mile to the south-southeast. Therefore, it is unlikely that it has affected the environmental condition of the Property.

Unmappable or Orphan Sites
Three unmappable sites were identified in the EDR Report. Unmappable sites cannot be plotted due to inaccurate or incomplete addresses. One of the unmappable sites is the City Dump and Salvage #2, which is known to be located on the Property and the adjoining site to the south. It is discussed earlier in this report. Based on review of the provided data, including the estimated locations of the second unmappable site in relation to the Property, it appears unlikely that it has adversely affected the environmental condition of the Property.

LANDFILLS
In addition to the Property landfill listings mentioned above, the EDR Database includes a CA SWF/LF listing for a LA County Flood Control Dump located at the southwestern corner of Westminster Avenue and Highway 1 (Pacific Coast Highway). Based on distance from the Property (approximately 0.25 miles), this facility is not likely to negatively affect the environmental condition of the Property.

OIL AND GAS WELLS
Available oil and gas well maps from the California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) were reviewed to identify oil and gas wells on the Property or in the nearby area. According to the Digital Online Mapping System (DOMS 2.1), the Property is situated within the Seal Beach oil field. One oil and gas production well was historically located on the Property and is listed as “plugged and abandoned.” Conoco Inc. Bixby A Well 72 (API #03707143) is mapped beneath the southeastern portion of the 6621 East Pacific Coast Highway building. A second oil and gas production well was historically located either on, or immediately outside, the southeastern corner of the Property. Synergy Oil & Gas, LLC Bixby A Well 18 (API #03706991) is mapped either on, or very near, the lower southeastern portion of the Property situated beyond the fence line of the current shopping center.

Records for these wells are not available online. As discussed in Section 6, historical aerial photographs indicate that, in addition to the wells, there were historically oil sumps at the southeastern portion of the Property. The historical oil operations on the Property constitute a REC.
30 A map showing the locations of dozens of other current and former oil and gas wells in the general area of the Property is included in Appendix E. While there is a potential that current and/or plugged oil and gas wells could be a source for methane migration beneath buildings at the Property, the existing LFG control system appears to be adequately mitigating methane risks, regardless of the source.

NATIONAL PIPELINE MAPPING SYSTEM (NPMS)
SCS reviewed the NPMS website for the Property and surrounding area to identify any hazardous materials pipelines. The NPMS is a geographic information system (GIS) created by the U.S.

Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), and Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) in cooperation with other federal and state governmental agencies and the pipeline industry. The NPMS consists of geospatial data, attribute data, public contact information, and metadata pertaining to the interstate and intrastate hazardous liquid trunklines and hazardous liquid low-stress lines as well as gas transmission pipelines, liquefied natural gas (LNG) plants, and hazardous liquid breakout tanks (tanks that receive and store liquids transported by pipeline) jurisdictional to PHMSA. The nominal accuracy of geospatial data in the NPMS is +/-500 feet. The NPMS does not contain information on interconnects, pump and compressor stations, valves, direction of flow, capacity, throughput, or operating pressure. In addition, distribution and gathering pipelines are not included in the NPMS.

The NPMS is built from data submitted by pipeline, LNG plant, and breakout tank facility operators. Since 2002, transmission pipeline and LNG plant facility operators are required to submit mapping information to the NPMS and to update their submissions annually. Breakout tank operators are able to submit data to the NPMS on a voluntary basis.

Based on review of the NPMS website, there are abandoned and in-service crude oil pipelines located along East Pacific Coast Highway, within 0.1 miles of the Property. 7 USER PROVIDED INFORMATION
The following information is the responsibility of the User (40 CFR 312.22) and is addressed in a questionnaire provided to the User through its counsel and attached to this report as Appendix G:
• Specialized knowledge or experience of the User.
• The relationship of the purchase price to the fair market value of the Property. The purchaser of a Property is required to consider whether any differential between the purchase price and the fair market value of the Property is due to the presence of releases or potential releases of hazardous substances at the Property.

Certain other limitations could affect the accuracy and completeness of this report, as follows:
• Site Access Limitations – None.
31 • Physical Obstructions to Observations – None.
• Outstanding Information Requests – None.
• Historical Data Sources Failure – None.
• Other Limitations – None.

A User Questionnaire was completed by Mr. Nick Zaharov of Carmel Partners on April 30, 2018 and is included in Appendix G. The provided information is discussed below.

TITLE RECORDS
A November 29, 2016 preliminary title report prepared by First American Title Insurance Company of Irvine, California was provided to SCS for review by Cox, Castle & Nicholson. The Property was purchased by Carmel Partners in 2017. Prior to that time, the Property was owned collectively by 14 entities, including single individuals, partnerships, companies, and family trusts. According to the title report, title and interest in and to all existing and effective oil and gas leases and agreements including royalties are reserved by Fred H. Bixby Company. There are easements on the Property for Southern California Edison (electrical utility), City of Long Beach (municipal water lines), sewers/storm drains, and a sign. Unspecified abutting site owners holds rights of ingress and egress to or from Pacific Coast Highway. A copy of the preliminary report is provided in Appendix B.

ENVIRONMENTAL LIENS OR ACTIVITY AND USE LIMITATIONS
No information regarding environmental liens or activity and use limitations was provided to SCS. No environmental liens or activity/use limitations were identified by SCS during the course of this assessment.

SPECIALIZED KNOWLEDGE
No specialized knowledge regarding the Property was provided to SCS by the User’s legal counsel.

VALUATION REDUCTION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IS SUES
No property valuation information was provided to SCS.
8 DEGREE OF OBVIOUSNES S OF THE PRESENCE/LIKELY

PRESENCE OF CONTAMINATION ON THE PROPERTY
There are no indications of contamination issues associated with the current use of the Property.

As discussed above, historical developments at the Property have included both oil/gas infrastructure and a landfill. Past investigations at the Property indicate that industrial waste may 32 have been landfilled at the Property. VOCs, pesticides, and metals have been detected in groundwater at the Property and are attributable to the historical oil and gas exploration and potentially the historical landfill operations. Another ongoing concern at the Property relates to LFG and migration of methane from adjoining oil field properties. There is a passive LFG control system supplemented by an intermittently operated air blower installed at the Property. In the 20+ years since this system was installed, no methane has been detected in any of the on-site buildings despite the presence of methane detected in some perimeter probes and venting locations. As long as the Property use does not change and the gas control system remains operational, there should be no methane-related concerns with the Property. 9 DATA GAPS
A data gap is a lack of or inability to obtain information required by the standard. If such data gaps exist, those gaps must be identified, the sources of information consulted to address the gaps, and the significance of such data gaps with regard to the ability to identify conditions indicative of a released or threatened release must be commented on.

A data gap represents an inability on the part of the environmental professional to obtain information required by the standards and practices of 40 CFR 312 to fully identify conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances on, at, in, or to the Property.

No data gaps were identified during the preparation of this Phase I ESA. 10 CONFLICT CERTIFICATION
SCS Engineers has no present or contemplated future ownership interest or financial interest in the real estate that is the subject of this Environmental Assessment Report; and SCS Engineers has no personal interest with respect to the subject matter of the Environmental Assessment Report of the parties involved and consultant has no relationship with the property or the owners thereof which would prevent an independent analysis of the environmental or other conditions of the Property.
33 11 SIGNATURES OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS
This Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report for the Market Place Long Beach Office Park located at 6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, California, dated May 10, 2018, was prepared by Christopher Romanowski and reviewed by Justin Rauzon and Julio Nuno.

We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, we meet the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in §312.10 of 40 CFR 312. The resumes for the individuals below are included in Appendix H. We have the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess a property of the nature, history, and setting of the subject property. We have developed and performed the all appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312.

Justin Rauzon, REPA
Project Manager

SCS ENGINEERS

Julio Nuno, REPA
Project Director

SCS ENGINEERS
29 12 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Based on the scope of work performed, SCS finds the following:

Current tenants include commercial business offices including real estate, medical counseling, chiropractic/acupuncture, accounting, insurance, legal, an exercise studio, and a physical therapy office (no X-Ray equipment onsite). There are no indications of contamination issues associated with the current use of the Property, although, historical developments at the Property have included both oil/gas infrastructure and a landfill. Past investigations at the Property conducted under LARWQCB oversight indicate that industrial waste may have been disposed at the Property. VOCs, pesticides, and metals have been detected in groundwater and are attributable to the historical oil and gas exploration and potentially the historical landfill operations. Another ongoing concern at the Property relates to LFG and migration of methane from adjoining oil field properties. A passive landfill gas control system supplemented by an intermittently operated air blower is present at the Property. In the 20+ years since this system was installed, no methane has been detected in any of the on-site buildings. As long as Property use does not change and the gas control system remains operational, SCS does not anticipate any methane-related concerns at the Property.

Although the landfill was closed in accordance with regulations in effect at the time of closure (1961), current landfill closure standards are more stringent. Both the CIWMB and the County Department of Health Services (the LEA) must approve any major development or redevelopment on older landfills. In granting approval for major new developments, the CIWMB may require that the entire former landfill site be brought up to current standards. There is, however, no systematic enforcement of the current landfill closure standards in the absence of major new development.

The Property owner of the adjoining site to the south-southeast, the “Pumpkin Patch” site, has proposed new development that has resulted in updated regulatory oversight of the former landfill. In response to the proposed redevelopment, the LARWQCB has indicated that it will impose new WDRs to the Pumpkin Patch site. Because the same landfill underlying the Pumpkin Patch site extends beneath the Property and the adjoining site to the north, the 30 LARWQCB may impose new regulatory post-closure landfill monitoring requirements on these sites as well.

SCS performed a Phase II site investigation at the Property on April 8, 2017 consisting of soil, soil vapor, and groundwater sampling. Based on the results of the sampling, SCS concluded that there are areas with elevated concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons and petroleum-related VOCs in soil to the southeast of building 6621 East Pacific Coast Highway, in the vicinity of the former oil well sumps. Benzene and naphthalene were detected in groundwater at concentrations above their California drinking water MCLs. Arsenic, barium, and lead were also detected in groundwater at concentrations equal to or greater than their MCLs or secondary water standards.

However, the concentrations of VOCs and metals detected in groundwater during the 2017 Phase II investigation were significantly lower than concentrations reported during groundwater sampling conducted in the late 1980s.

SCS further concluded that VOCs were present in soil vapor at the Property at concentrations below the commercial/industrial regulatory screening levels, with one exception. One sample had a concentration of chloroform slightly above the commercial/industrial screening level.

SCS concludes that the historical uses of the Property for oil drilling and production and as a landfill constitute RECs. There is not currently a regulatory requirement to conduct further investigation of soil or groundwater at the Property. The most recent communication from the LARWQCB regarding the Property was the 1996 letter approving the SWAT investigation. No further action was required at that time. In general, the Post-Closure Maintenance General WDRs adopted on January 24, 2002 for “closed, abandoned, or inactive (CAI) landfills” apply when there is a proposed site development or land use change; if water quality impairment is found, or if nuisance conditions warrant action. Because a change in land use is not currently proposed and the LARWQCB has not imposed new WDRs, additional investigation of the Property is not recommended at this time. SCS recommends that Carmel Partners continue to maintain and operate the methane mitigation system in place at the Property.

Based on the results of the April 2017 soil vapor investigation, the VOC concentrations in soil vapor would not likely be a concern to a regulatory agency under a continued commercial/industrial land use scenario. Additional investigation of soil vapor is not recommended at this time.
31 13 REFERENCES
Advanced Environmental Concepts, Inc., First Semiannual Groundwater Monitoring Report October 2016 to April 2017, Pumpkin Patch – Inactive Landfill Post-Closure Maintenance, Long Beach, California. March 22, 2017.

Advanced Environmental Concepts, Inc., Second Semiannual Groundwater Monitoring Report May 2017 to September 2017, Pumpkin Patch – Inactive Landfill Post-Closure Maintenance, Long Beach, California. September 26, 2017.

California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources Website: http://www.conservation.ca.gov/dog/Pages/Index.aspx.

California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources, California Oil and Gas Fields, Volume II, Southern, Central Coastal, and Offshore California, 1991.

California Department of Health Services, California Indoor Radon Levels Sorted by Zip Code, http://www.cdph.ca.gov/healthinfo/environhealth/Documents/Radon/CaliforniaRadonDat abase.pdf. Updated May 4, 2010.

California Department of Water Resources. Planned Utilization of the Ground Water Basins of the Coastal Plain of Los Angeles County. Bulletin No. 104. Reprinted April 1988.

California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board. GeoTracker website; http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/
City of Long Beach Department of Building & Safety website; http://www.lbds.info/building/ City of Long Beach Planning Department website:
http://www.lbds.info/planning/historic_preservation/historic_landmarks.asp Environmental Data Resources, Inc., www.edrnet.com, 1-800-352-0050.

IT Corporation (1987). Final Report: Assessment of the Bixby Ranch Company Sanitary Landfill for the Presence of Hazardous Substances. Prepared for Bixby Ranch Company. June 30, 1987.

IT Corporation (1988). Solid Waste Assessment Test Proposal: Bixby Ranch Company, Market Place Sanitary Landfill. Prepared for Bixby Ranch Company. March 31, 1988.

IT Corporation (1989). Solid Waste Assessment Test (SWAT), Market Place Sanitary Landfill.

Prepared for Bixby Ranch Company. June 1989.

IT Corporation (1991). Solid Waste Assessment Test (SWAT), Market Place Sanitary Landfill, Addendum Report. Prepared for Bixby Ranch Company. January 1991. 32 IT Corporation (1996). Final 1994-1995 Semiannual Groundwater Sampling and Analysis Report Market Place Sanitary Landfill, Long Beach, California. Prepared for Bixby Ranch Company. January 1996.

Los Angeles County Countywide General Plan, Major Waste Systems, Project Planning & Pollution Control Division – County Engineer, Regional Planning Commission. July 1973, Updated October 1996.

Los Angeles RWQCB, January 10, 2002. State of California, California Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region, Order No. R4-2002-022, General Waste Discharge Requirements for Post-Closure Maintenance of Inactive Nonhazardous Waste Landfills within the Los Angeles Region.

Moore & Taber (1986). Interim Foundation Investigation Report Proposed Office and Restaurnat Buildings Market Place Office Park Phase II Long Beach, California.

Prepared for Bixby Ranch Company. August 25, 1986.

National Pipeline Mapping System online maps;
https://www.npms.phmsa.dot.gov/PublicViewer/.

SCS Engineers (2001). Phase I Environmental Assessment: Bixby Market Place Office Park, Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, California. SCS File No. 01201052.00. June 15, 2001.

SCS Engineers (2017). Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Market Place Long Beach Office Park, 6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, California.

SCS File No. 01217048.00. April 26, 2017
SCS Engineers (2017). Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, Market Place Long Beach Office Park, 6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, California.

SCS File No. 01217048.00. May 12, 2017.

SCS Engineers (2018). Quarterly Operation, Monitoring, and Maintenance of Landfill Gas (LFG) Migration Control Facilities, The Market Place, Long Beach, California. SCS File No. 07187010.00. April 26, 2018.

United States Geological Survey, Los Alamitos, CA 7.5-Minute Topographic Map, 1964 (Photorevised 1981).
33 13 GLOSSARY/DEFINITIONS
AAI -- All Appropriate Inquiry
AUL -- Activity and Use Limitations
BTEX -- benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylenes CERCLA -- Comprehensive, Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act CERCLIS -- Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System
CFR -- Code of Federal Regulations
CORRACTS -- Corrective Action Against Responsible Parties at a RCRA site CREC -- A recognized environmental condition resulting from a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority (for example, as evidenced by the issuance of a no further action letter or equivalent, or meeting risk-based criteria established by regulatory authority), with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls (e.g., property use restrictions, AULs, or institutional or engineering controls).

DOGGR -- Department of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources De Minimis Condition -- A condition that generally does not present a threat to human health or the environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies. Conditions determined to be de minimis conditions are not RECs or CRECs.

DTSC -- California EPA Department of Toxic Substances Control EDR -- Environmental Data Resources, Inc.

EPA -- Environmental Protection Agency
ERNS -- Emergency Response Notification System
ESA -- Environmental Site Assessment
FINDS -- Facility Index System
HAZNET -- California EPA Hazardous Waste Facility and Manifest Data HREC -- Historical Recognized Environmental Condition: A past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products that has occurred in connection with the property and has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or meeting unrestricted use criteria established by a regulatory authority, without subjecting the property to any required controls
LQG -- Large Quantity Hazardous Waste Generator
LUST -- Leaking Underground Storage Tank
MCL -- Maximum contaminant level
MTBE -- Methyl-tert-butyl-ether
NFA -- No Further Action determination
NFRAP -- No Further Remedial Action Planned
NPL -- National Priority List (Superfund)
PAHs -- Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
PCBs -- Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRGs -- Preliminary Remediation Goals
RCRA -- Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RCRIS -- Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System 34 RECs -- Recognized environmental conditions is defined by ASTM E 1527-13 as: “The presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: (1) due to release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. De minimis conditions are not recognized environmental conditions.”
ROD -- Record of Decision
RBSLs -- Risk-based Screening Levels
RWQCB -- Regional Water Quality Control Board
SARA -- Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
SLIC -- Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups database SQG -- Small Quantity Hazardous Waste Generator
SWIS -- Solid Waste Information System
SWLF -- Solid Waste Facility/Landfills
TPH -- Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
TRIS -- Toxic Release Inventory System
TSD -- Treatment, Storage, and/or Disposal Facility
User -- The person or persons seeking to establish the innocent landowner defense, bona fide prospective purchaser liability protection, and/or contiguous property owner liability protection pursuant to CERCLA sections 101 and 107.

USGS -- United States Geologic Survey
UST -- Underground Storage Tank
VCP -- Voluntary Cleanup Program
VOCs -- Volatile organic compounds
Phase I – 6615, 6621, & 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway Attorney - Client Privileged and Attorney Work Product Material 33 13 GLOSSARY/DEFINITIONS
AAI -- All Appropriate Inquiry
AUL -- Activity and Use Limitations
BTEX -- benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylenes CERCLA -- Comprehensive, Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act CERCLIS -- Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System
CFR -- Code of Federal Regulations
CORRACTS -- Corrective Action Against Responsible Parties at a RCRA site CREC -- A recognized environmental condition resulting from a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority (for example, as evidenced by the issuance of a no further action letter or equivalent, or meeting risk-based criteria established by regulatory authority), with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls (e.g., property use restrictions, AULs, or institutional or engineering controls).

DTSC -- California EPA Department of Toxic Substances Control EDR -- Environmental Data Resources, Inc.

EPA -- Environmental Protection Agency
ERNS -- Emergency Response Notification System
ESA -- Environmental Site Assessment
FINDS -- Facility Index System
HAZNET -- California EPA Hazardous Waste Facility and Manifest Data HREC -- Historical Recognized Environmental Condition: A past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products that has occurred in connection with the property and has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or meeting unrestricted use criteria established by a regulatory authority, without subjecting the property to any required controls
LQG -- Large Quantity Hazardous Waste Generator
LUST -- Leaking Underground Storage Tank
MCL -- Maximum contaminant level
MTBE -- Methyl-tert-butyl-ether
NFA -- No Further Action determination
NFRAP -- No Further Remedial Action Planned
NPL -- National Priority List (Superfund)
PAHs -- Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
PCBs -- Polychlorinated biphenyls
PRGs -- Preliminary Remediation Goals
RCRA -- Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RCRIS -- Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System Phase I – 6615, 6621, & 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway Attorney - Client Privileged and Attorney Work Product Material 34 RECs -- Recognized environmental conditions is defined by ASTM E 1527-13 as: “The presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: (1) due to release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. De minimis conditions are not recognized environmental conditions.”
ROD -- Record of Decision
RBSLs -- Risk-based Screening Levels
RWQCB -- Regional Water Quality Control Board
SARA -- Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
SLIC -- Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups database SQG -- Small Quantity Hazardous Waste Generator
SWIS -- Solid Waste Information System
SWLF -- Solid Waste Facility/Landfills
TPH -- Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
TRIS -- Toxic Release Inventory System
TSD -- Treatment, Storage, and/or Disposal Facility
User -- The person or persons seeking to establish the innocent landowner defense, bona fide prospective purchaser liability protection, and/or contiguous property owner liability protection pursuant to CERCLA sections 101 and 107.

USGS -- United States Geologic Survey
UST -- Underground Storage Tank
VCP -- Voluntary Cleanup Program
VOCs -- Volatile organic compounds
P hase I – 6615, 6621, & 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway

S C S E N G I N E E R S
4 SITE:

SITE LOCATION MAP
Job No.: 01217048.01
Title:

PROJECT SITE
Market Place Office Park
6615, 6621, 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway
Long Beach, CA 90803

SCS ENGINEERS
Figure 2. Assessor’s Parcel Map (7237-020-040, 041, 050)

SCS ENGINEERS
Property at
6615, 6621 & 4495 East Pacic Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
P hase I – 6615, 6621, & 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway

APPENDIX B

TITLE REPORT
Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 1
First American Title Insurance Company
Updated
11/29/2016;
Amended 1.12.2017
First American Title Insurance Company
National Commercial Services
18500 Von Karman Ave, Suite 600
Irvine, CA 92612
11/29/2016
John W. McClintock
The Colton Company
515 North Cabrillo Park Drive, Suite 305
Santa Ana, CA 92701

Phone: (714)547-0800

Fax: (714)542-6650

Customer Reference: 6615, 6621 and 6695 PCH
Title Officer: Trenton Cornell
Phone: (949)885-2401
Fax No.:

E-Mail: [email protected]
Buyer:

Owner: Colton

Property: 6615, 6621 and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, CA

PRELIMINARY REPORT
In response to the above referenced application for a policy of title insurance, this company hereby reports that it is prepared to issue, or cause to be issued, as of the date hereof, a Policy or Policies of Title Insurance describing the land and the estate or interest therein hereinafter set forth, insuring against loss which may be sustained by reason of any defect, lien or encumbrance not shown or referred to as an Exception below or not excluded from coverage pursuant to the printed Schedules, Conditions and Stipulations of said Policy forms.

The printed Exceptions and Exclusions from the coverage and Limitations on Covered Risks of said policy or policies are set forth in Exhibit A attached. The policy to be issued may contain an arbitration clause. When the Amount of Insurance is less than that set forth in the arbitration clause, all arbitrable matters shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. Limitations on Covered Risks applicable to the CLTA and ALTA Homeowner’s Policies of Title Insurance which establish a Deductible Amount and a Maximum Dollar Limit of Liability for certain coverages are also set forth in Exhibit A. Copies of the policy forms should be read. They are available from the office which issued this report.

Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 2
First American Title Insurance Company
Please read the exceptions shown or referred to below and the exceptions and exclusions set forth in Exhibit A of this report carefully. The exceptions and exclusions are meant to provide you with notice of matters which are not covered under the terms of the title insurance policy and should be carefully considered.

It is important to note that this preliminary report is not a written representation as to the condition of title and may not list all liens, defects, and encumbrances affecting title to the land.

This report (and any supplements or amendments hereto) is issued solely for the purpose of facilitating the issuance of a policy of title insurance and no liability is assumed hereby. If it is desired that liability be assumed prior to the issuance of a policy of title insurance, a Binder or Commitment should be requested.

Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 3
First American Title Insurance Company
Dated as of November 8, 2016 at 7:30 A.M.

The form of Policy of title insurance contemplated by this report is:

ALTA Extended Loan Policy and
ALTA Standard Owner Policy
A specific request should be made if another form or additional coverage is desired.

Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in:

ROBERT J. CUNEO, A SINGLE MAN, AN UNDIVIDED 3.16% INTEREST; MRF FAMILY LIMITED A UTAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, AN UNDIVIDED 4.65% INTEREST; CGN FAMILY LLC, A UTAH LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AN UNDIVIDED 6.67% INTEREST; JOHN H. LLOYD, SR. AND BEVERLY C. LLOYD, OR THEIR SUCCESSORS, AS TRUSTEES OF THE JOHN AND BEVERLY LLOYD FAMILY TRUST, U/A/D JUNE 19, 2011, AN UNDIVIDED 1.96% INTEREST;
CHASE & ASSOCIATES, L.C., A UTAH LIABILITY COMPANY, AN UNDIVIDED 3.23% INTEREST; MITS FARM MARKET, INC., A UTAH CORPORATION, AN UNDIVIDED 3.03% INTEREST;

JIM AND SHAUNA JOYNER, HUSBAND AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS IN COMMON, AN UNDIVIDED 1.57% INTEREST;
SCJ ENTERPRISES L.C., A UTAH LIABILITY COMPANY, AN UNDIVIDED 1.49% INTEREST; CLARENCE WALTER PHILLIPS, AN UNMARRIED MAN, AN UNDIVIDED 1.69% INTEREST; BRIAN E. KINEL, A MARRIED MAN AS HIS SOLE AND SEPARATE PROPERTY, AN UNDIVIDED

3.70% INTEREST;
ALICE FAY JONES, A SINGLE WOMAN, AN UNDIVIDED 2.94% INTEREST;

CLAIR AND ANNE THUESON FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, AN IDAHO LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, AN UNDIVIDED 4.50% INTEREST;
DAVID A. COLTON, TRUSTEE OF THE COLTON FAMILY TRUST DATED SEPTEMBER 17, 1991, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 45.99% INTEREST; AND
MP PARTNERS, A CALIFORNIA GENERAL PARTNERSHIP, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 15.42%

INTEREST
The estate or interest in the land hereinafter described or referred to covered by this Report is:

FEE
The Land referred to herein is described as follows:

Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 4
First American Title Insurance Company

(See attached Legal Description)

At the date hereof exceptions to coverage in addition to the printed Exceptions and Exclusions in said policy form would be as follows:

1. General and special taxes and assessments for the fiscal year 2016-2017.

First Installment: $16,298.88, OPEN
Penalty: $0.00
Second Installment: $16,298.88, OPEN
Penalty: $0.00
Tax Rate Area: 05517
A. P. No.: 7237-020-040
1B General and special taxes and assessments for the fiscal year 2016-2017.

First Installment: $41,970.71, OPEN
Penalty: $0.00
Second Installment: $41,970.70, OPEN
Penalty: $0.00
Tax Rate Area: 05517
A. P. No.: 7237-020-041
1C General and special taxes and assessments for the fiscal year 2016-2017.

First Installment: $46,744.05, OPEN
Penalty: $0.00
Second Installment: $46,744.05, OPEN
Penalty: $0.00
Tax Rate Area: 05517
A. P. No.: 7237-020-050

1D Supplemental taxes for the fiscal year 2015 assessed pursuant to Chapter 3.5 commencing with Section 75 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code.

First Installment: $163.73, Delinquent
Penalty: $16.37
Second Installment: $163.73, Delinquent
Penalty: $26.37
Tax Rate Area: 05517
A. P. No.: 7237-020-040

1E Supplemental taxes for the fiscal year 2015 assessed pursuant to Chapter 3.5 commencing with Section 75 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code.

First Installment: $383.09, Delinquent
Penalty: $38.30
Second Installment: $383.08, Delinquent
Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 5
First American Title Insurance Company
Penalty: $48.30
Tax Rate Area: 05517
A. P. No.: 7237-020-041

1F Supplemental taxes for the fiscal year 2015 assessed pursuant to Chapter 3.5 commencing with Section 75 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code.

First Installment: $444.95, Delinquent
Penalty: $44.49
Second Installment: $444.94, Delinquent
Penalty: $54.49
Tax Rate Area: 05517
A. P. No.: 7237-020-050

2. The lien of supplemental taxes, if any, assessed pursuant to Chapter 3.5 commencing with Section 75 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code.

3. A reservation by Fred H. Bixby Company, a Corporation, of all the lessors rights, title and interest in and to all existing and effective oil and gas leases and agreements including royalties, and all other sums to be paid thereunder as reserved by deed recorded July 16, 1951 as Instrument No. 2693 in Book 36768 Page 436 Official Records.

4. An easement for PUBLIC UTILITY and incidental purposes, recorded as BOOK D 6997, PAGE 819 of Official Records.

In Favor of: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, A CORPORATION Affects: as described therein
The location of the easement cannot be determined from record information. (Affects PARCEL A)

5. An easement for PUBLIC UTILITY and incidental purposes, recorded MARCH 10, 1976 as INSTRUMENT NO. 2409 of Official Records.

In Favor of: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, A CORPORATION Affects: as described therein
The location of the easement cannot be determined from record information. (Affects PARCEL B)

6. An easement for Water lines and incidental purposes, recorded January 23, 1978 as Instrument No. 78-86259 of Official Records.

In Favor of: CITY OF LONG BEACH, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION Affects: as described therein
Among other things, said document provides for:
"No other utility shall occupy said easement on a parallel alignment: Provided however, that transverse crossing of the other utilities will be permitted; nor shall any improvement be Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 6
First American Title Insurance Company
constructed within the easement which would impede the operation, maintenance or repair of the water main, construction of sidewalk or pavement is not prohibited, however, construction of any improvements, including changes of grade, shall be subject to the prior approval of the water department."

7. An easement shown or dedicated on the map of PARCEL MAP NO. 7470 recorded DECEMBER 20, 1979 and on file in Book 121, Page 36, of PARCEL Maps.

For: Waterline and incidental purposes.
(Affects PARCEL A AND PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL B)

8. Abutter's rights of ingress and egress to or from PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY , have been dedicated or relinquished on the map of PARCEL MAP NO. 7470 on file in book 121, page 36, of PARCEL Maps.
(Affects PARCEL A)

9. An easement for Public utilities and incidental purposes, recorded August 26, 1980 as Instrument No. 80-823683 of Official Records.

In Favor of: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, A CORPORATION Affects: as described therein
(Affects PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL B)

10. An easement for PUBLIC UTILITY and incidental purposes, recorded SEPTEMBER 02, 1983 as INSTRUMENT NO. 83-1031362 of Official Records.

In Favor of: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, A CORPORATION Affects: as described therein
(Affects PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL B)

11. An easement for Sign purposes and incidental purposes in the document recorded May 29, 1984 as Instrument No. 84-635081 of Official Records.

12. An easement shown or dedicated on the map of PARCEL MAP NO. 14983 recorded OCTOBER 16, 1986 and on file in Book 190, Page 52, of PARCEL Maps.

For: Waterline and incidental purposes.
(Affects PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL B)

13. An easement shown or dedicated on the map of PARCEL MAP NO. 19212 recorded SEPTEMBER 30, 1993 and on file in Book 260, Page 93, of PARCEL Maps.

For: SEWERS, STORM DRAINS and incidental purposes.
(Affects PARCEL B)

14. Abutter's rights of ingress and egress to or from PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY AND STUDEBAKER ROAD, have been dedicated or relinquished on the map of PARCEL MAP NO. 19212 on file in book 260, page 93, of PARCEL Maps.
(Affects PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL B)
Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 7
First American Title Insurance Company

15. Abutter's rights of ingress and egress to or from STUDEBAKER ROAD EXCEPT FOR ONE DRIVEWAY OPENING, have been dedicated or relinquished on the map of PARCEL MAP NO. 19212 on file in book 260, page 93, of PARCEL Maps.
(Affects PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL B)

16. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements in the document recorded October 20, 1986 as Instrument No. 86-1405370 of Official Records, which provide that a violation thereof shall not defeat or render invalid the lien of any first mortgage or deed of trust made in good faith and for value, but deleting any covenant, condition or restriction indicating a preference, limitation or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, national origin, sexual orientation, marital status, ancestry, source of income or disability, to the extent such covenants, conditions or restrictions violate Title 42, Section 3604(c), of the United States Codes or Section 12955 of the California Government Code. Lawful restrictions under state and federal law on the age of occupants in senior housing or housing for older persons shall not be construed as restrictions based on familial status.

Document(s) declaring modifications thereof recorded November 21, 1994 as Instrument No. 94- 2094052 of Official Records.

Document(s) declaring modifications thereof recorded December 02, 1997 as Instrument No. 97- 1894314 of Official Records.

Document(s) declaring modifications thereof recorded May 15, 2000 as Instrument No. 000745336 of Official Records.

17. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements in the document recorded December 02, 1997 as Instrument No. 97-1894313 of Official Records, which provide that a violation thereof shall not defeat or render invalid the lien of any first mortgage or deed of trust made in good faith and for value, but deleting any covenant, condition or restriction indicating a preference, limitation or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, national origin, sexual orientation, marital status, ancestry, source of income or disability, to the extent such covenants, conditions or restrictions violate Title 42, Section 3604(c), of the United States Codes or Section 12955 of the California Government Code. Lawful restrictions under state and federal law on the age of occupants in senior housing or housing for older persons shall not be construed as restrictions based on familial status.

18. A deed of trust to secure an original indebtedness of $7,500,000.00 recorded December 16, 2002 as Instrument No. 02-3067998 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.

Dated: December 13, 2002
Trustor: MP Partners, a California general partnership
Trustee: Commonwealth Land Title Company
Beneficiary: John Hancock Real Estate Finance, Inc.

Document re-recorded March 13, 2003 as Instrument No. 03-0715767 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS .

A document entitled "ASSIGNMENT OF LEASES AND RENTS " recorded December 16, 2002 as Instrument No. 02-3067999 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, as additional security for the payment of the indebtedness secured by the deed of trust.

Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 8
First American Title Insurance Company
Document re-recorded March 13, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 0715768 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS .

A document recorded December 17, 2002 as Instrument No. 02 3088244 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by ROBERT J.

CUNEO.

A document recorded December 19, 2002 as Instrument No. 02 3115579 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by David R.

Evers and Alice M. Evers.

A document recorded January 30, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 0284866 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by CATHERINE H. MUNSON, TRUSTEE OF THE CATHERINE H. MUNSON TRUST ESTABLISHED MARCH 8, 1994.

A document recorded January 31, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 0300266 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by RAYMOND O. VINCENTI, TRUSTEE OF THE RAYMOND O. VINCENTI FAMILY TRUST, DATED MAY 13, 1991.

A document recorded February 04, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 0334634 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by MRF Family Limited.

A document recorded February 07, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 0376462 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by David C.

Hants.

A document recorded February 12, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 0422261 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by CGN Family LLC.

A document recorded February 28, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 0597986 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by Mike C.

Pierce and Julie B. Pierce.

A document recorded February 28, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 0597989 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by H & L Snow Investments, LLC.

A document recorded March 13, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 0715754 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by John H.

Lloyd and Beverly C. Lloyd.

A document recorded March 14, 2003 as Instrument No. 03-0729039 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by Chase & Associates, L.C.

A document recorded March 14, 2003 as Instrument No. 03-0729048 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by Mits Farm Market, Inc..

Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 9
First American Title Insurance Company
A document recorded March 14, 2003 as Instrument No. 03-0729051 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by Edward M.

Lamers and Judith H. Lamers, Trustees.

A document recorded March 14, 2003 as Instrument No. 03-0729054 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by Alan W.

Rosenberg, Trustee.

A document recorded March 14, 2003 as Instrument No. 03-0729057 of Official Records, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by A. Oblad Ltd.

A document recorded March 18, 2003 as Instrument No. 03-0755026 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by Jim Joyner and Shauna Joyner.

A document recorded April 03, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 0940374 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by SCJ Enterprises, L.C.

A document recorded April 15, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 1062203 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by Kirk K.

Nielson and Janice F. Nielson .

A document recorded April 15, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 1062206 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by Brian E.

Kinel, LLC.

A document recorded April 16, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 1077567 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by Clarence Walter Phillips.

A document recorded April 17, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 1089145 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by Roland J.

Galli and Doris P. Galli, Trustees.

A document recorded April 18, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 1102443 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by JOHN F.

MCCLURE.

A document recorded April 21, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 1114965 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by GLORIA GLASSER AS TRUSTEE OF THE GLORIA GLASSER 1996 TRUST DATED APRIL 4, 1996.

A document recorded May 20, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 1424647 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by Alice Fay Jones.

A document recorded May 20, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 1424655 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by The Clair and Anne Thueson Family Limited Partnership.

Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 10
First American Title Insurance Company
A document recorded May 21, 2003 as Instrument No. 03 1445864 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by Rilla S.

Corbett.

According to the public records, the beneficial interest under the deed of trust was assigned to

LASALLE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR MORGAN BEAR STEARNS COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES INC., COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2003-TOP10 by assignment recorded June 13, 2003 as INSTRUMENT NO. 03-1694614 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.

The interest of John Hancock Real Estate Finance, Inc., a Delaware Corporation under said Assignment of Assignment of Leases and Rents was purportedly assigned to LaSalle Bank National Association, as Trustee for Morgan Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc., Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2003-TOP10 by document recorded June 13, 2003 as Instrument No. 03-1694615 of Official Records.

A document recorded February 12, 2004 as Instrument No. 04 0321372 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, provides that the obligation secured by the deed of trust was assumed by Brian E.

Kinel.

19. A document be recorded in the public records conveying or otherwise eliminating any interest of ROLAND J. GALLI as trustee under the document recorded April 17, 2003 as INSTRUMENT NO. 03-1089143 of Official Records.

20. This item has been intentionally deleted.

21. The effect of a map purporting to show the land and other property, filed IN BOOK 248, PAGE 38 of Record of Surveys.
(Affects PARCEL A)

22. The effect of a map purporting to show the land and other property, filed IN BOOK 249, PAGE 26 of Record of Surveys.

23. This item has been intentionally deleted.

Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 11
First American Title Insurance Company

24. A Deed of Trust to secure an original indebtedness of $7,000,000.00 recorded JUNE 11, 2012 as INSTRUMENT NO. 20120865947 of Official Records.

Dated: JUNE 8, 2012
Trustor: ROBERT J. CUNEO, A SINGLE MAN, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED

3.16% INTEREST, MRF FAMILY LIMITED, A UTAH LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 4.65% INTEREST, CGN

FAMILY LLC, A UTAH LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AS TO AN
UNDIVIDED, 6.67% INTEREST, H & L SNOW INVESTMENTS,

LLC, A UTAH LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AS TO AN
UNDIVIDED 3.50% INTEREST, JOHN H. LLOYD AND BEVERLY
C. LLOYD, HUSBAND AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS, AS TO AN
UNDIVIDED 1.96% INTEREST, CHASE & ASSOCIATES, L.C., A

UTAH LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED

3.23% INTEREST, MITS FARM MARKET, INC., A UTAH
CORPORATION, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 3.03% INTEREST, JIM

AND SHAUNA JOYNER, HUSBAND AND WIFE AS JOINT
TENANTS IN COMMON, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 1.57%
INTEREST, SCJ ENTERPRISES L,C., A UTAH LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 1.49% INTEREST, CLARENCE

WALTER PHILLIPS, AN UNMARRIED MAN, AS TO AN
UNDIVIDED 1.69% INTEREST, ALICE FAY JONES, A SINGLE
WOMAN, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 2.94% INTEREST, CLAIR AND

ANNE THUESON FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, AN IDAHO
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 4.50%
INTEREST, RILLA S. CORBETT, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 4.35%
INTEREST, BRIAN E. KINEL, A MARRIED MAN AS HIS SOLE AND SEPARATE PROPERTY, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 3.70% INTEREST,
DAVID A. COLTON, TRUSTEE OF THE COLTON FAMILY TRUST
DATED SEPTEMBER 17, 1991, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 38.14%

INTEREST AND MP PARTNERS, A CALIFORNIA GENERAL

PARTNERSHIP, AS TO THE REMAINDER, AS TENANTS IN
COMMON
Trustee: BRENDA S. TYLER
Beneficiary: PRINCIPAL BANK, a federal savings bank
According to the public records, the beneficial interest under the deed of trust was assigned to PRINCIPAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, an Iowa corporation by assignment recorded SEPTEMBER 30, 2013 as INSTRUMENT NO. 20131414108 of Official Records.

25. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "SHORT FORM MEMORANDUM OF, AND AMENDMENT TO, TENANCY IN COMMON AGREEMENT" recorded JUNE 11, 2012 as INSTRUMENT NO. 20120865949 of Official Records.

Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 12
First American Title Insurance Company

26. A financing statement recorded JUNE 11, 2012 as INSTRUMENT NO. 20120865950 of Official Records.

Debtor: MP PARTNERS, MRF FAMILY LIMITED, CGN FAMILY LLC, H & L SNOW INVESTMENTS, LLC, JOHN H. LLOYD, BEVERLY C.

LLOYD, CHASE & ASSOCIATES, L.C., MITS FARM MARKET, INC., JAMES R JOYNER, SHAUNA CARTER, SCJ ENTERPRISES L.C.,

CLARENCE WALTER PHILLIPS, ALICE FAY JONES, CLAIR AND
ANNE THUESON FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, RILLA S.

CORBETT, BRIAN E. KINEL, DAVID A. COLTON, COLTON
FAMILY TRUST (THE) DATED SEPTEMBER 17, 1991 AND
ROBERT J. CUNEO
Secured party: PRINCIPAL BANK
According to the public records, the security interest of the secured party was assigned to PRINCIPAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY by document recorded SEPTEMBER 30, 2013 as INSTRUMENT NO. 20131414109 of Official Records.

27. The effect of a deed executed by CGN FAMILY LLC to HEATHER NELSON BURCHETT, DAVID

TAYLOR NELSON, ROBYN NELSON, AND BRENT ANDREW NELSON, AS TENANTS IN COMMON, recorded January 30, 2014 as INSTRUMENT NO. 20140105762 of Official Records.

The Company will require satisfactory evidence that the deed was an absolute conveyance for value and that there are no other agreements, oral or written, regarding the ownership or occupancy of the land described in the deed.

28. This item has been intentionally deleted.

29. Any defects, liens, encumbrances or other matters which name parties with the same or similar names as John H. Lloyd (3 matters), Jim Joyner (2 matters), Shauna Joyner (2 matters), Clarence Walter Phillips (1 matter), Alice Fay Jones (5 matters), John F. McClure (1 matter), David Taylor Nelson (more than 10 matters) Robyn Nelson (5 matter) and Brent Andrew Nelson (3 matters). The name search necessary to ascertain the existence of such matters has not been completed. In order to complete this preliminary report or commitment, we will require a statement of information.

30. Any right, title or interest of the spouse or domestic partner (if any) of any vestee herein.

31. A deed from the spouse of any married vestee herein be recorded in the public records, or the joinder of the spouse of any married vestee named herein on any conveyance, encumbrance or lease to be executed by the vestee.

The deed should contain the following statement:

"It is the express intent of the grantor, being the spouse of the grantee, to convey all right, title and interest of the grantor, community or otherwise, in and to the herein described property to the grantee as his/her sole and separate property."

32. Intentionally Deleted

33. Rights of parties in possession.

Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 13
First American Title Insurance Company

INFORMATIONAL NOTES

1. Taxes for proration purposes only for the fiscal year 2015-2016.

First Installment: $46,517.59, PAID
Second Installment: $42,106.03, PAID
Tax Rate Area: 05517
APN: 7237-020-050
(Affects PARCEL A)

2. Taxes for proration purposes only for the fiscal year 2015-2016.

First Installment: $15,821.79, PAID
Second Installment: $15,075.62, PAID
Tax Rate Area: 05517
APN: 7237-020-040
(Affects PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL B)

3. Taxes for proration purposes only for the fiscal year 2015-2016.

First Installment: $42,016.00, PAID
Second Installment: $37,604.43, PAID
Tax Rate Area: 05517
APN: 7237-020-041
(Affects PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL B)

4. According to the latest available equalized assessment roll in the office of the county tax assessor, there is located on the land a(n) Commercial Structure known as 6615, 6621 and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, CA.

5. According to the public records, there has been no conveyance of the land within a period of twenty four months prior to the date of this report, except as follows:

A document recorded September 28, 2015 as INSTRUMENT NO. 20151197606 of Official Records.

From: H & L SNOW INVESTMENTS, LLC, A UTAH LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY To: DAVID A. COLTON, TRUSTEE OF THE COLTON FAMILY TRUST DATED SEPTEMBER 17, 1991, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 3.50% INTEREST

6. This preliminary report/commitment was prepared based upon an application for a policy of title insurance that identified land by street address or assessor's parcel number only. It is the responsibility of the applicant to determine whether the land referred to herein is in fact the land that is to be described in the policy or policies to be issued.

Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 14
First American Title Insurance Company

7. Should this report be used to facilitate your transaction, we must be provided with the following prior to the issuance of the policy:

A. WITH RESPECT TO A CORPORATION:

1. A certificate of good standing of recent date issued by the Secretary of State of the corporation's state of domicile.

2. A certificate copy of a resolution of the Board of Directors authorizing the contemplated transaction and designating which corporate officers shall have the power to execute on behalf of the corporation.

3. A certificate of revivor and a certificate of relief from contract voidability issued by the Franchise Tax Board of the State of California.

4. Requirements which the Company may impose following its review of the above material and other information which the Company may require.

B. WITH RESPECT TO A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP:

1. A certified copy of the certificate of limited partnership (form LP-1) and any amendments thereto (form LP-2) to be recorded in the public records;

2. A full copy of the partnership agreement and any amendments;

3. Satisfactory evidence of the consent of a majority in interest of the limited partners to the contemplated transaction;

4. A certificate of revivor and a certificate of relief from contract voidability issued by the Franchise Tax Board of the State of California.

5. Requirements which the Company may impose following its review of the above material and other information which the Company may require.

C. WITH RESPECT TO A FOREIGN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP:

1. A certified copy of the application for registration, foreign limited partnership (form LP-5) and any amendments thereto (form LP-6) to be recorded in the public records;

2. A full copy of the partnership agreement and any amendment;

3. Satisfactory evidence of the consent of a majority in interest of the limited partners to the contemplated transaction;

4. A certificate of revivor and a certificate of relief from contract voidability issued by the Franchise Tax Board of the State of California.

5. Requirements which the Company may impose following its review of the above material and other information which the Company may require.

D. WITH RESPECT TO A GENERAL PARTNERSHIP:

1. A certified copy of a statement of partnership authority pursuant to Section 16303 of the California Corporation Code (form GP-I), executed by at least two partners, and a certified copy of any amendments to such statement (form GP-7), to be recorded in the public records;

2. A full copy of the partnership agreement and any amendments;

3. Requirements which the Company may impose following its review of the above material required herein and other information which the Company may require.

E. WITH RESPECT TO A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY:

1. A copy of its operating agreement and any amendments thereto;

2. If it is a California limited liability company, a certified copy of its articles of organization (LLC-1) and any certificate of correction (LLC-11), certificate of amendment (LLC-2), or restatement of articles of organization (LLC-10) to be recorded in the public records;

3. If it is a foreign limited liability company, a certified copy of its application for registration (LLC-5) to be recorded in the public records;

4. With respect to any deed, deed of trust, lease, subordination agreement or other document or instrument executed by such limited liability company and presented for recordation by the Company or upon which the Company is asked to rely, such document or instrument must be Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 15
First American Title Insurance Company
executed in accordance with one of the following, as appropriate:
(i) If the limited liability company properly operates through officers appointed or elected pursuant to the terms of a written operating agreement, such documents must be executed by at least two duly elected or appointed officers, as follows: the chairman of the board, the president or any vice president, and any secretary, assistant secretary, the chief financial officer or any assistant treasurer;
(ii) If the limited liability company properly operates through a manager or managers identified in the articles of organization and/or duly elected pursuant to the terms of a written operating agreement, such document must be executed by at least two such managers or by one manager if the limited liability company properly operates with the existence of only one manager.

5. A certificate of revivor and a certificate of relief from contract voidability issued by the Franchise Tax Board of the State of California.

6. Requirements which the Company may impose following its review of the above material and other information which the Company may require.

F. WITH RESPECT TO A TRUST:

1. A certification pursuant to Section 18100.5 of the California Probate Code in a form satisfactory to the Company.

2. Copies of those excerpts from the original trust documents and amendments thereto which designate the trustee and confer upon the trustee the power to act in the pending transaction.

3. Other requirements which the Company may impose following its review of the material require herein and other information which the Company may require.

G. WITH RESPECT TO INDIVIDUALS:

1. A statement of information.

The map attached, if any, may or may not be a survey of the land depicted hereon. First American Title Insurance Company expressly disclaims any liability for loss or damage which may result from reliance on this map except to the extent coverage for such loss or damage is expressly provided by the terms and provisions of the title insurance policy, if any, to which this map is attached. *****To obtain wire instructions for deposit of funds to your escrow file please contact your Escrow Officer.*****
Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 16
First American Title Insurance Company

LEGAL DESCRIPTION

Real property in the City of Long Beach, County of Los Angeles, State of California, described as follows:

PARCEL A:

PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN ON CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 9906-14 AS EVIDENCED BY DOCUMENT RECORDED JANUARY 25, 2000 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 00-0112750 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

PARCEL 1 AND THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 7470, IN THE CITY OF LONG

BEACH, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN UPON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 121, PAGES 36 THROUGH 39, INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, SAID PARCEL 2 WAS MODIFIED BY MLA 9605-01 RECORDED AUGUST 14, 1996, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 96-1307893,

IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, SAID PORTION BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT THE NORTHERLY MOST POINT OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE SOUTH 52° 07' 37" WEST A DISTANCE OF 263.01 FEET TO THE WESTERLY MOST POINT OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE NORTH 37° 52' 23" WEST A DISTANCE OF 46.37 FEET; THENCE NORTH 52° 07' 37" EAST A DISTANCE OF 261.01 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 37° 52' 23" EAST A DISTANCE OF 46.37 FEET; THENCE NORTH 52° 07' 37" EAST 2.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

EXCEPT THEREFROM ALL OIL, GAS, MINERALS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES IN AND UNDER SAID LAND LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 500 FEET FROM THE SURFACE THEREOF;

BUT WITH NO RIGHT OF SURFACE ENTRY, AS PROVIDED IN THE DEEDS RECORDED SEPTEMBER 16, 1971, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 3355 IN BOOK D5193, PAGE 959, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AND JANUARY 29 1976, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 4104, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.

PARCEL B:

PARCELS 1 AND 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 19212, IN THE CITY OF LONG BEACH, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN UPON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 260, PAGES 93 AND 94 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.

EXCEPT THEREFROM ALL OIL, GAS, MINERALS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES IN AND UNDER SAID LAND LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 500 FEET FROM THE SURFACE THEREOF;

BUT WITH NO RIGHT OF SURFACE ENTRY, AS PROVIDED IN THE DEEDS RECORDED SEPTEMBER 16, 1971, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 3355, IN BOOK D5193, PAGE 959, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AND JANUARY 29, 1976, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 4104, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.

APN: 7237-020-050 (Affects Parcel A), 7237-020-040 (Affects Parcel 1 of Parcel B) and 7237- 020-041 (Affects Parcel 2 of Parcel B)
Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 17
First American Title Insurance Company
The First American Corporation
First American Title Company
Privacy Policy

We Are Committed to Safeguarding Customer Information
In order to better serve your needs now and in the future, we may ask you to provide us with certain information. We understand that you may be concerned about what we will do with such information - particularly any personal or financial information. We agree that you have a right to know how we will utilize the personal information you provide to us. Therefore, together with our parent company, The First American Corporation, we have adopted this Privacy Policy to govern the use and handling of your personal information.

Applicability
This Privacy Policy governs our use of the information which you provide to us. It does not govern the manner in which we may use information we have obtained from any other source, such as information obtained from a public record or from another person or entity. First American has also adopted broader guidelines that govern our use of personal information regardless of its source. First American calls these guidelines its Fair Information Values, a copy of which can be found on our website at www.firstam.com.

Types of Information
Depending upon which of our services you are utilizing, the types of nonpublic personal information that we may collect include:
• Information we receive from you on applications, forms and in other communications to us, whether in writing, in person, by telephone or any other means;
• Information about your transactions with us, our affiliated companies, or others; and • Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency.

Use of Information
We request information from you for our own legitimate business purposes and not for the benefit of any nonaffiliated party. Therefore, we will not release your information to nonaffiliated parties except: (1) as necessary for us to provide the product or service you have requested of us; or (2) as permitted by law. We may, however, store such information indefinitely, including the period after which any customer relationship has ceased. Such information may be used for any internal purpose, such as quality control efforts or customer analysis. We may also provide all of the types of nonpublic personal information listed above to one or more of our affiliated companies. Such affiliated companies include financial service providers, such as title insurers, property and casualty insurers, and trust and investment advisory companies, or companies involved in real estate services, such as appraisal companies, home warranty companies, and escrow companies. Furthermore, we may also provide all the information we collect, as described above, to companies that perform marketing services on our behalf, on behalf of our affiliated companies, or to other financial institutions with whom we or our affiliated companies have joint marketing agreements.

Former Customers
Even if you are no longer our customer, our Privacy Policy will continue to apply to you.

Confidentiality and Security
We will use our best efforts to ensure that no unauthorized parties have access to any of your information. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those individuals and entities who need to know that information to provide products or services to you. We will use our best efforts to train and oversee our employees and agents to ensure that your information will be handled responsibly and in accordance with this Privacy Policy and First American's Fair Information Values. We currently maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information.

Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 18
First American Title Insurance Company
CLTA/ALTA HOMEOWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE (02-03-10)

EXCLUSIONS
In addition to the Exceptions in Schedule B, You are not insured against loss, costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses resulting from:

1. Governmental police power, and the existence or violation of those portions of any law or government regulation concerning:
(a) building; (d) improvements on the Land;
(b) zoning; (e) land division; and
(c) land use; (f) environmental protection.

This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 8.a., 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 23 or 27.

2. The failure of Your existing structures, or any part of them, to be constructed in accordance with applicable building codes. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 14 or 15.

3. The right to take the Land by condemning it. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 17.

4. Risks:
(a) that are created, allowed, or agreed to by You, whether or not they are recorded in the Public Records; (b) that are Known to You at the Policy Date, but not to Us, unless they are recorded in the Public Records at the Policy Date; (c) that result in no loss to You; or
(d) that first occur after the Policy Date - this does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 7, 8.e., 25, 26, 27 or 28.

5. Failure to pay value for Your Title.

6. Lack of a right:
(a) to any land outside the area specifically described and referred to in paragraph 3 of Schedule A; and (b) in streets, alleys, or waterways that touch the Land.

This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 11 or 21.

7. The transfer of the Title to You is invalid as a preferential transfer or as a fraudulent transfer or conveyance under federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws.

LIMITATIONS ON COVERED RISKS
Your insurance for the following Covered Risks is limited on the Owner's Coverage Statement as follows: For Covered Risk 16, 18, 19, and 21 Your Deductible Amount and Our Maximum Dollar Limit of Liability shown in Schedule A.

Your Deductible Amount Our Maximum Dollar
Limit of Liability
Covered Risk 16: 1% of Policy Amount or $2,500.00 (whichever is less) $10,000.00 Covered Risk 18: 1% of Policy Amount or $5,000.00 (whichever is less) $25,000.00 Covered Risk 19: 1% of Policy Amount or $5,000.00 (whichever is less) $25,000.00 Covered Risk 21: 1% of Policy Amount or $2,500.00 (whichever is less) $5,000.00

ALTA RESIDENTIAL TITLE INSURANCE POLICY (6-1-87)

EXCLUSIONS
In addition to the Exceptions in Schedule B, you are not insured against loss, costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses resulting from:

1. Governmental police power, and the existence or violation of any law or government regulation. This includes building and zoning ordinances and also laws and regulations concerning:
(a) and use
(b) improvements on the land
(c) and division
(d) environmental protection
This exclusion does not apply to violations or the enforcement of these matters which appear in the public records at Policy Date.

This exclusion does not limit the zoning coverage described in Items 12 and 13 of Covered Title Risks.

2. The right to take the land by condemning it, unless:
(a) a notice of exercising the right appears in the public records on the Policy Date (b) the taking happened prior to the Policy Date and is binding on you if you bought the land without knowing of the taking Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 19
First American Title Insurance Company

3. Title Risks:
(a) that are created, allowed, or agreed to by you
(b) that are known to you, but not to us, on the Policy Date -- unless they appeared in the public records (c) that result in no loss to you
(d) that first affect your title after the Policy Date -- this does not limit the labor and material lien coverage in Item 8 of Covered Title Risks

4. Failure to pay value for your title.

5. Lack of a right:
(a) to any land outside the area specifically described and referred to in Item 3 of Schedule A OR (b) in streets, alleys, or waterways that touch your land This exclusion does not limit the access coverage in Item 5 of Covered Title Risks. 2006 ALTA LOAN POLICY (06-17-06)

EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE
The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses that arise by reason of:

1. a. Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to
i. the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land;
ii. the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; iii. the subdivision of land; or
iv. environmental protection;
or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5.
b. Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6.

2. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8.

3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters a. created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; b. not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy;
c. resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; d. attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11, 13, or 14); or
e. resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Insured Mortgage.

4. Unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage because of the inability or failure of an Insured to comply with applicable doing-business laws of the state where the Land is situated.

5. Invalidity or unenforceability in whole or in part of the lien of the Insured Mortgage that arises out of the transaction evidenced by the Insured Mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth-in-lending law.

6. Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, that the transaction creating the lien of the Insured Mortgage, is
a. a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer, or
b. a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 13(b) of this policy.

7. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date of Policy and the date of recording of the Insured Mortgage in the Public Records. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11(b).

The above policy form may be issued to afford either Standard Coverage or Extended Coverage. In addition to the above Exclusions from Coverage, the Exceptions from Coverage in a Standard Coverage policy will also include the following Exceptions from Coverage:

EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE
This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees or expenses) that arise by reason of:

Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 20
First American Title Insurance Company

1. (a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records.

2. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims that are not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land.

3. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records.

4. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records.

5. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), or (c) are shown by the Public Records.

6. Any lien or right to a lien for services, labor or material not shown by the public records. 2006 ALTA OWNER'S POLICY (06-17-06)

1. a. Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to
i. the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land;
ii. the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; iii. the subdivision of land; or
iv. environmental protection;
or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5.
b.Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6.

2. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8.

3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters a. created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; b. not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy;
c. resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; d. attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11, 13, or 14); or
e. resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Insured Mortgage.

4. Unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage because of the inability or failure of an Insured to comply with applicable doing-business laws of the state where the Land is situated.

EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE
This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees or expenses) that arise by reason of:

Order Number: NCS-789395-SA1
Page Number: 21
First American Title Insurance Company

3. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records.

6. Any lien or right to a lien for services, labor or material not shown by the public records.

ALTA EXPANDED COVERAGE RESIDENTIAL LOAN POLICY (07-26-10)

1. a. Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to

i. the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land;
ii. the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; iii. the subdivision of land; or
iv. environmental protection;
or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5, 6, 13(c), 13(d), 14 or 16. b. Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5, 6, 13(c), 13(d), 14 or 16.

2. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8.

3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters a. created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; b. not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy;
c. resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; d. attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27 or 28); or e. resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Insured Mortgage.

4. Unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage because of the inability or failure of an Insured to comply with applicable doing-business laws of the state where the Land is situated.

6. Any claim of invalidity, unenforceability or lack of priority of the lien of the Insured Mortgage as to Advances or modifications made after the Insured has Knowledge that the vestee shown in Schedule A is no longer the owner of the estate or interest covered by this policy. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 11.

7. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching subsequent to Date of Policy. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 11(b) or 25.

8. The failure of the residential structure, or any portion of it, to have been constructed before, on or after Date of Policy in accordance with applicable building codes. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 5 or 6.

9. Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, that the transaction creating the lien of the Insured Mortgage, is
a. a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer, or
b. a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 27(b) of this policy.

P hase I – 6615, 6621, & 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway

APPENDIX C

GOOGLE EARTH AERIAL IMAGE AND SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
Photo 1 – View from the southwestern portion of the site towards the western side of 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway.

Photo 2 – View to the northeast of the Property, between 6615 and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway.

Photo 3 – View of hydraulic equipment and superficial staining at 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway.

Photo 4 – View of supply closet in 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway.

Photo 5 – Hydraulic elevator equipment for the one elevator at 6621 East Pacific Coast Highway.

Photo 6 – View hydraulic oil drum in elevator room at 6621 East Pacific Coast Highway.

Photo 7 – View looking southeast with a methane ventilation pipe.

Photo 8 – View looking to the east on the Property.

Photo 9 – Representative view of office space at the Property.

Photo 10 – Additional representative view of the office space at the Property.

Photo 11 – View of elevator room in 6615 East Pacific Coast Highway.

Photo 12 – View of elevator equipment in 6615 East Pacific Coast Highway.

Photo 13 – View of SCE transformer on the west side of the Property.

Photo 14 – View looking across Pacific Coast Highway to the west of the Property.

Photo 15 – View of previous sub-surface investigation of the Property.

Photo 16 – View of one of the storm drains on the eastern portion of the Property.

Photo 17 – View of the eastern adjacent property.

Photo 18 – Additional view of the eastern adjacent property.

Photo 19 – View of concrete drain on the eastern portion of the Property.

Photo 20 – View to the north of the Property.

Photo 21 – View of the blower system for methane.

Photo 22 – View of movie theater to the north of the Property.

Photo 23 – View to the southeast of the Property showing the strawberry stand.

Photo 24 – View of settling on the east side of the Property.

Photo 25 – View looking to the north of the Property.

Photo 26 – View looking to the northeast on the Property.

Photo 27 – View looking to the north on the eastern side of the Property.

Photo 28 – View along the fence line at the northeastern side of the Property.

Photo 29 – View of SCE transformer on the north side of the Property.

Photo 30 – View looking to the east on the Property.

P hase I – 6615, 6621, & 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway

APPENDIX D

HISTORICAL SITE USE INFORMATION
The EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package
6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast Hwy
6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
Inquiry Number: 3308201.5
April 24, 2012
Date EDR Searched Historical Sources:

Aerial Photography April 24, 2012
Target Property:
6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
Year Scale Details Source
1928 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=500' Flight Year: 1928 Fairchild 1938 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=555' Flight Year: 1938 Laval 1947 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=666' Flight Year: 1947 Fairchild 1952 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=555' Flight Year: 1952 Pacific Air 1968 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=480' Flight Year: 1968 Teledyne 1976 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=666' Flight Year: 1976 Teledyne 1989 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=666' Flight Year: 1989 USGS 1994 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=500' /Composite DOQQ - acquisition dates: 1994 EDR 2005 Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=500' Flight Year: 2005 EDR 3308201.5
2 INQUIRY #:

YEAR:
3308201.5
1928
= 500'
INQUIRY #:

YEAR:
3308201.5
1938
= 555'
INQUIRY #:

YEAR:
3308201.5
1947
= 666'
INQUIRY #:

YEAR:
3308201.5
1952
= 555'
INQUIRY #:

YEAR:
3308201.5
1968
= 480'
INQUIRY #:

YEAR:
3308201.5
1976
= 666'
INQUIRY #:

YEAR:
3308201.5
1989
= 666'
INQUIRY #:

YEAR:
3308201.5
1994
= 500'
INQUIRY #:

YEAR:
3308201.5
2005
= 500'

6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast Hwy
6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
Inquiry Number: 3308201.6
April 23, 2012
The EDR-City Directory Abstract
440 Wheelers Farms Road
Milford, CT 06461
800.352.0050
Environmental Data Resources Inc www.edrnet.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION
Executive Summary
Findings
City Directory Images
Thank you for your business.

Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.

Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY

DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR

OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction orforecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.

Copyright 2012 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates is prohibited without prior written permission.

EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates.

All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

DESCRIPTION
Environmental Data Resources, Inc.’s (EDR) City Directory Abstract is a screening tool designed to assist environmental professionals in evaluating potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities.

EDR’s City Directory Abstract includes a search and abstract of available city directory data. For each address, the directory lists the name of the corresponding occupant at five year intervals.

Business directories including city, cross reference and telephone directories were reviewed, if available, at approximately five year intervals for the years spanning 1920 through 2006. This report compiles information gathered in this review by geocoding the latitude and longitude of properties identified and gathering information about properties within 660 feet of the target property.

A summary of the information obtained is provided in the text of this report.

RESEARCH SUMMARY
The following research sources were consulted in the preparation of this report. An "X" indicates where information was identified in the source and provided in this report.

Year Source TP Adjoining Text Abstract Source Image
2006 Haines Company, Inc. X X X -
2004 Haines Company - - - -
2003 Haines & Company - - - -
2001 Haines & Company, Inc. - - - -
2000 Haines X X X -
1999 Haines Company - - - -
1996 GTE - - - -
1995 Pacific Bell - X X -
1992 PACIFIC BELL WHITE PAGES - - - -
1991 Pacific Bell X X X -
1990 Pacific Bell - X X -
1986 Pacific Bell - X X -
1985 Pacific Bell X X X -
1981 Pacific Telephone - X X -
1980 Pacific Telephone X X X -
1976 Pacific Telephone - - - -
1975 Pacific Telephone Co - - - -
1972 R. L. Polk & Co. - - - -
1971 Pacific Telephone - - - -
1970 GTE - - - -
1969 Pacific Telephone - - - -
1967 Pacific Telephone - - - -
1966 Pacific Telephone - - - -
1965 GTE - - - -
1964 Pacific Telephone - X X -
3308201- 6 Page 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Year Source TP Adjoining Text Abstract Source Image
1963 Pacific Telephone - - - -
1962 Pacific Telephone - - - -
1961 Luskey Brothers & Co - - - -
1960 Pacific Telephone - X X -
1958 Pacific Telephone - - - -
1957 Pacific Telephone - - - -
1956 General Telephone Company Publishers - - - -
1955 Home Directory Service - - - -
1954 R. L. Polk & Co. - - - -
1952 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1951 Los Angeles Directory Co Publishers - - - -
1950 Pacific Telephone - - - -
1949 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1948 Associated Telephone Company, Ltd. - - - -
1947 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1946 Southern California Telephone Co - - - -
1945 R. L. Polk & Co. - - - -
1944 R. L. Polk & Co. - - - -
1942 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1940 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1939 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1938 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1937 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1936 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1935 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1934 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1933 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1932 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1931 TRIBUNE-NEWS PUBLISHING CO. - - - -
1930 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1929 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1928 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1927 Kaasen Directory Company Publishers - - - -
1926 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1925 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1924 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1923 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1921 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
1920 Los Angeles Directory Co. - - - -
3308201- 6 Page 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

SELECTED ADDRESSES
The following addresses were selected by the client, for EDR to research. An "X" indicates where information was identified.

Address Type Findings
6615 E Pacific Coast Hwy Client Entered X
6695 E Pacific Coast Hwy Client Entered X
6608 E Pacific Coast Hwy Client Entered X
3308201- 6 Page 3

FINDINGS

TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION

ADDRESS
6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803

FINDINGS DETAIL
Target Property research detail.

Year Uses Source
2006 ADJ CONSULTANTS Haines Company, Inc.

AIELLO INC ST MICHELLE WINE Haines Company, Inc.

ASSOCIATES Haines Company, Inc.

BIBBYSUSAN Lcsw Haines Company, Inc.

BUILDING A BETTER Haines Company, Inc.

CABIPABIP Haines Company, Inc.

CALGARD Haines Company, Inc.

CENTER FOR Haines Company, Inc.

COASTAL PRPRTS LA VIOLETTE ALICE Haines Company, Inc.

CONSTRUCTION Haines Company, Inc.

ESTATES STEINBACHER Haines Company, Inc.

HOLMES Haines Company, Inc.

INTUITIONAL CLAIM Haines Company, Inc.

KCB BUILDERS Haines Company, Inc.

KELLER WILLIAMS Haines Company, Inc.

LINDALWALLACE Haines Company, Inc.

LOFSTROM LLP INCOCOMPANY Haines Company, Inc.

MANAGEMENTINC GARR GEORGEE Haines Company, Inc.

MARKS MICHELLE Haines Company, Inc.

MEZA MADRID Haines Company, Inc.

PROPERTY Haines Company, Inc.

SANDRA LCSW SYSTEMLINK Haines Company, Inc.

SERVICES Haines Company, Inc.
2000 A W S CONSTRUCTION SERVICES Haines
CAPITAL ADVANTAGE Haines
CAPITAL INVESTMENT NETWORK Haines
CHARTIST THE Haines
CONROYS FLOWERS Haines
FLORISTS CAPTL CORP Haines
3308201- 6 Page 4

FINDINGS
Year Uses Source
2000 QUALEX Haines
RENTAL EXPRESS CORP Haines
SENSKE FINANCIAL CORP Haines
1991 A Edelist Deposition Service Inc Pacific Bell
ANZDL Pacific Bell
Australia New Zealand Direct Line Pacific Bell
Australia New Zealand Direct Line Corp Pacific Bell
C T V Productions Pacific Bell
Capital Investment Network Pacific Bell
Communications Training & Video Productions Pacific Bell Corporate Franchise Offices Pacific Bell
Edelist A Deposition Service Inc Pacific Bell
Florists Capital Corp Pacific Bell
Progress B C Video Concepts Pacific Bell
Rental Express Corp Pacific Bell
Southern Steam Inc Pacific Bell
Tradewest Hardwood & Co Pacific Bell
1985 BETERNENEICHIERRICHARDS INC

INRESHATS LONGBEACH
Pacific Bell
HEDGES LINDAJMA Pacific Bell
INDUSTRIAL CONSULTING CENTER Pacific Bell
INTERCOMMUNITY COUNSELING CENTER Pacific Bell
INTEROCEAN STEAMSHIP CORP Pacific Bell
LEE LESTER G PHD Pacific Bell
VAN DE KAMPS FROZEN FOO4S Pacific Bell
1980 Noyes Roach Co Pacific Telephone
3308201- 6 Page 5

FINDINGS

ADJOINING PROPERTY DETAIL
The following Adjoining Property addresses were researched for this report. Detailed findings are provided for each address.

E PACIFIC COAST
6521 E PACIFIC COAST
Year Uses Source
1991 SUMA JAPANESE CUISINE Pacific Bell
1980 Front Page The Pacific Telephone
6527 E PACIFIC COAST
Year Uses Source
1991 C L Ltd Inc Pacific Bell
1980 Miller Chris Shop Pacific Telephone
CHRIS MILLER SHOP Pacific Telephone
6605 E PACIFIC COAST
Year Uses Source
1991 El Torito Restaurant & Cantina Pacific Bell
1980 El Torito Restaurant Pacific Telephone
6695 E PACIFIC COAST
Year Uses Source
1991 Bakhtar Associates Pacific Bell
Engineering Enterprises Inc Pacific Bell
Simon EEI Pacific Bell
Applied Environmental Services Pacific Bell

E PACIFIC COAST HWY
6521 E PACIFIC COAST HWY
Year Uses Source
2006 ITALIAN Res TAU Haines Company, Inc.

AMODOMIO Haines Company, Inc.
1985 SIJMA JAPAESE CUISIE Pacific Bell
6527 E PACIFIC COAST HWY
Year Uses Source
2006 HARUHARUSUSHI Haines Company, Inc.
1985 MILLER CHRIS SHOP Pacific Bell
3308201- 6 Page 6
Year Uses Source

FINDINGS
Year Uses Source
1985 CHRIS MILLER BOUTIQUE Pacific Bell
6600 E PACIFIC COAST HWY
Year Uses Source
2006 CORP DAVERSA MARINA Haines Company, Inc.

SHORES QUIZNOSSUBS Haines Company, Inc.

BOX BROTHERS Haines Company, Inc.

BOATERSWORLD Haines Company, Inc.
6601 E PACIFIC COAST HWY
Year Uses Source
2006 THEATRES Haines Company, Inc.

UNITD ARTISTS Haines Company, Inc.
1990 UNITED ARTISTS THEATRE CIRCUIT
INC
Pacific Bell
1986 UNITED ARTISTS THEATRE CIRCUIT
INC
Pacific Bell
1985 U AMAL CI A 1234 Pacific Bell
1964 CONTINENTAL OIL CO LOG BEACH Pacific Telephone
1960 CONTINENTAL OIL CO LONG BEACH Pacific Telephone
6602 E PACIFIC COAST HWY
Year Uses Source
2006 FASTFRAME Haines Company, Inc.
6604 E PACIFIC COAST HWY
Year Uses Source
2006 HAPPY NAILS & SPA Haines Company, Inc.
6605 E PACIFIC COAST HWY
Year Uses Source
2006 Res T & CNTNA Haines Company, Inc.

ELTORITO MEXICAN Haines Company, Inc.
1985 EL TORITO RESTAURANT & CANTINA Pacific Bell
E Pacific Coast Hwy
6608 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Year Uses Source
2006 PARADISE Haines Company, Inc.

CLEANERS Haines Company, Inc.
3308201- 6 Page 7
Year Uses Source

FINDINGS
6615 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Year Uses Source
2006 BUILDING CA LEAGUE OF Haines Company, Inc.

HIGH SCHOOLS CA LEAGUE OF Haines Company, Inc.

MIDDLE SCHOOLS CARDINAL PACIFIC Haines Company, Inc.

ESCROW INC CENTURY 21 CNTRY Haines Company, Inc.

SPRW RLTY COASTCOREAL Haines Company, Inc.

ESTATE CORE GROUP Haines Company, Inc.

COULTER MILNER& Haines Company, Inc.

CO HARTMAN ERIC S Haines Company, Inc.

INTERFIRST Haines Company, Inc.

ESCROW INC INTRCONTL Haines Company, Inc.

FINANCIAL Haines Company, Inc.

SERVICES Haines Company, Inc.

KIRSTINE Haines Company, Inc.

COMPANY INC MARINE CLERKS Haines Company, Inc.

MARTIN BOOST Haines Company, Inc.

ASSOCIATES MARTIN CAROLYN J Haines Company, Inc.

MILNER JAS L&CO Haines Company, Inc.

MJBPLASTICSINC Haines Company, Inc.

SWATEK FRANK Haines Company, Inc.

TMA INVESTMENTS Haines Company, Inc.

INC VALENZUELAJOHN Haines Company, Inc.

CFP WESTRNMUTL Haines Company, Inc.

MORTAGE CORP WILCOX MICHAEL E Haines Company, Inc.

HEDLEYROBERT Haines Company, Inc.
1991 Bennett Chas J atty Pacific Bell
Garcia Andrew atty Pacific Bell
East Pacific Bell
Market Place The Pacific Bell
Sears Mortgage Corp Pacific Bell
Wilcox Michael E ins Pacific Bell
Benson Maurice Pacific Bell
Bennett Kerry Kistner & Garcia Pacific Bell
HARTMAN ERIC S atty Pacific Bell
Milner Jas L & Co Pacific Bell
Madmen Pacific Bell
COULTER MILNER & CO Pacific Bell
Nakamura Allan ins Pacific Bell
3308201- 6 Page 8
Year Uses Source

FINDINGS
Year Uses Source
1991 Moore Data Management Services Pacific Bell
Standard Steel Pacific Bell
Crown Computers Pacific Bell
Kerry Wm H atty Pacific Bell
JMR Advertising Pacific Bell
Pistoia Graphic Design Pacific Bell
Van Camp Estates Pacific Bell
American Internatl Adjustment Co Pacific Bell
Eckert Warren H atty Pacific Bell
Kistner Wayne T atty Pacific Bell
King Michael Advertising Inc Pacific Bell
King Michael M OD Pacific Bell
1990 MERRILL LYNCH PIERCE FENNER &

SMITH INC BRKRS
Pacific Bell
1986 WEDBUSH NOBLE COOKE INC LONG
BEACH
Pacific Bell

MERRILL LYNCH PIERCE FENNER &

SMITH INC BRKRS
Pacific Bell
1985 LB Pacific Bell
BENNETT KERRY KISTNER & GARCIA Pacific Bell
BIXBY LB Pacific Bell
LB Pacific Bell
ECKERT WARREN H ATTY Pacific Bell

FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP

AGENTS MARKET PLACE THE
Pacific Bell
NAKAMURA ALLAN INS Pacific Bell
ADIACORP Pacific Bell
GARCIA ANDREW ATTY Pacific Bell
CRANEMORLEY Pacific Bell
LEVI SAFETY CO Pacific Bell
DIXIE AUTO TRANSPORT CO Pacific Bell
HARTIMAN ERIC S ATTY Pacific Bell
BENSON MAURICE Pacific Bell
BENNETT CHASJ ATTY Pacific Bell
DURKINJOHNF Pacific Bell
WED8USH NOBLE COOW INC Pacific Bell

MERRILL LYNCH PIERCE FENNER &

SMITH INC
Pacific Bell
WILCOX MIKE INS Pacific Bell
COAST BANK ADMINISTRATION Pacific Bell
3308201- 6 Page 9
Year Uses Source

FINDINGS
Year Uses Source
1985 KISTNER WAYNE T ATTY Pacific Bell
KOENIG WOOD DEVELOPMENT CO Pacific Bell
KERRYWMMH ATTY Pacific Bell
1981 LIFE & CASUALTY SERVICE LIFE

MEDICAL & DENTAL CLAIMS LONG
BEACH
Pacific Telephone

CONNECTICUT GENERAL LIFE

INSURANCE LONG BEACH
Pacific Telephone
EQUICO LESSORS INC LONG BEACH Pacific Telephone
1980 AETNA LIFE & CASUALTY Claim Service
Group Life Medical & Dental Claims
Pacific Telephone
Eckert Warren H atty Pacific Telephone
Koenig Wood Development Co Pacific Telephone
Market Place The Pacific Telephone
EQUICO LESSORS INC Pacific Telephone
Lopez Joan ins Pacific Telephone
Law Offices Of Maurice Benson Pacific Telephone
Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith Inc Pacific Telephone Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith Inc Pacific Telephone

MERRILL LYNCH PIERCE FENNER &
SMITH INC brkrs
Pacific Telephone
South Coast Properties Pacific Telephone
Hartman Eric S atty Pacific Telephone
Nakamura Allan ins Pacific Telephone
Wilcox Mike ins Pacific Telephone
Wagenseller & Durst Inc Pacific Telephone

AETNA LIFE & CASUALTY CLAIM

SERVICE GROUP LIFE MEDICAL &

DENTAL CLAIMS
Pacific Telephone

E PACIFIC COAST HWY
6620 E PACIFIC COAST HWY
Year Uses Source
2006 INDYMAC BANKFS Haines Company, Inc.
6624 E PACIFIC COAST HWY
Year Uses Source
2006 SUPERCUTS Haines Company, Inc.
3308201- 6 Page 10
Year Uses Source

FINDINGS
6632 E PACIFIC COAST HWY
Year Uses Source
2006 JUICE ZONE Haines Company, Inc.
6640 E PACIFIC COAST HWY
Year Uses Source
2006 HIBACHISUSHI& Haines Company, Inc.

GRILL Haines Company, Inc.
6670 E PACIFIC COAST HWY
Year Uses Source
2006 MIMISCAFE Haines Company, Inc.
6695 E PACIFIC COAST HWY
Year Uses Source
2006 ESTATE REMAX REAL Haines Company, Inc.

ESTATE SECORD RICHARD C Haines Company, Inc.

REMAX REAL Haines Company, Inc.

SONS REED JOSEPHF Haines Company, Inc.

SONS INC EDWARDSAG& Haines Company, Inc.

WELLS FARGO Haines Company, Inc.

HOME MORTGAGE Haines Company, Inc.

A G EDWARDS Haines Company, Inc.

E Pacific Coast Hwy
6695 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Year Uses Source
2006 A G EDWARDS Haines Company, Inc.

SONS INC EDWARDSAG& Haines Company, Inc.

SONS REED JOSEPHF Haines Company, Inc.

REMAX REAL Haines Company, Inc.

ESTATE REMAX REAL Haines Company, Inc.

ESTATE SECORD RICHARD C Haines Company, Inc.

HOME MORTGAGE Haines Company, Inc.

WELLS FARGO Haines Company, Inc.
2000 A G EDWARDS & SONS Haines
EDWARDS A G & SONS Haines
POWIS CHARLES Haines
REED JOSEPH F Haines
REMAX KARL LUECKE Haines
3308201- 6 Page 11
Year Uses Source

FINDINGS
Year Uses Source
2000 REMAX REAL ESTATE SPECIALISTS Haines
SECORD RICHARD C Haines
1991 Bakhtar Associates Pacific Bell
Simon EEI Pacific Bell
Applied Environmental Services Pacific Bell
Engineering Enterprises Inc Pacific Bell

E PACIFIC COAST HWY
6700 E PACIFIC COAST HWY
Year Uses Source
2006 BUILDING Haines Company, Inc.

BROWN ROBERT C Haines Company, Inc.

C&N ENERGY LTD Haines Company, Inc.

CAPITAL Haines Company, Inc.

ADVANTAGE CONCEPTMARINE Haines Company, Inc.

ASSOCIATES DAVENPORT Haines Company, Inc.

PATRICIA MFCC DIVERSFD Haines Company, Inc.

SECURITIES INC Haines Company, Inc.

EISENBERG Haines Company, Inc.

DONALD S LAW OFC Haines Company, Inc.

ELDERS C MA MFCC Haines Company, Inc.

EXCELFUNDING Haines Company, Inc.

FINANCL Haines Company, Inc.

SOLUTIONS GROUP Haines Company, Inc.

FINANCL Haines Company, Inc.

SOLUTIONS GRP Haines Company, Inc.

LLC FIRSTSOURCE Haines Company, Inc.

FINANCIAL Haines Company, Inc.

FIRSTSOURCE Haines Company, Inc.

FINANCIAL GARCIA ANDREW Haines Company, Inc.

GELLER EPRTHNR Haines Company, Inc.

MCCNNLL LLP Haines Company, Inc.

GELLER EPRTHNR Haines Company, Inc.

MCCNNLL LLP Haines Company, Inc.

GOODRICH Haines Company, Inc.

GOODYEAR & HINDS Haines Company, Inc.

GOODR 1 CH ROY L Haines Company, Inc.

CPA GOODYEAR Haines Company, Inc.
3308201- 6 Page 12
Year Uses Source

FINDINGS
Year Uses Source
2006 GREGORYA HALLSTEIN Haines Company, Inc.

WARNER HAN PADRON Haines Company, Inc.

ASSOCIATES LLP INDEP FINANCIAL Haines Company, Inc.

SERVICES KAGAN PAULO Haines Company, Inc.

KENNETH CECIL Haines Company, Inc.

KERRY GARCIA& Haines Company, Inc.

LEWIS KERRYWILLIAM H Haines Company, Inc.

LAQUER URBAN Haines Company, Inc.

CUFFORD&HODGES LAUROJOHNJR Haines Company, Inc.

LEIGHT MICHAEL Haines Company, Inc.

LEWIS DANIEL G Haines Company, Inc.

LONESTARRADIO Haines Company, Inc.

MAXSON & ASC Haines Company, Inc.

ACCOUNTANCY Haines Company, Inc.

CORP MAXSON LARRY B Haines Company, Inc.

MAXSON PERRY B Haines Company, Inc.

MAXSON COONEY Haines Company, Inc.

PROPERTIES MCVEY TIMOTHY Haines Company, Inc.

CFP NERRIE JAMES E Haines Company, Inc.

ORR ROBERT M Haines Company, Inc.

ATTORNEY AT LAW RBC DAIN Haines Company, Inc.

RAUSCHER Haines Company, Inc.

SAWYER STEPHEN Haines Company, Inc.

ATTY SINGERWAYNE Haines Company, Inc.

LAW OFFICE SMITH BARNEY Haines Company, Inc.

STATE FARM INS Haines Company, Inc.

COMPANIES THECOLTON Haines Company, Inc.

COMPANY WESTBERG Haines Company, Inc.

INVESTMENT CORP WINTERSTEIN Haines Company, Inc.

MICHELE L PHD Haines Company, Inc.
1985 CAMERON-BROWN CO Pacific Bell
KINDSCHI RONALD O INVESTMENTS Pacific Bell
PRUDIENTIAL-BACHE SECURITIES Pacific Bell

SHEARSON LEHMAN BROTHERS INC

LONGBEACH
Pacific Bell

SOUTHRBNI CROSS OVERSEAS

AGENCY LNC
Pacific Bell
3308201- 6 Page 13
Year Uses Source

FINDINGS
6701 E PACIFIC COAST HWY
Year Uses Source
2006 SNOWY PINES XMAS Haines Company, Inc.

PATCH Haines Company, Inc.

PAS PUMPKIN Haines Company, Inc.

TREES Haines Company, Inc.

PACIFIC COAST HWY
6521 PACIFIC COAST HWY
Year Uses Source
1995 SUMA JAPANESE CUISINE Pacific Bell

PACIFIC COAST HWY E
6521 PACIFIC COAST HWY E
Year Uses Source
2000 LA GROTTE Haines
6527 PACIFIC COAST HWY E
Year Uses Source
2000 PRINTED LADYUS CHRISTMAS PLUMS Haines
6601 PACIFIC COAST HWY E
Year Uses Source
2000 UNITD ARTISTS THTRS Haines
6605 PACIFIC COAST HWY E
Year Uses Source
2000 EL TORITO MEXICAN REST & CANTINA Haines
6695 PACIFIC COAST HWY E
Year Uses Source
2000 POWIS CHARLES Haines
EDWARDS A G & SONS Haines
A G EDWARDS & SONS Haines
SECORD RICHARD C Haines
REMAX REAL ESTATE SPECIALISTS Haines
REED JOSEPH F Haines
REMAX KARL LUECKE Haines
3308201- 6 Page 14
Year Uses Source

FINDINGS
6700 PACIFIC COAST HWY E
Year Uses Source
2000 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT Haines
BUILDING BROWN ROBERT C Haines
DAVENPORT PATRICIA A MFCC Haines
3308201- 6 Page 15

FINDINGS
TARGET PROPERTY: ADDRESS NOT IDENTIFIED IN RESEARCH SOURCE The following Target Property addresses were researched for this report, and the addresses were not identified in the research source.

Address Researched Address Not Identified in Research Source 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy 2004, 2003, 2001, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1990, 1986, 1981, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920
ADJOINING PROPERTY: ADDRESSES NOT IDENTIFIED IN RESEARCH SOURCE The following Adjoining Property addresses were researched for this report, and the addresses were not identified in research source.

Address Researched Address Not Identified in Research Source 6521 E PACIFIC COAST 2006, 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6521 E PACIFIC COAST HWY 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6521 PACIFIC COAST HWY 2006, 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6521 PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2006, 2004, 2003, 2001, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6527 E PACIFIC COAST 2006, 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6527 E PACIFIC COAST HWY 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6527 PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2006, 2004, 2003, 2001, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920

FINDINGS
Address Researched Address Not Identified in Research Source 6600 E PACIFIC COAST HWY 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6601 E PACIFIC COAST HWY 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920
6601 PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2006, 2004, 2003, 2001, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6602 E PACIFIC COAST HWY 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6604 E PACIFIC COAST HWY 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6605 E PACIFIC COAST 2006, 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6605 E PACIFIC COAST HWY 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6605 PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2006, 2004, 2003, 2001, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6608 E Pacific Coast Hwy 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6615 E Pacific Coast Hwy 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920
6620 E PACIFIC COAST HWY 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920

FINDINGS
Address Researched Address Not Identified in Research Source 6624 E PACIFIC COAST HWY 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6632 E PACIFIC COAST HWY 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6640 E PACIFIC COAST HWY 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6670 E PACIFIC COAST HWY 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6695 E PACIFIC COAST 2006, 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6695 E PACIFIC COAST HWY 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6695 E Pacific Coast Hwy 2004, 2003, 2001, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920
6695 PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2006, 2004, 2003, 2001, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6700 E PACIFIC COAST HWY 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6700 PACIFIC COAST HWY E 2006, 2004, 2003, 2001, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 6701 E PACIFIC COAST HWY 2004, 2003, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1996, 1995, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1986, 1985, 1981, 1980, 1976, 1975, 1972, 1971, 1970, 1969, 1967, 1966, 1965, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1961, 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1950, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1946, 1945, 1944, 1942, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1937, 1936, 1935, 1934, 1933, 1932, 1931, 1930, 1929, 1928, 1927, 1926, 1925, 1924, 1923, 1921, 1920 EDR Historical Topographic Map Report
6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast Hwy
6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
Inquiry Number: 3308201.4
April 23, 2012
Historical Topographic Map
→
N

TARGET QUAD
NAME: SOUTHERN CA SHEET 1
MAP YEAR: 1901
SERIES: 60
SCALE: 1:250000
SITE NAME: 6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast
Hwy
ADDRESS: 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
LAT/LONG: 33.7548 / -118.1074
CLIENT: SCS Engineers
CONTACT: Loran Bures
INQUIRY#: 3308201.4
RESEARCH DATE: 04/23/2012
Historical Topographic Map
→
N

TARGET QUAD
NAME: DOWNEY
MAP YEAR: 1902
SERIES: 15
SCALE: 1:62500
SITE NAME: 6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast
Hwy
ADDRESS: 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
LAT/LONG: 33.7548 / -118.1074
CLIENT: SCS Engineers
CONTACT: Loran Bures
INQUIRY#: 3308201.4
RESEARCH DATE: 04/23/2012
Historical Topographic Map
→
N

TARGET QUAD
NAME: LONG BEACH
MAP YEAR: 1925
SERIES: 7.5
SCALE: 1:24000
SITE NAME: 6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast
Hwy
ADDRESS: 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
LAT/LONG: 33.7548 / -118.1074
CLIENT: SCS Engineers
CONTACT: Loran Bures
INQUIRY#: 3308201.4
RESEARCH DATE: 04/23/2012
Historical Topographic Map
→
N

TARGET QUAD
NAME: LOS ALAMITOS
MAP YEAR: 1935
SERIES: 7.5
SCALE: 1:31680
SITE NAME: 6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast
Hwy
ADDRESS: 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
LAT/LONG: 33.7548 / -118.1074
CLIENT: SCS Engineers
CONTACT: Loran Bures
INQUIRY#: 3308201.4
RESEARCH DATE: 04/23/2012
Historical Topographic Map
→
N

TARGET QUAD
NAME: DOWNEY
MAP YEAR: 1947
SERIES: 15
SCALE: 1:50000
SITE NAME: 6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast
Hwy
ADDRESS: 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
LAT/LONG: 33.7548 / -118.1074
CLIENT: SCS Engineers
CONTACT: Loran Bures
INQUIRY#: 3308201.4
RESEARCH DATE: 04/23/2012
Historical Topographic Map
→
N

TARGET QUAD
NAME: LOS ALAMITOS
MAP YEAR: 1950
SERIES: 7.5
SCALE: 1:24000
SITE NAME: 6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast
Hwy
ADDRESS: 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
LAT/LONG: 33.7548 / -118.1074
CLIENT: SCS Engineers
CONTACT: Loran Bures
INQUIRY#: 3308201.4
RESEARCH DATE: 04/23/2012
Historical Topographic Map
→
N

TARGET QUAD
NAME: LONGBEACH VICINITY
1OF3
MAP YEAR: 1951
SERIES: 7.5
SCALE: 1:24000
SITE NAME: 6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast
Hwy
ADDRESS: 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
LAT/LONG: 33.7548 / -118.1074
CLIENT: SCS Engineers
CONTACT: Loran Bures
INQUIRY#: 3308201.4
RESEARCH DATE: 04/23/2012
Historical Topographic Map
→
N

TARGET QUAD
NAME: LOS ALAMITOS
MAP YEAR: 1964
SERIES: 7.5
SCALE: 1:24000
SITE NAME: 6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast
Hwy
ADDRESS: 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
LAT/LONG: 33.7548 / -118.1074
CLIENT: SCS Engineers
CONTACT: Loran Bures
INQUIRY#: 3308201.4
RESEARCH DATE: 04/23/2012
Historical Topographic Map
→
N

TARGET QUAD
NAME: LOS ALAMITOS
MAP YEAR: 1972
PHOTOREVISED FROM :1964
SERIES: 7.5
SCALE: 1:24000
SITE NAME: 6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast
Hwy
ADDRESS: 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
LAT/LONG: 33.7548 / -118.1074
CLIENT: SCS Engineers
CONTACT: Loran Bures
INQUIRY#: 3308201.4
RESEARCH DATE: 04/23/2012
Historical Topographic Map
→
N

TARGET QUAD
NAME: LOS ALAMITOS
MAP YEAR: 1981
PHOTOREVISED FROM :1964
SERIES: 7.5
SCALE: 1:24000
SITE NAME: 6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast
Hwy
ADDRESS: 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
LAT/LONG: 33.7548 / -118.1074
CLIENT: SCS Engineers
CONTACT: Loran Bures
INQUIRY#: 3308201.4
RESEARCH DATE: 04/23/2012
Historical Topographic Map
→
N

ADJOINING QUAD
NAME: LAS BOLSAS
MAP YEAR: 1934
SERIES: 15
SCALE: 1:62500
SITE NAME: 6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast
Hwy
ADDRESS: 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
LAT/LONG: 33.7548 / -118.1074
CLIENT: SCS Engineers
CONTACT: Loran Bures
INQUIRY#: 3308201.4
RESEARCH DATE: 04/23/2012
Historical Topographic Map
→
N

ADJOINING QUAD
NAME: SEAL BEACH
MAP YEAR: 1935
SERIES: 7.5
SCALE: 1:31680
SITE NAME: 6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast
Hwy
ADDRESS: 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
LAT/LONG: 33.7548 / -118.1074
CLIENT: SCS Engineers
CONTACT: Loran Bures
INQUIRY#: 3308201.4
RESEARCH DATE: 04/23/2012
Historical Topographic Map
→
N

ADJOINING QUAD
NAME: SEAL BEACH
MAP YEAR: 1950
SERIES: 7.5
SCALE: 1:24000
SITE NAME: 6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast
Hwy
ADDRESS: 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
LAT/LONG: 33.7548 / -118.1074
CLIENT: SCS Engineers
CONTACT: Loran Bures
INQUIRY#: 3308201.4
RESEARCH DATE: 04/23/2012
Historical Topographic Map
→
N

ADJOINING QUAD
NAME: SEAL BEACH
MAP YEAR: 1965
SERIES: 7.5
SCALE: 1:24000
SITE NAME: 6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast
Hwy
ADDRESS: 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
LAT/LONG: 33.7548 / -118.1074
CLIENT: SCS Engineers
CONTACT: Loran Bures
INQUIRY#: 3308201.4
RESEARCH DATE: 04/23/2012
Historical Topographic Map
→
N

ADJOINING QUAD
NAME: SEAL BEACH
MAP YEAR: 1972
PHOTOREVISED FROM :1965
SERIES: 7.5
SCALE: 1:24000
SITE NAME: 6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast
Hwy
ADDRESS: 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
LAT/LONG: 33.7548 / -118.1074
CLIENT: SCS Engineers
CONTACT: Loran Bures
INQUIRY#: 3308201.4
RESEARCH DATE: 04/23/2012
Historical Topographic Map
→
N

ADJOINING QUAD
NAME: SEAL BEACH
MAP YEAR: 1981
PHOTOREVISED FROM :1965
SERIES: 7.5
SCALE: 1:24000
SITE NAME: 6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast
Hwy
ADDRESS: 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
LAT/LONG: 33.7548 / -118.1074
CLIENT: SCS Engineers
CONTACT: Loran Bures
INQUIRY#: 3308201.4
RESEARCH DATE: 04/23/2012
Certified Sanborn® Map Report
6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast Hwy
6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
Inquiry Number: 3308201.3
April 23, 2012
Certified Sanborn® Map Report 4/23/12
Site Name:
6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast
6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90803
Client Name:

SCS Engineers
3900 Kilroy Airport Way
Long Beach, CA 90806
EDR Inquiry # 3308201.3 Contact: Loran Bures
The complete Sanborn Library collection has been searched by EDR, and fire insurance maps covering the target property location provided by SCS Engineers were identified for the years listed below. The certified Sanborn Library search results in this report can be authenticated by visiting www.edrnet.com/sanborn and entering the certification number. Only Environmental Data Resources Inc. (EDR) is authorized to grant rights for commercial reproduction of maps by Sanborn Library LLC, the copyright holder for the collection.

Certified Sanborn Results:

Site Name: 6615 - 6695 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Address: 6621 E Pacific Coast Hwy
City, State, Zip: Long Beach, CA 90803
Cross Street:

P.O. # 01-LB
Project: 01212118.00
Certification # BE8A-474A-AF53
Library of Congress
University Publications of America
EDR Private Collection
The Sanborn Library LLC Since 1866™
The Sanborn Library includes more than 1.2 million
Sanborn fire insurance maps, which track historical
property usage in approximately 12,000 American
cities and towns. Collections searched:

Sanborn® Library search results
Certification # BE8A-474A-AF53

UNMAPPED PROPERTY
This report certifies that the complete holdings of the Sanborn Library, LLC collection have been searched based on client supplied target property information, and fire insurance maps covering the target property were not found.

Limited Permission To Make Copies
SCS Engineers (the client) is permitted to make up to THREE photocopies of this Sanborn Map transmittal and each fire insurance map accompanying this report solely for the limited use of its customer. No one other than the client is authorized to make copies. Upon request made directly to an EDR Account Executive, the client may be permitted to make a limited number of additional photocopies. This permission is conditioned upon compliance by the client, its customer and their agents with EDR's copyright policy; a copy of which is available upon request.

Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF

ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.

Copyright 2012 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.

EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.
3308201 - 3 page 2
P hase I – 6615, 6621, & 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway

APPENDIX E

PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS AND REGULATORY

AGENCY FILE REVIEW INFORMATION
Phase I – 6615, 6621, & 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway Attorney - Client Privileged and Attorney Work Product Material

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT

MARKET PLACE LONG BEACH OFFICE PARK
6615, 6621, AND 6695 EAST PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90803
(APNS: 7237 - 020 - 040, - 041, AND - 050 )
Prepared for:

Carmel Partners Realty Investors, LLC
c/o Preston W. Brooks
Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP
2029 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, California 90067
(310) 284-2223
Prepared by:

SCS ENGINEERS
3900 Kilroy Airport Way, Suite 100
Long Beach, California 90806
(562) 426-9544
April 26, 2017
File No. 01217048.00, Task 1
Phase I – 6615, 6621, & 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway At torney - Client Privileged and Attorney Work Product Material i
Table of Contents
Section Page
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... III 2 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................................1 Scope of Services.............................................................................................................................1 Special Terms and Conditions........................................................................................................2 Limitations and Assumptions ...........................................................................................................2 3 SITE DESCRIPTION..................................................................................................................................3 Location and Legal Description .....................................................................................................3 Site and Vicinity Characteristics ....................................................................................................3 Adjoining Property Use ..............................................................................................................3 Structures, Roads, and Other Relevant Site Improvements ......................................................4 Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations...................................................................4 Current Site Use................................................................................................................................4 Site Map ............................................................................................................................................4 4 SITE INSPECTION ...................................................................................................................................5 Interior and Exterior Observations ...............................................................................................5 Drinking Water............................................................................................................................6 Wastewater .................................................................................................................................6 Natural Drainage........................................................................................................................6 Hazardous Substances ....................................................................................................................6 Elevators and Other Hydraulic Equipment .............................................................................6 Hazardous Substance Handling and Storage ............................................................................6 Storage Tanks...................................................................................................................................6 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) ..................................................................................................7 Solid Waste Disposal Issues and Disturbed Areas.....................................................................7 Physical Setting Analysis.................................................................................................................7 Physiographic Setting .................................................................................................................7 Geology and Soils ......................................................................................................................7 Groundwater................................................................................................................................8 Other Conditions of Potential Concern.........................................................................................8 Underground Hazardous Materials Pipelines........................................................................8 Active, Plugged, or Abandoned Oil and Gas Wells and Infrastructure...........................8 Historic Mining Activity or Ore Processing Facilities .............................................................8 Electromagnetic Field Concerns ................................................................................................8 Wetlands and/or Endangered Species..................................................................................9 Radon ............................................................................................................................................9 Wells..............................................................................................................................................9 Asbestos-Containing Materials (ACMs) and Lead-Based Paint (LBP)................................9 Interviews...........................................................................................................................................9 5 PUBLIC RECORD REVIEW SECTION....................................................................................................9 Phase I – 6615, 6621, & 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway At torney - Client Privileged and Attorney Work Product Material i i
Property Listings............................................................................................................................ 10 Adjacent Site Listings.................................................................................................................... 11 Other Database Sites................................................................................................................... 11 Unmappable or Orphan Sites.................................................................................................11 Landfills........................................................................................................................................... 12 Oil and Gas Wells........................................................................................................................ 12 National Pipeline Mapping System (NPMS) ............................................................................ 12 6 HISTORICAL USE ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................. 13 Historical Use Summary................................................................................................................ 17 Historical Use of Adjoining Sites................................................................................................. 17 Commonly Known or ReasonablY Ascertainable Information............................................... 17 Previous Environmental Reports..............................................................................................17 Regulatory Agency Records....................................................................................................18 7 USER PROVIDED INFORMATION..................................................................................................... 23 Title Records................................................................................................................................... 23 Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations................................................................ 23 Specialized Knowledge............................................................................................................... 24 Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues .......................................................................... 24 8 DEGREE OF OBVIOUSNESS OF THE PRESENCE/LIKELY PRESENCE OF CONTAMINATION ON THE PROPERTY............................................................................................................................. 24 9 DATA GAPS.......................................................................................................................................... 24 10 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS...................................................................................................... 24 11 SIGNATURES OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS ............................................................... 28 12 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................................... 29 13 GLOSSARY/DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................................. 31 Appendices
A Figures 1 and 2
B Title Report
C Google Earth Aerial Image and Site Photographs
D EDR Database Report
E Previous Environmental Reports and Regulatory Agency File Review Information F Historical Site Use Information
G User Questionnaire
H Resumes of Project Personnel
Phase I – 6615, 6621, & 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway At torney - Client Privileged and Attorney Work Product Material iii
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
SCS Engineers (SCS) was retained by the Carmel Partners Realty Investors, LLC to prepare a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of the Market Place Long Beach Office Park located at 6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, California (the “Property”). This assessment was performed in a manner which complies with 40 CFR 312, Standards for Conducting All Appropriate Inquiries, in general conformance with ASTM E1527-13, and in conformance with the Master Services Agreement between SCS and Carmel Partners dated March 2017.

The three office buildings are two-story structures with wood and stucco siding. Commercial business tenants at the office buildings include real estate, medical counseling, legal, chiropractic/acupuncture (no X-ray equipment onsite), accounting, physical therapy, etc. Since portions of the Property were historically used as a residential/commercial refuse landfill, a landfill gas control system is currently operating at the Property. Some evidence of small stress cracks and one area of differential settling was noted in the parking area at the center of the Property during the site inspection. However, quarterly landfill gas control system monitoring indicates that the system is operating as intended and that site buildings are adequately protected from accumulation of combustible gas.

In addition to the main office park area, as noted above, a portion of the Property extends beyond the fence line to the southeast. This small area is situated approximately five feet lower in elevation than the parking lot of the office park. Electrical equipment, trees, a concrete stormwater drain tunnel, and metal pipeline saddles associated with historical oil infrastructure were observed in this area. This portion of the Property is indistinguishable from the surrounding oil field.

The Property was undeveloped wetland located to the northeast of Alamitos Bay and north of the San Gabriel River until the mid-1920s. By 1928, two oil sumps and oil-related infrastructure were present on the southeastern part of the Property. The rest of the Property was undeveloped land, no longer identifiable as wetland. The oil sumps were no longer visible by 1938, when one oil well was present on the southeastern portion of the Property. In 1947, two possible oil wells were depicted on a historical topographic map, but only one was visible in an historical aerial photo. Portions of the Property were used as a landfill between mid-1960 and early 1961. By 1964, oil wells were no longer visible on the Property in aerial photos. A dark spot (possibly vegetation or dark soil) was visible at the southeastern corner of the Property in a 1976 aerial photo, a short distance to the west of the historical oil sumps and oil wells. The Property was developed with three office buildings in their current configuration between 1978 and the early 1980s. Numerous tenant improvements have been performed at the office buildings since that time. The past presence of the landfill, two oil sumps, one or two oil wells, and oil-related infrastructure at the Property constitute RECs.

Phase I – 6615, 6621, & 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway At torney - Client Privileged and Attorney Work Product Material i v
SCS Field Services currently provides operations, maintenance, and monitoring (OM&M) services for the landfill gas control system at the Property and has monitored the system for more than 20 years. According to the most recent quarterly monitoring report, the system is operating adequately and prevents the buildup of combustible levels of methane in the buildings on the Property.

There are no indications of contamination issues associated with the current use of the Property.

As discussed above, historical developments at the Property have included both oil/gas infrastructure and a landfill. Past investigations at the Property conducted under Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB) oversight indicate that industrial waste may have been disposed at the Property. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), pesticides, and metals have been detected in groundwater and are attributable to the historical oil and gas exploration and potentially the historical landfill operations. Another ongoing concern at the Property relates to landfill gas and migration of methane from adjoining oil field properties. There is a passive landfill gas control system supplemented by an intermittently operated air blower installed at the Property. In the 20+ years since this system was installed, no methane has been detected in any of the on-site buildings despite the detection of combustible gas in some perimeter probes and venting locations. As long as Property use does not change and the gas control system remains operational, SCS does not anticipate any methane-related concerns with the Property.

Although the landfill was closed in accordance with regulations in effect at the time of closure (1961), current landfill closure standards are more stringent. Both the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) and the County Department of Health Services must approve any major development or redevelopment on older landfills. In granting approval for major new developments, the CIWMB may require that the entire former landfill site be brought up to current standards. There is, however, no systematic enforcement of the current landfill closure standards in the absence of major new development.

The Property owner of the adjoining site to the south-southeast, the “Pumpkin Patch” site, has proposed new development that has resulted in updated regulatory oversight of the former landfill. While communication between the LARWQCB regarding the former landfill has thus far been directed only to the Pumpkin Patch site owner, it indicates that new Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) for the former landfill are replacing a 1996 landfill closure letter. It is likely that any proposed redevelopment activities at the Property will result in new regulatory post-closure landfill monitoring requirements at the Property similar to those required on the Pumpkin Patch.

Regulatory database information identified known and suspected contamination sites in the area surrounding the Property. It is possible that some of these sites have contributed to groundwater contamination beneath the Property. Although not detailed in regulatory database reports, the oil and gas operations located to the north and east of the Property are also a likely source of groundwater contamination and/or combustible gas (methane). The presence of the adjacent oil field and nearby wetlands areas would complicate assessment of combustible gas that may originate on the Property.

Phase I – 6615, 6621, & 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway At torney - Client Privileged and Attorney Work Product Material v
Conclusions
In summary, SCS has performed a Phase I Environmental Assessment in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Standard Practice E 1527 and the requirements of our Master Services Contract with Carmel Partners concerning the property at Market Place Long Beach Office Park located at 6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, California.

Any exceptions to, or deletions from, this practice are described in the Executive Summary Section of this report.

Based on the findings of the June 2016 Phase I ESA, the Property was historically used for oil drilling and production operations, including former oil sumps and oil-related infrastructure, predominantly on the easternmost portion of the Property. In addition, portions of the Property were used as a landfill between mid-1960 and early 1961. These former operations are considered to be recognized environmental conditions. For the reasons set forth herein, the following additional investigation is recommended:
• Soil vapor survey at perimeter probe locations outside of the anticipated landfill footprint in selected accessible areas of the Property.
• Soil sampling from borings in the area of historic oil operations.

Sampling of groundwater from temporary wells at five locations Phase I – 6615, 6621, & 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway At torney - Client Privileged and Attorney Work Product Material 2 • Review of historical Property use information (topographic maps, aerial photographs, fire insurance maps, existing reports, etc.).
• Commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information about the Property (e.g., interviews with appropriate regulatory agency personnel and review of agency files review of available documents, interviews with other knowledgeable persons). • Degree of obviousness of the presence or likely presence of contamination at the Property, and the ability to detect the contamination by appropriate investigation. • Information provided as a result of the additional inquiries conducted by the User.

Hazardous substances naturally occurring in plants, soils, and rocks (e.g., heavy metals, naturally occurring asbestos, or radon) are not typically considered in these investigations. Similarly, construction debris (e.g., discarded concrete, asphalt) is not considered to be of concern unless observations suggest that hazardous substances are likely to be present in significant concentrations.

Phase I – 6615, 6621, & 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway At torney - Client Privileged and Attorney Work Product Material 1 2 INTRODUCTION
SCS Engineers (SCS) was retained by Carmel Partners Realty Investors, LLC (Carmel Partners or the “User”) to prepare a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I ESA) of the Market Place Long Beach Office Park located at 6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach, California (the “Property”). A location map for the Property is presented as Figure 1 in Appendix A.

Long Beach City CouncilSeptember 19, 2023

Long Beach City Council
September 19, 2023