DIVISION OF MINES AND GEOLOGY€¦ · 02/06/1981 · DIVISION OF MINES AND GEOLOGY SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT OFFICE FERRY BUILDING SAN FRANCISCO, CA 9.4111 (Phone 415-557-0633) County

STATE" OF CAlrFORNIA-THE f:IESOURCES AGENCY -e-· -- ·-·~- ~ ··-

O!;PARTMENT OF CONSERVATION

DIVISION OF MINES AND GEOLOGY SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT OFFICE FERRY BUILDING

SAN FRANCISCO, CA 9.4111 (Phone 415-557-0633)

County Engineer-Facilities Engineering Geology Section 550 South Vermont Avenue Room 403 A Los Angeles, California 90020

Attention: Art Keene

Dear Art,

•. .. George Deukmejian IN>XU1NIX.U::B.~X1t, Gov•rrior

We are placing on open file the following report, presumably reviewed and approved by the County of Los Angeles in compliance with the Alquist!riolo Special Studies Zones Act:

Geology report, Tax Parcel 3052-20-15, E~ Lot 80, R,S. 64-32/35, Palmdale, CA; by lluena Engineers; June 2, l 981.

report was received With out a cover letter or review documenting that it was reviewed. If it has, please send of this ·for our file.

EWH:rys

cc: A-P file

Sincerely yours,

EARL W. HART Office of the State Geologist CEG 935

(

' \ i

t;:NGINEMING G~OLOGV SECTION

( j !?. ,.., Dist. Office C/

(213} '7~-2161 F _____)<_ NF ___ _

GEOLOGIC REVIEW SHEET SHEET I OF I

;:::~:~.;tpff r r~ 8 Location ~'~ . . -· Geologist &. .. a.... L::.~ . .

COUNTY O~ LOS ANGE: LE$ D!:.PARlMEN'f OF= ENG!NEE.R-FACI LITI ES

550 SO. VERMONT AVE .. LOS ANGELES. CA 90020

·····-· ·---·-··- .. ·cn-7'\·-- ...... -·· ·--- ·-- Developer/owner ...J/...~ ... C .e. .5.~ .. ~ ......... .

DISTRIBUTION: Z-oist_ Engineer J Geologist ·-·· Soils Er,gineer _./ 1. Geol. Sect. Fil.,.....-

··-- Grading Section Soils Engineer __ ... - ... -... . ..... .c;! _ Engineer

PLAN CHECK NO. OR DA TE 0!= H E.POHT(S)

Review of:

Action:

~~~~1~:;~,~ ~.~. ~:. t:. <;/ i;~ -----c-~1___ -~~~=~--::,-8~:--~ OGeologic Site lr1sµect1un 0!1ly P.C. Np,.~-"rt7-~=-~Geologic Report Dated "1 -2 -c'j / @ ~18Ct}' ·Z:_?; !_)_ OSoils Report Qated ....... _ ·-.. · .. --. OGeology & Soils Report Oated ______ _

CJ Plan is geologically approved

IH1>1an approved geologically subject to conditions below

()iloSec. 309 Code requiromonts mot (o'"""'1rt) .............. 0 Sec. 308(bl 3c & e code requirements met (not met)

D Plan is not approved for reasons below

DSubmit plans for recheck

Remarks: i. DA consulting Oen.gincr.ring geology, L.Jsoils engineerir1g1 Oreportls) is required

_________ ,, __ ··-"'

2. ,,3A11 recommendatior~s of tha consulting design or shown as notes on the plans.

~eologist,

·-····-·· _, ... __ ... _,, ___________ _ Dsoils engineer rnus.t be incorporated in the

3_ DThe plan must b~ s.pccifically approved by the Dconsultant geologist, Dconsultant soils engineer by Dletter-report and/or Dmanual signature(s) with datc(sl prior to approval by the Geology Section.

4. O In-grading Inspections must be made by the consulting Ogeologist, D soils engineer. Dlnspection reports must br- submitted to the Geology Section for review monthly.

5. DRough grading must be approved by a approval by the Geology Section.

Ofinal geology report, L.Jfinal soils engineering report prior to DAn As-Built Geologic Map must be included in the final geology report.

6. ~oundation and/or wall e-xcavations must be inspected and approved by the consulting engineer, prior to the placing of $tcel or concrete.

~·geologist,

7. l..JThe County Engineer Soils Erigirieet·ing Section's Dapproval is required Orr-quirements attached

Dconditions of approval are attached Dapproval attached (dated--------······-·-.. -~ )

8. OShow all proposed tentativP. c,;orrcctive devices (e.g. buttress. stability fills, subdrains, etc) on the plan.

9. 0Add items .. -.,,-------- and ··~---------- , above-, as notes to the plan.

Osoils

Prepared byJ.2~. t:: :Z""'-'-'----F--'+--- _ Reviewed by ___ _ -----~•t• Ii~ :>I' • "~

ENGINEEA.l~G GEOLOGY SECTION

(213) 738-2161

,., I j

. '

GEOLOGIC REVIEW SHEET COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

DE:.PARTMENT OF ENGINEEA-F"ACILITU:.S

550 SO. VERMONT AVE .• LOS ANGELES, CA 90010

Tract/PM --------- --·-----~=--~ --~~-------- ________ _ ~~:.~:~r·~~p?Zll-- --z=_---t --~ 't) -TI ---11

Geologist 81, e,y.,. ~· F~_ f7--,;,~-: L• I Developer/owner :::::V.e.=t= ;~;::;:;_;-e;;::_ Soils Engineer_ ..... , ......... _________ ,-.. ---·· Engineer ____________ _

PLAN CHECK NO. OR OATE OF REPORTISI

Review of: 0Grading P.C. No. _____________ _

IZJBuilding P.C. No.-----6_1...S--K ___ ~------------

Dist. Office Y, '-' F ---· '"·-NF ~£-'"~--SHEET I 07

DISTRIBUTION: k-Dis.t. Engineer

/Geologist _Soils [ngineer

/.Geo!. Sect. Fi!J _ Grading Section

DGeologic Site Inspection Only P.C. No. __________ _ -··------- -------~logic Report Doted C, r :;?_ -lL f

DSoils Report Dated OGeology & Soils Report Dated __ _

Action: 0 Pian is geologically approved

0 Plan approved geologically subject to conditions below

~-Code requirements met {1 • r O

OS.c. 308(b) 3c & e code requirements met (not met)

~t approved for reasons below

~bmit plans. for recheck

1) Pn"lr'th CZ....... ~C,,A,.__./L -1--o - J ~ /7{_0 r /Rlo.v . r;.~ 5c_cJk_ ) ~ /"(a«- ~fo_e;t /;; n, ?' ~,.. rer r;::a,_ ~h....r1f µce,,,~1£,;,r . S-v-~r.-IJ;t /. ~ ifk r-- ~··_,, 4 /;{.__ ~~;~ 7 ~ ~ ~£,,._ JfH

.l'kuS f- ~ p YI o·,- • _,._,

~ 7)

Prepared by

7&G30A - PS 3-82

2-- 2J- 7 _r,_

I I ..

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

...

GEOLOGY REPORT

TAX PARCEL 3052-20-15

EJ.s, LOT 80, R.S. 64-32/35

PALMDALE, CALIFORNIA

B-1860-LOl

June 2, 1981

BUENA ENGINEERS, INC.

I I ...

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

Engineers, ln1:.

42326 ·10th STREET WEST • P.O. BOX 2866 • LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA 93534 • PHONE (805) 948-7538

June 2, 1981

Mr. Leo DeMonte 19449 Wells Drive Tarzana, CA 91356

Mr. DeMonte:

Subject: Geology Report Tax Parcel 3052-20-15 E~, Lot 80, R.S. 64-32/35 Palmdale, California

B-1860-LOl

Presented herewith is our Geology Report performed as authorized for Tax Parcel 3052-20-15, Palmdale, Los Angeles County, California.

Recommendations for general site development with respect to observed site geologic conditions are included. The conclusions and recommendations contained herein were based upon the applicable standards of our profession at the time this report was prepared. Copies are furnished only to provide the data which were gathered and which are summarized in the report,

Please contact the undersigned if there are any questions concerning this report or the recommendations in~luded herein.

Respectfully submitted,


~J!. Mark S. Spykerman Staff Geologist

Rw~~ ~hae1 v. 'mith

MSS/MVS/smn

cc: 6 - DeMonte 1 - file

ENGINEERING OFACES:

FIELO OFFICES:

VENTURA (805) 64U727

THOUSAN 0 OAKS (8051 49f>.8484

SANTA BARBARA 18051968-9912

R. G, #3273, E.G. #956

PALM SPRINGS (7141328-9131

LANCASTER (805) ..... 7538

SAN LUIS OBISPO (805) 5441-6187

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

June 2, 1981 - 1 - B-1860-LOl

INTRODUCTION

In this report we present the results of a geology report for the

subject parcel in accordance with Section 308-311 of the Los

Angeles County Building Code, The study was conducted in accord

ance with authorization by Mr. Leo DeMonte on May 4, 1981, The

purpose of the study was to review fault and related geologic

hazards pertaining to proposed site development. Recommendations

are provided relative to the proposed construction of one single

family residence. Minimal site grading is anticipated.

The site geologic conditions were investigated in the field and

through selected technical publications. Conclusions regarding

the site are based on the data collected and form the basis for

the recommendations presented.

FIELD EXPLORATION

The site reconnaissance and field exploration for this project

was conducted on May 19, 1981. Field work consisted of the

excavation of one exploration trench approximately 300 feet in

length and extending from approximately five to six feet below

the existing ground surface. The approximate location of the

trench is shown on the Site Plan, Plate I. The trench was

excavated with a tractor mounted backhoe and was oriented

approximately perpendicular to the general trend of faulting

in the area. Portions of the walls and bottom of the trench

were cleaned of loose or smeared soil and graphic log compiled

illustrating the approximate locations and orientations of

pertinent features observed. The log is included as Plate II

of this report. Previous geologic mapping prepared by Barrows,

et. all (1976) was also utilized to aid in interpretation of

the site geology.



. June 2, 1981 - 2 - B-1860-LOl

The Site Plan, Plate I of this report was prepared utilizing

pace and compass measurements from existing street and topo

graphic features. The location of details shown on the Site

Plan, including the trench, contours, and drainage courses

should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by

the method used, The Site Plan is not a detailed site survey.

SITE DESCRIPTION

The + 1.2 acre parcel is located immediately south of Avenue

T-8 approximately 600 feet west of 37th Street East, Palmdale,

California. Access is from Avenue T-8 which is a graded dirt

road.

Topographically, the site slopes gently to the north except in

the northeast portion of the lot where the topography rises to

form a southerly trending ridge. Maximum relief is approximately

20 to 25 feet. Several intermittant drainage courses cross the

site approximately as shown on the Site Plan.

At the time of our field investigation, the site was vacant with

no improvements. Vegetation consisted of native weeds and

grasses with occasional junipers and joshua trees.

GEOLOGIC SETTING

The project site is located at the base of the San Gabriel Moun

tains in Southern California. The San Gabriels are a part of

the Transverse Ranges which

across Southern California.

extend in an east-west direction

Rocks

Ranges consist of extremely complex

composing the Transverse

folded and faulted rocks

varying from Pre-Cambrian gneisses to modern alluvial deposits.

North of the San Gabriel Mountains is a vast area of deserts

and mountain ranges comprising the Mojave Desert. Pre-Cambrian,

Paleozoic, and Mesozoic rocks overlain by extensive Cenozoic

lake and fluvial deposits are encountered in this area. Dividing

BUENA. ENGINEERS, INC.


June 2, 1981 - 3 - B-1860-LOl

the Transverse Ranges from the Mojave Desert is the San Andreas • rift zone.

The San Andreas rift zone, which is up to 6,000 feet wide, domin

ates the landscape in the Palmdale area with classic fault features

and geologic structure. Right lateral offset of many streams and

gullies averaging 10 to 13 feet apparently records the most recent

fault movement along this portion of the main trace of the San

Andreas fault, which occured in 1857. Abundant smaller but· potent

ially active faults within the San Andreas rift zone lie north of

the main trace of the San Andreas fault. These include the Little

rock fault, Cemetery fault, and abundant subsidiary faults. Qllater

nary movement is locally evident along these faults.

SITE GEOLOGY

The site is located at the southern edge of the Mojave Desert at

the foot of the San Gabriel Mountains. The major geologic features

in this area is the San Andreas fault zone which is the result of

crustal plate interaction between the North American and Pacific

crustal plates. Movement within this zone is responsible for the

irregular topography and the deformation and faulting of lith

ologic units within the fault zone. Rock units encountered on

the site consist of Quaternary sediments, and Tertiary sedimentary

rocks. These include from oldest to youngest, the Anaverde Forma

tion, Nadeau Gravel, older alluvium, and Holocene alluvial deposits.

A description of the units encountered is as follows:

Anaverde Formation (Pliocene)

The Anaverde Formation consists of continental sediments

derived· from source areas located to the north. Due to

movements within the San Andreas fault zone, members of

the Anaverde Formation are typically folded and faulted

and contain abundant internal shears. Only the red arkose

member (Tar) is exposed in this parcel. This member con-

sists of tan to reddish tan, fine to medium grained arkose

which is poorly to moderately bedded, and severely weathered.



· June 2, 1981 - 4 - B-1860-LOl

On this parcel the red arkose member is in fault contact with

younger Quaternary sediments,

Nadeau Gravel (Pleistocene)

The Nadeau Gravel (Qn} is a continental deposit commonly less

than 25 feet thick, composed of poorly stratified reddish brown

to brown sand, sandy gravel, and cobbles. The unit at this

location is typically composed of unconsolidated to poorly

consolidated interbedded lenses of clayey fine to coarse sand

and gravelly sand, The predominate clast type is Pelona Schist

with minor quantities of quartz, gneiss, and granitic clasts.

Older Alluvium (Pleistocene)

The older alluvium (Qoa) consists of reddish brown to tan fine

to medium sand with minor gravel. The deposits appear to be

fine to medium sand with minor gravel. The deposits appear

to be less than ten feet thick and overlie the Anaverde red

arkose.

Holocene Alluvium

Holocene alluvium on the site consists of slope wash and coll

uvium (Qsw) and recent alluvium (Qal). Slopewash and colluvium

consist of unconsolidated sand and gravel transported downslope

by mass wasting and runoff. Recent alluvium consists of fluv

ial sand and gravel deposited in present day drainage channels,

FAULTS

The project is located within the San Andreas rift zone which includes

the San Andreas, Littlerock, Nadeau, and Cemetery fault zones. The

subject parcel is within the Littlerock fault zone, which in this

area is up to 1,000 feet wide. Additional faults within the general

vicinity of the site include, the San Andreas fault 1,300 feet south

of the site, the Nadeau fault 3,600 feet south of the site, and the

Cemetery fault 3,000 feet north of the site. All referenced distances

are approximate.



June 2, 1981 - 5 - B-1860-LOl

Results of the on-site trenching indicated that at least three

significant faults within the Littlerock fault zone cross the

site. Offset and disruption of Quaternary alluvial units

indicates that the faults are active or at least potentially

active.

Historically, the Palmdale area has experienced ground rupture

and severe ground shaking from moderate to great earthquakes

which have occured in the general vicinity. lntensity maps for

the past major earthquakes indicate the area experienced intens

ities as great as Vll to VIII based on the modified Mercalli

Scale. This assumption is in line with estimated intensities

felt during the 1857 Fort Te:jon Earthquake. Based on a hypothe

tical great earthquake centered near Littlerock, California (Gates,

1972), the Palmdale area could experience Modified Mercalli inten

sities as great as XI. A description of the damage which can be

anticipated based on the Modified Mercalli Scale is presented on

Table l of this report. It should be noted that the level of

damage predicted by the Modified Mercalli Scale is based on past

experience of a given earthquake on buildings not designed to

present building standards. Damage to structures designed to

current standards is expected to be less. However, possible

structural damage should be anticipated to structures constructed

within this area due to the potential for severe ground shaking.

other potential hazards include minor flooding and erosion within

the on-site intermittant drainage courses during peak periods of

rainfall. Potential damage due to flooding and erosion can be

mitigated by appropriate site grading during construction. Due

to the site location, generally moderate topography, and lith..,

ologic units encountered on-site, other geologic hazards including

landslides, settlement, and slippage are not expected to adversly

affect the site or the proposed improvements.



June 2, 1981 - 6 - B-1860-LOl

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the field reconnaissance, tr.enching, and literature

review, it is our professional opinion that the primary geologic

hazards relative to site development for residential purposes

are fault rupture, ground shaking, flooding, and erosion. No

obvious ground rupture or other evidence of recent ground move

ment was observed across the delineated "Building Area". Traces

of the Littlerock fault project through the property approximately

as shown on the Site Plan. In our opinion, construction within

the area designated as the "Buildable Area" should meet the mini

mum requirements of Section 311 of the Los Angeles County Building

Code. If construction for human habitation is intende:'!outside

the area designated, additional exploration should be required

to verify the absence of faulting at the additional building

location.

The site is located ~ithin the San Andreas rift zone. Therefore,

there is a potential for structural damage to any building in this

area due to severe ground shaking. It is our opinion that a sign

ificant seismic event and related effects resulting from move

ment within the San Andreas fault zone will occur in this area in

the lifetime of the proposed structure. Ground rupture would

most likely occur along previously established zoned of weaknessi

however, them is no guarantee that ground rupture will not occur

at other locations. Earthquake intensities as great as XI based

on the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale should be anticipated

during severe seismic activity.

Possible flooding and erosion may occure in the vicinity of the

on-site drainage courses. Proper site management should mitigate

this potential hazard. As the .delineated "Buildable Area" is

relatively flat, sewage disposal by leachfield should not adversly

impact the slope stability of the site.



June 2, 1981 - 7 - B-1860-LOl

Based on the findings summarized in this report, it is our opinion

that the delineated "Buildable 11,rea" is not subject to a geologic

hazard from landslides, settlement, or slippage as defined in

Section 309 of the Los Angeles County Building Code. It is also

our opinion that the proposed building and anticipated site

grading will not affect the geologic stability of the site or

adjacent properties per Section 309, provided the recommendations

in this report are followed.

RECOMMENDATIONS

It is recommended that any on-site construction for human occup

ancy be confined to the area designated as the proposed building

location. Additional trenching should be required for construction

outside of this area. A 25 foot offset from projections of the

identfied faults is recommended.

Construction design should allow for all plumbing and utility

services to be connected with flexible connections and provided

with convenient shut-offs. It is recommended that residential

structures be designed to at least minimum code standards for

Seismic Zone 4 as designated by the latest edition of the Uniform

Building Code. Structural design should be reviewed for compli

ance with applicable seismic codes.

Grading Plans, if required, should be reviewed by the project

Engineering Geologist. All site grading should be in accord

ance with applicable building codes. Positive measures should

be taken to divert runoff away from the building site and other

future improvements.



June 2, 1981 - 8 - B-1860-LOl

LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS

The analysis and recommendations submitted in this report are based

in part upon the data obtained from one (1) exploration trench and

site reconnaissance. The nature and extent of variations beyond

the trench may not become evident until construction. If variations

then appear evident, it will be necessary to reevaluate the recom

mendations of this report.

In the event that any changes in the nature or location of the

building are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained

in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes

are reviewed and conclusions of this report modified or verified

in writing.

This report is issued with the understanding that it is the respon

sibility of the owner, or .of his representative to insure that the

information and recommendations contained herein are called to the

attention of the architect and engineers for the project and incorp

orated into the plan and that the necessary steps are taken to see

that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations

in the field.

The Engineering Geologist has prepared this report for the exclusive

use of the client and authorized agents. This report has been pre

pared in accordance with generally accepted engineering geology

practices. No other warranties either expressed or implied are

made as to the professional advice provided under the terms of

this agreement, and included in the report.



.. . .. ' . June 2, 1981 - 9 - B-1860-LOl

It is recommended that the engineering geologist be provided the

opportunity for a general review of site grading plans if required,

and site development during the site grading phase. (lf the eng

ineering geologist is not accorded the privilege of making bhis

recommended review, he can assume no responsibility for misinter

pretation of his recommendations.)

END o F T E X T

Appendixes

BUEMA EMGIMEERS, IMC.


TABLE I

MODJFJEO MERCALU INTENSITY SCALE Of 1931' (1956 vcrsion>J

Mnonry A. B, C. 0. To avoid .ambiguily of language. the qu:dity uf masonry, brick ur ull1crwise, 15 specified by the following lcllcring.

Masonry A. Good workmanship, mortar, ;ind dnign; rc:inforced, especially laterally. and lmond lui;cll1cr by u>ing •led, cuncu:l1>, de.; designed lo rcsi~I lateral forces. ·

Mosonry B. Goud workmanship and morlar; reinforced, bul nol dc•igncd jq

delail lo resist falcral forc;es. · i1u)unry C. Ordiniilry '"ork1nans.hip and rnurl.ar; nu e.)l;lrc;rnc wcakncs.se:s like

failing lo lie in al comers, but ncilher rcinforo:cd nor desii:ncd ai:ainsl huri%onlal for· c:es.

Musonry D. Weak materials, such as adobe; pour mortar; low slandards of work· m"nd1ip; weak l1ori%unlally.

I. Noi hill. tw':iil.rgin.al and 1ong~po1iod clfcc.li or l4111go 1C.ilr'U1q""''-es.

II. feh b.)' per~ns at re,:t. on upper fktors. at f;mwt.abJy p~ced.

UL Fe-n indoor.sr H11nging <Jbjrcls. swing, Vibril1il):!'fl Uke p.a:.i.'!.og Of tight huck.$. Dur-11lion e51ima1o4. May not bo •acogni.ie-d aS. an t=arthquak• ..

rv. Hanging objecl1o awing. \fi.bration like p41t:~lng ol ht:a"Y trucks~ or se.n~~1ion of,. Joh like* hcai-yy b,,n "hiking the w.alls~ St11nd'..ng mo1oll' c:.ata. 1ock. Wil\dowi. didles. doors rattle. Gla"S.s.e5 c:lint. Crockery c.la5hes. ln the upper Jarip• or tV wooden Wiilk •nd ,, .. mfJ c1eak. -v. FcJt ouldObls: dire.c:•ion e5.1im11lod. s•eepefs. wakcocdT -Liquid:(. di1-1u1ba:d. ~me !!.pilled. S!f1aU un. stiibl• objects. di$p1aced or ups.et. Doofs swing. c105e 1 open.. ShuUers1 p'iclu'e' moV"e~ -Penduh;m c~"s ""1op, Jiilar1. c"h•no• t•••. -· VL Feb. b)' au. Many ftighlen•d •r'\d tun OUldoor&T Pers.ans. watk unS.l1!•d•11. W.rtdOWlll'S., di,,,hcs.. gl.ilii.:!w-A•• btQ\on.·Knic.kkn~cks. bociks, eu: .... otr i~otvc$. Pictu1e-1o oil wall$. Fu1ttU1.1r• mo¥od 01 o""eth . .i1"f"d. V.'eak pla~•er .and ma5"0n:t)' 0 CfeCkedT Srnt1U bells tiog (c.hi.ucl). a.choOI). Tft:cs. bu:IJ\e5o a.ha\\eri "visibly. or heard lo 1us1le.

- Vil. Difficule to slaltd'. NoUced by dtlYers or rnolor c•ff.. Hanging objeCl.S quiver. f\;rnilur• brok•n. Doam~ge lo n-i.a:i.onfJ D, lncluding ci•c~s. Wll!liD\ chimneys brok~n •t 1001 lin•+ f'all of pla51er. lo0:1ot9 ;,,ricli;s. stoOol!.$ 0 lilo.s. cotniceJ a•so :.:~.~ .. aced P•'~pols. and .-1chileclutal oui.:i.m•nts. Sorn• CfACks in "'""~nty C. Waves on pot'lids; w•1•r ti.Jrbid wilh ~ud:. SmaD slidtS1" And c•vi.ng In along sand or gr•'Hll banl5. Large bells fKra~ Conc1~1• lltiQ.aljaB dih:hes d ... maged.

VIII. Stporing or molor c.•~ .aUacted. 041.m•o• lo ~il.SORty C; P•nial eou:~p .... SQ.Me. dam.ge lo m•sonty 8; none lo ma1'0nN' A.. FaU of s•uc<:o •nd 1iOm• masonry w•Hs.. Twis.Ung. faU or chimnoys. l•cfott ~.ckst monumonts. ~cwcus. elevated lanka. fr ... m• hOl.i5ie.• moved on loundalions If "OI bollod do""": loon panel ••1ls lhrown out. Decayed pUing bl-ok•n orf. Bt ... nches broken from 11ees. Ch.ang•Ji lft f\Qw or tempat;;t.tLlt• of 5ptings and w•Us. Ct•Ckli in •e'l gtound •tad on 51.e•p slopes.

IX.. G•ner.-1 p•nic. Ma:1o1;1NJ' D de5tro,-.d: "'•50AIJ' C h••Yllt d•m•o..S. 50metimes wllh comp .... con.apse; rn•~ B li~rious1.y d•m•ged. G•n81.aJ dam•O• to loundalion... Fram. !Jtruc:lur•• .. If ftOI bOh.•d. s11iifled otf lou.,.d.•tion&.,. F'•me• t•ckedT Sefious d•m•g• lo ••MllrYQita. Undergn)Uf'ld pipa9. tcok•n.. Cons.picuoua c:t•t=k• in prouttd. Jn •Ptni••d .a19•s _..air.Cl arid mud ejected, iear1hquak• lovft-. tain•. Nnd cralera..

x.. MO$l m:11ti0nl)" and h•me 51JU"dU:••• de1.troy•d 'With lhcllr lound111ions+ Som• weH~~lrt woodon s;:ltUC-1u1e1 a"d bridge• dt11s.llV}'•d.. Seriou .. damag• 10 darns. dila;•s. •rnbank"'9nt•. Large landslides.. W•••r thtown on b.nks or ca11.1lt. riv.rs. l•k•s. el..e. Sand ar"d mud s.hltl•d horizontally o" be•che• and flat land. A•Hs a>.nl aligh11J'.

XI. fl•lb llient o•••t'1. Underground pipeline-a compla1ely out .,, sef'Vic:•.

XII. Da.mao• noarJ;r l(Jl•l Lll•g• rock rna~s displ ... ced. Une• al sipht and lev91 di•lot1"'1. Ot>jecto th1owt1 Jnlo •hi• •1'.

•O.ig""aJ 1911 "'•rsi6tt .,_Wood. H. 0,. Ahd H11n11ft.,,,n. f' .. 1f31. Mo.difi•d MP~fk lnt•~•llr uat. ol l~.lt; S•J~n.OloJikM ~r.•1 o1 ...,,..,~ .. ,...,,,.,M. .... !.l... •- L ._. •n.111.

~19.56 ••si.:in p;itrpar.cf bJ" Ch&l'J.n f. R.idt.,et., 1111 CNtrt~a.ty S•i .. "'°lo'lll'· 19.s.I. pT 13J ... t3',, W .. H.,. F1e9tniflll A C::-..

Source: California Division of Mines ~nd Geology, 1975, Special Report 107.


June 2, 1981 B-1860-LOl

"

REFERENCES

1) Barrows, A.G., Kahle, J,E., and Beeby, D,J., 1976, Geology and Fault Activity of the Palmdale Segment of the San Andreas Fault Zone, Los Angeles County, California, CDMG Open File Report 76-6 LA.

2) California Division of Mines and Geology, 1969 1 Geologic Map of California, Los Angeles Sheet.

3) , 1975, California Geologic Data Map Series, Map No. 1, Faults, Volcanoes, Thermal Springs and wells.

4) , 1977, Fault Hazard Zones In California, S.P. 42, Revised January 1977.

5) , 1977, Active Fault Mapping and Evaluation Program, S.P. 47.

6) , 1979, State of California Special Studies Zone, Palmdale Quadrangle.

7) Dibblee, Thomas w., Jr., 1967 A.real Geology of the Western Mojave Desert, California, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 522.

8) Gates, G.E., 1972, The San Fernando Earthquake of February 9, 1971 and Public policy, Special Subcommittee of the Joint Committee on Seismic Safety, California Legislature, July 1972.

9) Kahle, J.E·., Smith, D.P., and Beeby, D.J., 1975, Geology of the Leona Valley Segment of the San Andreas Fault Zone, Los Angeles County, California, CDMG Open File Report 77-1 LA.

10) Noble, Levi F., 1953, Geology of the Pearland Quadrangle, California, U.S., Geological Survey, Geologic Quadrangle Map of the United States.

11) Sieh, Kerry E., 1978, Earthquake Intervals, San Andreas Fault, Palmdale, California, California Geology, June 1978.

•



---------..-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------.... North

0

5

15

l 0 5

0

15

10 20 30

, ______ - Qn-1 ~ - --

- --------

l 0 l a l 0

DISTANCE (FT) 50 60 70

~-- - -Qn-1 --:;--...____ ___ ~----

- .... ---~------ ~-- -

Possible gouge N66°w, 66°s

140 . 5

Apparent depositional

contact

--- .... ~/ .... _ ... _

DISTANCE {FT)

150 160 170 Medium

80

---

Fault _ __/

N70°W, 60°s

90 00

Brown Clayey sand with voids. (Qs¥l

Fault

N65°w,vertical

180 190 200 Brown silty fine to

sand (Qsw) ---

10 - . ·~ - - -:---D_r_a_iJf_a_g_e_

:------ --

__ ..-------- -- - - - - -SW - 1 - - ;.; -,...; • ..._--_.:-_: =. - - - - - - - - - --

_;. - - - - - - - -- - - - -.:: - - - - - f --------- --~:.:: ... : _ !- --:;.,.·:..:---->--- ~-- ::·.:. - -..... - - -- '

15

- ... ..:..__ -_-__ '---------:~- -- --Q<5a-_ ~-

~ ~ ~1. --- --- ~~-~~~=~~~~~~;~~~~::~~~~-=~--~~~---1 a.a' -~- - ~ -- __-. b.o"!\- -- - -- - - -.._ ~,. ,....- ,.. - .. - ... -~-.....

:.:~:f" __ .( ~-"--r.

£i?' • ~-- Ce~d~:d ca1iche ~~-=::;~St--__ s-~~--\___

seams Fault o o Fault ----N60 W, 59 S N65oW,

~

2 0 2 0 E-<

Vertical DISTANCE (FT)

20 20 20

South

2 0 2 0 270 2 0 90 !'><

:i:: 5 E-<

5 -------11< f>1 Cl

10 10

---·

LEGEND

W 1 - Bru.n silty sand with C)ravel and =bbles. V=rriably cerrented.

Qll-2 - Greenish brown fine to coarse sand with gravels and =!::bles, poorly bedded. J:oose to rredium dense.

Qsw - South of rrain drainage: liqllt reddish brown to brown silty fine to mediun sand. Itxlse to rredium dense North of rrain drainage: ~clayey fine to !'Edi.um sand.

Qoa - BrcMrl to light reddish tan silty fine to !Tedium sand with minor gra~l. Poorly b:>dded. MediU!l dense to dense.

lt!.deau Gravel

W - Dark reddish brown fine to rredium sand with clay. Abundant quartz float.

Ob! - Reddish brown clayey fine to rredi un sand with gravels and col::fil.es. cerented, very dense. Zone of illuviaticn.

()1-3 - Dark brown silty to slightly silty fine to coarse sand with gravel and =bbles. 't::derately bedded. I.oose to dense.

Anaverde Red Arkose

Tars - Residual soil deri~ fn:rn underlying arkose. Reddish broNn silty fine sand.

Tar-1- Redlish tan fine to mediun grained arkose. Severly weathered, friable.

Tar-2- Reddish tan fine to rrediun grained arkose. M:iderately ~thered, hard. Blocky structure.

Tax Parcel 3052-20-15 ~' Lot 80, R.S. 64-32/35

PAU>mrE, CALIFORNIA Plate II


DAff 6/2/!H JOB NCS-1860-l'.Dl


NOTE:

I }

I

. ·.

I r

---~,...--

• •

I

Qn n I

1 ''• so'

\__ ..

I __ J

Contours are for diagramatical purposes only. This is not a site survey.

LEGEND

Qal - Holocene Alluvium

Qsw Holocene Slopewash & Colluvium

Qn - Pleistocene Nadeau Gravel

Qoa/Qsw - Pleistocene Older Alluvium overlain by thin layer of slopewash and colluvium

Tar - Pliocene Avaverde red arkose

c~? - Lithologic contact: Dashed where approximate

.. ::=:.~ - Fault: Dashed where approxiarnte, dotted where concealed.

,;::=_:4 - Intermittant Drainage Course

~ - Denotes strike & Dip- of Bedding

>---; - Denotes approximate location of exploration trench.

Scale: l" = + 5 O '

Contour Interval + 5'

SITE PLAN & GEOLOGY MAP

Tax Parcel 3052-20-15

Palmdale, California Plate No. 1


6/2/81 JOB N0&-1860-Wl

Documents

DIVISION OF MINES AND GEOLOGY€¦ · 02/06/1981 · DIVISION OF MINES AND GEOLOGY SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT OFFICE FERRY BUILDING SAN FRANCISCO, CA 9.4111 (Phone 415-557-0633) County