Probabilistic Fault Displacement Hazard Evaluation, Section 2
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY WESTSIDE PURPLE LINE EXTENSION PROJECT, SECTION 2 ADVANCED PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING Contract No. PS‐4350‐2000 Probabilistic Fault Displacement Hazard Evaluation, Section 2 Prepared for: Prepared by: 777 South Figueroa Street, Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017 March 2017 Probabilistic Fault Displacement Hazard Evaluation, Section 2 Table of Contents Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... ES‐1 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.1 Scope of Work .................................................................................................................. 1‐1 1.2 Previous and Ongoing Investigations ............................................................................... 1‐1 2.0 TECTONIC SETTING ............................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.1 Santa Monica Fault .......................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.1.1 Description and Regional Setting of the Santa Monica Fault ............................. 2‐1 2.1.2 Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast Models of the Santa Monica Fault .................................................................................................................... 2‐2 2.1.3 Potential for Multi‐fault Ruptures ...................................................................... 2‐3 2.1.4 Results of Recent Investigations of the Santa Monica Fault .............................. 2‐4 2.1.5 Location of Santa Monica Fault Crossings .......................................................... 2‐5 2.2 Newport‐Inglewood Fault ................................................................................................ 2‐6 2.3 West Beverly Hills Lineament and Northern Extension of Newport‐Inglewood Fault .... 2‐7 2.4 Summary of Fault Activity for PFDHA .............................................................................. 2‐8 3.0 FAULT RUPTURE MODELS ..................................................................................................... 3‐1 3.1 Scenarios for Rupture of the Santa Monica Fault ............................................................ 3‐1 3.2 Scenarios for Rupture of the Newport‐Inglewood Fault ................................................. 3‐5 4.0 PROBABILISTIC FAULT DISPLACEMENT HAZARD ASSESSMENT .............................................. 4‐1 4.1 Methodology for Probabilistic Fault Displacement Hazard Analysis ............................... 4‐1 4.1.1 Approaches for Frequency of Fault Displacement ............................................. 4‐1 4.1.2 Characteristic Earthquakes and Maximum and Average Fault Displacement .... 4‐1 4.1.3 Probability of Rupture along Alignment ............................................................. 4‐2 4.1.4 Probability of Surface Rupture............................................................................ 4‐2 4.1.5 Probability of Secondary Displacement .............................................................. 4‐3 4.1.6 Selection of Primary versus Secondary Fault Displacement Models .................. 4‐3 4.1.7 Fault Displacement Models ................................................................................ 4‐4 4.2 Results of the PFDHA –Santa Monica Fault ..................................................................... 4‐4 4.2.1 Displacement Hazard for the Santa Monica Fault Rupture Scenarios ................ 4‐5 4.2.2 Mean Displacement Hazard for the Santa Monica Fault .................................... 4‐6 4.2.3 Return Periods for Santa Monica Fault Displacement Exceedance .................... 4‐9 4.3 Results of the PFDHA –Newport‐Inglewood Fault ........................................................... 4‐9 4.3.1 Displacement Hazard for the Newport‐Inglewood Fault Rupture Scenarios ... 4‐10 4.3.2 Mean Displacement Hazard for the Newport‐Inglewood Fault ....................... 4‐10 4.3.3 Return Periods for Newport‐Inglewood Fault Displacement Exceedance ....... 4‐12 4.4 Summary of Fault Displacement Parameters ................................................................ 4‐12 WESTSIDE PURPLE LINE EXTENSION PROJECT March 2017 Page ES-i Probabilistic Fault Displacement Hazard Evaluation, Section 2 Table of Contents 5.0 LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................................ 5‐1 6.0 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 6‐1 List of Tables Table 1: Fault Source Parameters from UCERF 3 Models .......................................................................... 3‐3 Table 2: Source Characteristics for Santa Monica Fault Rupture Scenarios .............................................. 3‐6 Table 3: Source Characteristics for Newport‐Inglewood Fault Rupture Scenarios ................................... 3‐8 Table 4: Santa Monica Fault rupture Scenario Parameters and Weights .................................................. 4‐6 Table 5: Mean Displacement Hazard for Santa Monica Fault ................................................................... 4‐9 Table 6: Expected Return Periods for Displacement Exceedance – Santa Monica Fault .......................... 4‐9 Table 7: Newport‐Inglewood Fault Rupture Scenario Parameters and Weights..................................... 4‐11 Table 8: Mean Displacement Hazard for Newport‐Inglewood Fault ....................................................... 4‐11 Table 9: Expected Return Periods for Displacement Exceedance – Newport ‐Inglewood Fault ............. 4‐12 List of Figures Figure 1: Quaternary Faults and Geomorphic Features ........................................................................... A‐1 Figure 2: Regional Extent of Fault Sources ............................................................................................... A‐2 Figure 3: Location of Quaternary Faults and UCERF 3 Fault Traces .......................................................... A‐3 Figure 4: Fault Segments for Santa Monica Fault Rupture Scenarios ....................................................... A‐4 Figure 5: Location of Modeled Fault Traces and Fault Crossings.............................................................. A‐5 Figure 6: Santa Monica Fault Rupture Scenarios ...................................................................................... A‐6 Figure 7: Newport‐Inglewood Fault Rupture Scenarios ........................................................................... A‐9 Figure 8: Geometry and Displacement Model for Strike‐Slip Faulting ................................................... A‐10 Figure 9: Santa Monica rupture Scenario Contributions and Total Mean Displacement Hazard ........... A‐11 Figure 10: Newport‐Inglewood Rupture Scenario Contributions and Total Mean Displacement Hazard ..... ...................................................................................................................................... A‐12 WESTSIDE PURPLE LINE EXTENSION PROJECT Page ES-ii March 2017 Probabilistic Fault Displacement Hazard Evaluation, Section 2 Executive Summary Executive Summary A portion of the alignment of Section 2 of the planned Metro Westside Purple Line Expansion (WPLE) is in an area of Beverly Hills where mapped and inferred Quaternary traces of the Santa Monica fault and a northern extension of the Newport‐Inglewood fault cross the tunnel alignment. To assess the potential impact of fault rupture to the tunnel, a probabilistic fault displacement hazard analysis (PFDHA) has been performed in accordance with the Metro Supplemental Seismic Design Criteria (Revision 9, 2015). The fault traces utilized in the PFDHA were input to a computational model to evaluate the various potential scenarios for fault rupture that could affect the WPLE. The Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF) 2 (WGCEP, 2008) and UCERF3 (Field et al., 2013) include alternative models for the location and extent of faults. These models were used as a basis for the fault model used in the PFDHA. The fault model for the PFDHA considered an eastern extension of the South Trace of the Santa Monica fault that, based on field investigations, is slightly relocated from the UCERF3 model of this fault. The potential fault crossings of the South Trace in the PFDHA model were located along Tunnel Reach 5, which is the portion of the WPLE between the Wilshire/Rodeo Station on the east and the Century City Constellation Station on the west. A fault identified by Metro (2017) along Lasky Drive was presumed in the PFDHA fault model to represent the location of the eastward extension of the South Trace of the Santa Monica fault. An inferred northern extension of the Newport‐Inglewood fault mapped by the California Geological Survey (2016) also may cross the subway tunnel alignment at Lasky Drive and was therefore included as part of the PFDHA fault model. The Santa Monica fault is part of a series of generally east‐west–trending active strike‐slip and reverse faults that extend along the southern margin of the Transverse Ranges mountains from offshore of Santa Monica to the northeastern margin of the Los Angeles Basin. The Uniform California Earthquake Probabilities