1998-5633 G ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
;. Capital Improvement Projects
city Of District Support Services
Encinitas Field Operations
Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance
Subdivision Engineering
Traffic Engineering
April 2, 2003
Attn: Safeco Insurance Company of America
2677 North Main Street
Suite 100
Santa Ana, California 92705 -6623
RE: Janis Maloy
1769 Crest Drive
APN 262 - 032 -16
Grading Permit 5633 -G
Final release of security
Permit 5633 -G authorized earthwork, storm drainage, and erosion control, all needed to
build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the grading.
Therefore, release of the security deposit is merited.
Performance Bond 6057168, in the amount of $38,014.00, is hereby fully exonerated.
The document original is enclosed.
Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633-
2779 or in writing, attention this Department.
Sincerely,
Masih Maher ay embach
Senior Civil Engineer Finance Manager
Financial Services
Cc: Jay Lembach, FinanceManager
Janis Maloy
Debra Geishart
file
enc.
TEL 760 - 633 -2600 / FAX 760 - 633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 TDD 760- 633 -2700 recycled paper
CITY OF ENCINITAS
APPLICANT SECURITY DEPOSI RELEASE
Vendor No.
Depositor Name: \
Phone N �J �� � 7
Address: ��U/ �
*
State Zip
DEPOSIT DESCRIPTION:
1. MEMO PROJECT NUMBER
2. RELEASED AMOUNT:
3. DEPOSIT BALANCE: $�
1
Notes: &J /420--
AUTHORIZATION TO RELEASE: Project Coordinator
Date
Supervisor Date
Department Head Date
DEPOSIT BALANCE CONFIRMED: Finance Dept
Date
GENERAL PROJ. # BRIEF DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
LEDGER # (25 Characters limit)
101- 0000 - 218.00 -00 ------ Security Deposit - _ _ _ _ _ _
TOTALS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS CLAIM REPRESENTS A APPROVED FOR PAYMENT
JUST CHARGE AGAINST THE CITY OF ENCINITAS
PROCESSED BY FINANCE
DEPARTMENTAL APPROVAL
DATE OF REQUEST DATE
DATE CHECK REQUIRED Next Warrant
JN9 7-018B
: ..... ; .... .:vur :::::::::::::::::::: December 3,1998
.....:....... P age 1 of 5
c..+v'ri_ �.NC- �r•�er- miNc>• �UP`YET,Y'IR7Ci • !l_ ?1F�11�tt3�+ ;
.:.:.:.:..::.:.:.:.:.:..::.:.:.:.:.:..::.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:..::.:..
DEC " 3 r1w
Hydrology Calculations and Drainage Design By:
RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
. wq�b11 ►toucff /�
•:7�,. P,r-{, HIV •� •fi"
Brian Donald, RCE 26175 •� " ° '' ° °''`
License Expires 3/31/02 �, o° •.
JOB
RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT CORP SHEET NO. Z _ OF
531 Encinitas Blvd. #201
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024 CALCULATED BY W DATE
(760) 942 -1106 FAX 60) 942 -2514 CHECKED BY ` DATE
SCALE
Lill
�1� Q
' N
— S02v9'2TE iou5f
r
PRODUCT 26 (Slnok Sheets) 205 1(Pad6ed)
JOB
RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT CORP SHEET NO. OF
523 ENCINITAS Blvd. #204 ///
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024 CALCULATED BY DATE _(,.c4-h0p
(619) 942 -1106
CHECKED BY DATE
SCALE
TADi: 2
mmorr rorrrIrWITS (RATIONAL HET1100)
DEVELOPED AREAS �UROAFIZ
coeff i c ien t. c
Land Use Soi Group (1)
D }�
Residential; A 0 C
Single ramiiy 4 0 - .45 - .5 55
Multi -Units . 4 5! .50 .60 .70
Ilob i l e home s 45 .50 .55 65
Rural (lots greater than 112 acre) ..30 .35 . .45
Cotmiercia1(7) .70 75 .80 85
80'y Impervious
1ndustrIa1(2) .80 .85 90 95
90% 1mpervio0S
IIUTES i r
(I) . , oil Group mans nre nvnllnhie at the offices of the Department of Public Works.
( actual conditions devi:>tte significantly from the tabulated Impervious-
ness values of 80% or 90 %, ,the value; given for coefficient C, may be revised
by multiplylnq 80„', or 90% by the ratio of actual lmpervioushess to the
tabulated Imperviousness. Ilowever, In no case shall the final coefficient
be less than 0.50. For example: Consider commercial property on 1)soil.group,
Actual imperviousnes3 - 50'x,_
Tabulated imperviousness - 80);
Revised c - 5 x 0.85 0.53
Iv -A -9
AprUID1 x ix-0
Rev. 's/81
PRODUCT 204.1 )Single Sheets) 205 1) Padded) ®ee Inc. Groton. Mass. 01471 To Order PHONE TOLL FREE 1 NO 225 6360
JOB 9 / '
RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT CORP.
531 Encinitas Blvd. #201 SHEET NO. of
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024 CALCULATED BY 3 17 DATE 3
(760) 942 -1106 FAX (760) 942 -2514
CHECKED BY DATE
SCALE
03- Dec -98
HYDROLOGY CALCULATION
0100= 'C *I *A
A=: 0.63 Acres See Attached Drainage Area Map
C = . 0.55
1= ! 5.00 - inches /hour (Max intensity forTc < 10 minutes)
Q100 = 1.73 CFS
PIPE CAPACITY CALCULATION
Maximum Capacity of PVC Pipe Flowing Just Full
Qmax = ((1.486) *(A) *(R *'.6667) *(S ** 5))1(N)
For 6" PVC Pipe at 8 % Min'
r= 0.25 ft
A = 3.14 *(r* *2) = 0.20 sq ft
R = A!P = 0.125 ft
S
N = 0.012
Qmax = 1.72 CFS 01(
6" PVC @ 8% MIN GOOD FROM TYPE "F" INLET TO DISPERSION PIPE
r) 5�rle 1 e -r" 1 /—
� F
C. V. 6 1 s on,
MOM 204 1(ShVie Sh,,Isl 2% 1 (Palled(
JOB I ( ^ d1f x )
RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT CORP.
• SHEET NO. �1 OF
531 Encinitas Blvd. #201 ^J
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024 CALCULATED BY DATE (760) 942 -1106 FAX (760) 942 -2514
CHECKED BY DATE
SCALE
03- Dec -98
HEAD LOSS CALCULATIONS
Q100 = 1.73 cfs
FRICTION LOSS
H = ((4.66) * (N * *2)'(Lr(Q� *2))l(d *(1613))
For 12 - 2" Diam PVC Pipe through Wail
d= 0.167 ft'
ft
Q= (Q100)!12 = 0.14 cfs
N = 0.012
H1= 0.29 ft
For 70 I.f. 8" PVC
d= 0.667 ft
L = 70.00 ft
Q Q100 1.73 cfs
N = 0.012
H2 = 1.22 ft
TOTAL FRICTION LOSS IN 8" PIPE AND 2" OUTLETS'
Mot 1-11 +H2= 1.51 ft
= 32� '32t:5 cm- Z -p- o�
E " JA441Aj u
PROIHIOT 201 -, (SFigle SNPIs) 205 (PWW)
No W *`C"S
COAST GEOTECHNICAL 414-t
' CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
April 7, 1999
1
' Steve Maloy
1769 Crest Drive
Encinitas, CA 92024
t Subject: GEOLOGIC RECONNAISSANCE 3
Por. Lot 25, Blk E, and Por. Blk F
' Map 2114
1769 Crest Drive
Cardiff, California
1
' Dear Mr. Maloy:
In response to your request and in accordance with our Proposal and Agreement
' dated March 17, 1999, we have performed a geologic reconnaissance study on the
subject property.
From a geologic viewpoint, the site is suitable for the proposed development.
However, due to the limited scope of this study, additional recommendations and
testing may be necessary during the grading phase.
' If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at (619) 755 -8622.
This opportunity to be of service is appreciated.
' Respectfully submitted, EER //�/�,
COAST GEOTECHNICAL
W 2109
Mark Burwell, C.E.G. �
' Engineering Geologist
' 779 ACADEMY DRIVE • SOLANA BEACI I • CALIFORNIA 92075
(619) 755 -8622 • FAX (619) 755 -9126
u
e . .
�1
u
4
f
1 �
Pog
IL
I I Ey
ISO
IBM
two
IIJ
April 7, 1999
W.O. R- 2920.39
Page 3
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our geologic reconnaissance on the subject
property. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the geologic conditions on the site
and their influence on the proposed development.
1
SITE CONDITIONS
The subject property is located just north of Birmingham Drive, along the east side of
Crest Drive, in the Cardiff district, city of Encinitas. The western portion of the
rectangular lot is a relatively level graded pad which accommodates a single- family
residence. The eastern portion of the property descends for approximately 50 vertical
feet at varying gradients of 1 1 /2:1 to 5:1 with an overall gradient of about 4:1
(horizontal to vertical) to the top of an inland bluff. The east - facing inland bluff
descends an additional 170 ±, vertical feet at an overall gradient of about 3/4:1
(horizontal to vertical) to developed property adjacent to El Camino Real. The
property is bounded by a developed residential lot to the north and by a long
driveway adjacent to the southern property line.
' The eastern portion of the site is covered by a moderate to heavy growth of ice plant,
' shrubs and grass. Drainage is generally directed to the east by sheet flow.
' April 7, 1999
W.O. R- 292039
' Page 4
' PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
Grading plans for development of the site were prepared by Resource Development
Corporation. The project includes the construction of a 16 foot wide driveway
' extending approximately 300 lateral feet along the southern property line. Retaining
' walls, up to 7.0 feet, and drainage facilities are incorporated into the plans. Most of
the driveway will be on cut with a variable height, up to 7.0 feet, 2:1 (horizontal to
' vertical) cut slope along a portion of the driveway. A 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) fill
' slope and fill area is planned along the eastern extent of the project utilizing driveway
cut material.
Previous development includes a cut and fill pad along the eastern extent of the
' project. No geotechnical reports are known to exist for this grading therefore, the fill
deposits are considered undocumented.
GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
' The subject property is located in the Coastal Plains Physiographic Province of San
Diego county and is underlain by two major sedimentary rock formations. The upper
' slope area, above an approximate elevation of 300 feet, is composed of Pleistocene
' terrace deposits overlain by soil and isolated fill materials. The Pleistocene sands are
underlain by Eocene -age Torrey sandstone. A brief description of the earth materials
' observed on the site is discussed on the following page. g
1
t
' April 7, 1999
W.O. R- 292039
' Page 5
' Artificial Fill
The western building pad is underlain, in part, by a wedge- shaped fill which thickens
' to the east to perhaps 6.0 to 8.0 feet. Additional fill is present along the outside
' portion of the previously graded cut /fill pad at the eastern extent of the project. The
' depth of fill along the eastern fill slope appears to be on the order of 3.0 to 4.0 feet.
The fill is composed of locally derived silty sand deposits and are non - expansive.
' Soil
Undisturbed portions of the slope appear to be covered by a thin veneer of brown
' silty sand. Limited exposures suggest that the soil is less than 1.0 foot thick.
Terrace Deposits
' Underlying the surficial materials, poorly to moderately consolidated Pleistocene
' terrace deposits are present. The sedimentary unit is composed of poorly bedded,
reddish brown silty and fine - grained sandstone. The Pleistocene sands are weakly
' cemented and friable.
Torrey Sandstone
' Underlying the cap of Pleistocene terrace deposits and exposed along the rear bluff
P P g
' is whitish tan arkosic sandstone. The well indurated sedimentary rock has commonly
' been designated as Torrey Sandstone on published geologic maps. The sedimentary
unit strikes northeastward and dips gently to the northwest at 4 to 5 degrees.
April 7, 1999
W.O. R- 292039
' Page 6
Ground Water
No evidence of perched or high ground water tables were noted during our site
' review. However, the Pleistocene terrace deposits are relatively pervious and
' infiltrated water generally migrates down to and along the terrace deposit/Torrey
' Sandstone contact. This condition can create a perched water table above the
relatively impervious Torrey Sandstone. It should be noted that seepage problems can
' develop after completion of construction. These seepage problems most often result
' from drainage alterations, landscaping and over - irrigation. In the event that seepage
or saturated ground does occur, it has been our experience that they are most
' effectively handled on an individual basis.
Slope Stability
' The Pleistocene sands are poorly bedded but are generally considered to be flat - lying.
' The geologic orientation of the underlying Torrey Sandstone is favorable in regards
to deep- seated stability. However, the Division of Mines and Geology, 1995, has
' classified the rear slope as "generally susceptible" in regards to relative landslide
' susceptibility. This classification is probably based primarily on the steepness of
terrain rather than geologic orientation.
' Tectonic Settine
' The site is located within the seismically active southern California region which is
' April 7, 1999
W.O. R- 292039
' Page 7
' generally characterized by northwest trending Quaternary-age fault zones. Several of
these fault zones and fault segments are classified as active by the California Division
' of Mines and Geology (Al uist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act).
q q g
t The nearest active fault is the offshore Rose Canyon Fault Zone located y e approximately
' 4.5 miles southwest of the site. Other faults which could affect the site include the
' Coronado Bank, Elsinore, San Jacinto and San Andreas Faults. The proximity of major
faults to the site and seismic parameters are shown on the enclosed Earthquake Fault
' Analysis.
Liquefaction Potential
Liquefaction is a process by which a sand mass loses its shearing strength completely
' and flows. The temporary transformation of the material into a fluid mass is often
associated with ground motion resulting from an earthquake.
Owing to the moderately dense nature of the terrace deposits, and the anticipated
' depth to ground water, the potential for seismically induced liquefaction and soil
' instability is considered low.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
' Seismic Considerations
' Although the likelihood of ground rupture on the site is remote, the property will be
t
' April 7, 1999
W.O. R- 292039
' Page 8
' exposed to moderate to high levels of ground motion resulting from the release of
energy, should an earthquake occur along the numerous known and unknown faults
' in the region.
' The Rose Canyon Fault Zone is the nearest known active fault and is considered the
' design earthquake for the site. A maximum probable event along the offshore
' segment of the Rose Canyon Fault is expected to produce a peak bedrock horizontal
acceleration of 0.438 and a repeatable ground acceleration of 0.288.
' Grading Considerations
The existing fill deposits in the area of proposed development should be removed and
' replaced as properly compacted fill prior to placement of additional fill. All fill should
' be keyed and benched into competent terrace deposits. The proposed 2:1 cut slope
may expose existing fill deposits. It may be necessary to remove and replace these
deposits as properly compacted fill. The terrace deposits are rippable with
' conventional grading equipment. However, Torrey Sandstone, if encountered, is
dense and hard generally requiring heavier equipment in this regard.
' Foundations
' For design purposes, an allowable bearing value of 1500 pounds per square foot may
be used for footings founded into competent terrace deposits.
The bearing value indicated above is for the total dead and frequently applied live
' April 7, 1999
W.O. R- 292039
' Page 9
' loads. This value may be increased by 33 percent for short durations of loading,
including the effects of wind and seismic forces.
Resistance to lateral load may be provided by friction acting at the base of foundations
' and b passive earth pressure. A coefficient of friction of 0.
Y P P 35 maybe used with dead-
' load forces. A passive earth pressure of 250 pounds per square foot, per foot of depth
' of terrace deposits penetrated to a maximum of 1500 pounds per square foot may be
used.
' Retaining Walls
Cantilever walls (yielding) retaining a level or 2:1 surcharge may be designed for an
' active - equivalent fluid pressure of 35 and 43 pounds per cubic foot, respectively. Wall
footings should be designed in accordance with the foundation design
recommendations. All retaining walls should be provided with an adequate
backdrainage system. The soil parameters assume a granular backfill compacted to a
' minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density.
Driveway
' Our experience in the vicinity of the site suggests the terrace deposits reflect an R-
' value of 34. Therefore, the minimum section required by the city agencies is
considered adequate. However, the surficial deposits in the area of the proposed
' driveway should be removed and replaced as compacted fill. The pavement section
' April 7, 1999
W.O. R- 292039
' Page 10
' should be protected from water sources which could migrate into driveway subgrade
deposits.
' Additional Geotechnical Services
The parameters presented for design purposes are based on previous studies
' conducted b this firm. A eotechnical engineer y g e g veer and engineering geologist should
' evaluate subsurface conditions during grading and construction. Additional
' recommendations may be necessary.
' LIMITATIONS
' This report is presented with the provision that it is the responsibility of the owner
or the owner's representative to bring the information and recommendations given
' herein to the attention of the project's architects and /or engineers so that they may
' be incorporated into plans.
' If conditions encountered during construction appear to differ from those described
in this report, our office should be notified so that we may consider whether
' modifications are needed. No responsibility for construction compliance with design
g
' concepts, specifications or recommendations given in this report is assumed unless
' on -site review is performed during the course of construction.
' The conclusions and recommendations of this report apply as of the current date. In
time, however, changes can occur on a property whether caused by acts of man or
' April 7, 1999
W.O. R- 292039
' Page 11
' nature on this or adjoining properties. Additionally, changes in professional standards
may be brought about by legislation or the expansion of knowledge. Consequently,
' the conclusions and recommendations of this report may be rendered wholly P Y Y or
' partially invalid by events beyond our control. This report is therefore subject to
' review and should not be relied upon after the passage of two years.
t The professional judgments presented herein are founded partly on our assessment
of the technical data gathered, partly on our understanding of the proposed
' construction and partly on our general experience in the geotechnical field.
' However, in no respect do we guarantee the outcome of the project.
t
1
' Enclosures: Earthquake Fault Analysis
Regional Fault Map
Geologic Map (Rear Pocket)
' April 7, 1999
W.O. R- 292039
Page 12
' REFERENCES
' 1. Hays, Walter W., 1980, Procedures for Estimating Earthquake Ground Motions,
,
Geological Survey Professional Paper 1114, 77 pages.
1
2. Seed, H.B., and Idriss, I.M., 1970, A Simplified Procedure for Evaluating Soil
Liquefaction Potential: Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
' 3. Treiman, J.A., 1984, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone, A Review and Analysis,
California Division of Mines and Geology.
MAPS/AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS
' 1. California Division of Mines and Geology, 1994, Fault Activity Map of California,
Scale 1 "= 750,000'.
2. Geologic Map of the Encinitas and Rancho Santa Fe 7.5' Quadrangles, 1996, DMG
1 Open File Report 96 -02.
1 3. Resource Development Corporation, Grading Plan For Driveway - 1769 Crest
Drive, Cardiff, Scale 1 " =20'.
' 4. San Diego County Topographic /Orthophoto Survey, 1985, Map No. 314 -1689,
Scale 1" =200'.
' S. Siang S. Tan and Desmond G. Giffen, 1995, Landslide Hazards in the Northern
Part of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, California, DMG
Open File Report 95 -04, 8 Plates, Map Scale 1:24,000.
i
1
� ENCLOSURES
i
i
i
i
i
i
1
1
' DATE: Wednesday, April 7, 1999
****** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
* E Q F A U L T
* *
* Ver. 2.20
* *
****** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
' (Estimation of Peak Horizontal Acceleration
From Digitized California Faults)
SEARCH PERFORMED FOR: Maloy
' JOB NUMBER: P- 292039
' JOB NAME: Maloy
SITE COORDINATES:
LATITUDE: 33.03 N
' LONGITUDE: 117.26 W
SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi
' ATTENUATION RELATION: 2) Campbell & Bozorgnia (1994) Horiz. - Soft Rock
UNCERTAINTY (M =Mean, S= Mean +1 - Sigma): S
' SCOND: 0
' COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION
FAULT -DATA FILE USED: CALIFLT.DAT
' SOURCE OF DEPTH VALUES (A= Attenuation File, F =Fault Data File): A
1
-----------------------------
' DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS
-----------------------------
Page 1
MAX.
APPROX. ------------- - - - - -- -------------------
' ABBREVIATED DISTANCE MAX. PEAK SITE MAX. PEAK SITE
FAULT NAME mi (km) CRED. SITE INTENS PROB. SITE INTENS
MAG. ACC. g MM MAG. ACC. g MM
-------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
' BLUE CUT 84 (135) 7.00 0.029 V 6.00 0.012 III
-------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
BORREGO MTN. (San Jacinto) 63 (102) 6.50 0.028 V 6.20 0.021 IV
CAMP ROCK- EMER.- COPPER MTN - 99 - (160) 7.00 - 0.022 IV 5.80 0.008 II
-------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
' CASA LOMA_CLARK (S_Jacin.) 51 ( 83) 7.00 - 0_059 VI 7.00 0.059 VI
- - - -- - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
CATALINA ESCARPMENT 41 ( 65) 7.00 0.083 VII 6.10 0.038 V
-------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
' CHINO - 55 ( 89) 7.00 0.050 VI 5.40 0.014 IV
-------------------- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
CLAMSHELL- SAWPIT 90 (144) 6.60 0.017 IV 4.90 0.004 I
CORONADO BANK -AGUA BLANCA 19 ( 31) 7.50 0.288 IX 6.70 0.173 VIII
-------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
COYOTE CREEK (San Jacinto) 52 ( 83) 7.00 0.058 VI 6.10 0.026 V
CUCAMONGA 8 6.90 0.026 V 6.10 0.014 III
-------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
' ELSINORE 28 45 7.50 0.195 VIII 6.60 0.101 VII
ELYSIAN PARK SEISMIC ZONE 85 (137) 7.10 0.027 V 5.80 0.010 III
-------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
' GLN.HELEN -LYTLE CR- CLREMNT 56 - ( - 90) 7.00 0.052 - - VI -- 6.70 - 0_040 - - - V --
-------------------- - - - - -- - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - --
HELENDALE 90 (145) 7.30 0.034 V 5.50 0.007 II
HOMESTEAD VALLEY 99 - 7.50 0.035 V 4.80 0.003 I
-------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
' HOT S- BUCK RDG_(S.Jacinto) 53 ( 86) 7.00 0.056 VI 6.10 0.025 V
---- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
IMPERIAL - BRAWLEY 99 (159) 7.00 0.022 IV 7.00 0.022 IV
-------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
' JOHNSON VALLEY - 92 (148) 7.50 - 0_039 - - - V -- - 5_20 0.005 - - II --
-------------------- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - --
LA NACION 15 ( 24) 6.50 0.229 IX 4.20 0.042 VI
LENWOOD -OLD WOMAN SPRINGS 97 (156) 7.30 0.030 V 5.50 0.006 II
NEWPORT - INGLEWOOD (NORTH) 75 (121) 6.70 0.026 V 4.20 0.003 I
' -------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - -- - - -- - - - -- - - - -- - - --
NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD- OFFSHORE 13 ( 21) 7.10 0.334 S IX 5.90 0.153 VIII
NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE 86 (138) -- 7 - . - 70 -
70 0.052 VI 6.00 0.011 -- III -
------------------------- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
t PALOS VERDES HILLS - - - - - -- - 49 - ( - 79) 7.20 0.075 VII 6.20 0.031 V
PINTO MOUNTAIN - MORONGO 78 (126) 7.30 0.041 V 5.80 0.011 III
-------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - --
' -----------------------------
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS
Page
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
' MAX. CREDIBLE EVENT MAX. PROBABLE EVENT
APPROX ---- --------- - ----- ---- --------- ------
ABBREVIATED DISTANCE MAX. PEAK SITE MAX. PEAK SITE
' FAULT NAME mi (km) CRED. SITE INTENS PROB. SITE INTENS
MAG. ACC. g MM MAG. ACC. g MM
-------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
RAYMOND 88 (142) 7.50 0.036 V 4.90 0.004 I
' -------------------- - - - - -- --------- - - - -- - - - - --
ROSE CANYON 4 ( 7) 7.00 0.688 XI 5.90 0.427 X
-------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
' SAN ANDREAS (Coachella V.) 77 (125) 8.00 0_ - - -
078 VII 6.80 0.027 - - - V --
SAN ANDREAS (Mojave) 88 (141) 8.00 0.065 VI 7.40 0.038 V
-------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- ----- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
' SAN ANDREAS (S_ Bern_Mtn_) - 74 (120) 8.00 - 0_082 - - VII - 6.70 0.026 - - V --
-------- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- -
SAN CLEMENTE - SAN ISIDRO 51 ( 82) 8.00 0.138 VIII 6.50 0.039 V
SAND HILLS 93 - 8.00 0.060 VI - 6.60 0.017 IV
-------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
' SAN - DIEGO TRGH. -BAHIA SOL. 29 ( 47) 7.50 0.184 VIII 6.20 - 0_066 VI
----------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - --
SAN GABRIEL 93 (149) 7.40 0.035 V 5.60 0.007 II
-------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
' SAN GORGONIO - BANNING 67 (108) 7.50 0.055 VI 6.60 0.027 V
-------------------- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
SAN JOSE 77 (124) 6.70 0.025 V 5.00 0.005 II
SANTA MONICA - HOLLYWOOD 94 (151) 7.00 0.022 IV 5.80 0.008 III
-------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
' SANTA MONICA MTNS. THRUST 96 (154) 7.20 0.037 V 6.30 0.018 IV
SIERRA MADRE -SAN FERNANDO 80 (129) 7.30 0.036 V 6.30 0.016 IV
-------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
' SUPERSTITION HLS.(S.Jacin) - 82 - (132) 7.00 0.030 - - - V -- 6.10 0.013 -- III -
-------------------- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - --
SUPERSTITION MTN.(S.Jacin) 76 (123) 7.00 0.033 V 6.20 0.016 IV
------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
' VERDUGO - 91 (146) 6.70 - 0_018 IV 5.20 0.005 II
------------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - --
WHITTIER - NORTH ELSINORE 60 ( 97) 7.10 0.051 VI 6.00 0.019 IV
1
' -------------------- - - - - -- -- ----- - -- - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - --
( - - - - --
WILSHIRE ARCH 91 146 5.70 0.012 III 5.00 0.007 II
********************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
' -END OF SEARCH- 44 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS.
' THE ROSE CANYON FAULT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE.
IT IS ABOUT 4.5 MILES AWAY.
' LARGEST MAXIMUM- CREDIBLE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.688 g
LARGEST MAXIMUM - PROBABLE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.427 g
1
t
pp j gg Y i g 9
Z g b Hit � r
fl• 3• A p p i s S �
W E y V M 3 �� y !
' ?'�5a �F ss� y g s x -
�����5
�� -fa a � s � � I ?��n tL
~ q � q � yk Y � � LL€ ����3� � � �I• � 5 fr{ 'F � � a4
O
1 \�
v t 1��jj 'a• +�' a'i d � I/ '
rn�- � ��� i-a'� �'���. fir �.. 4's � — S � � ;��> � �/ e t ,; � \�`�� •��' i,_ _ r._� i
IN -1\ / /i.�/ lam •' / I� ! I�� y 7 - �
3 i' l f 1
cn
- / - 3 •�' , / � i /]v MME,, ! r /--' -, I � _�! � � - -- -�`. � � i � I .. 1 ,. .
1: &
/ A °.'s. ---� "-L �" \ - � "�'f i.. i
1 �= 1
1 ! d
i. N >� � •+r/ 1 4LL $ � 1 / I i I - ��. ���
. - j I \ � .Z�� N ��' t' Yom. �� � �� ��, iY /• 4 _ I'2 \ � //. / .B
y7� - 7 �-1 I t i•��} - c t , iwi � p � �/f -7 � _i 2 jr � �
y o$ • , 8 4. �' �.I: I � V: ��'. � `;. � � � / / - �,��
'z
lo�r
- '•r � _T 7`r � '� J / ri � O} � )/ i � /�/ X2/7`/ � ��^ �
/
i
90 t HM (09L — uoilmod oo juawdopoo oomosaa - joaui6u3
m
N �
V r•-•
. 4
XvW ab Mll. " V Z
m CC) _
i _ o ° LO U') O
w
U
o > > N <t Z
W U . LL!
OO
ch 0 . z 1 I n ®® ;'''' W Lr J
LLI 'Q
UP
Qy iii W w V OL
! iv o U
Qz
Ul
oz
cnk
ul
a
UZ
U_ 1 o •- — bsL N 40
v } x x Z
' o -� 1t\ � � c�iN W 1.3.1
Q i A z
-
i 0 10 X a
LU
° rn a �H a
U ^ Q
wa
i c '3•j 1 W 0� f� d � w
E'er v
o�
iC G7 r>
tq �$ 0 1 V O
ICML CL
a.
cm
OW
7 7 47. Uj
LLJ
Go m
Sm
Err
So
1
.. .,,. • . _ • ,,.,, �,,,�.. • . �
' -,°.� ':% :•: •.�:! /� :' :.�• • 'gip �,, ._.:. —, C..�
NI99A
�dMAlLi Cpl
T 1 z i :':': ::;:;�. ..: t; ti
z
ra
AG OC +G 7 b' N/lh
LLJ
CL o
Cc
uj
c c
cc
LLJ
CL
t
d
i ( z d z
CL
7 ,Yj
13 i
. L
— � .;� � ` !•9' _ = ' � I it
O t n u
LJLJ
cn
IY �[ IM --� ♦ , ,
LU
tj
1:::•'i ,
_ S . ;
J w \,,A
U .
CR
M Itt l '
60+1 CL-1
�. U
C14 Li
c14 '
CAD
,
L,N -.� 1 gy p• 1
-?--� C) - r
of
•9 !`'
_._ �� I `yam
T IV�^IA
� EXIS IN6 PGG � DR Y
m Grio 1
a 1 1 w 101.52 � ► � � • : � � ; . �. . ;, �`
S02 2rE
t wo
r--
MN
5.
FL
AMD
0