Download pamphlet (4.4 Mb PDF file)
To
accompany DS-177
u.s. Department
of the interior
u.s.
geological survey
Digital Database of
recently active traces
of the Hayward fault, California
by James J. Lienkaemper
The purpose of this map is to show
the location of and evidence for recent movement on active fault traces within
the Hayward Fault Zone, California.
The mapped traces represent the integration of the following three
different types of data: (1) geomorphic expression, (2) creep (aseismic fault
slip), and (3)
trench exposures. This publication
is a major revision of an earlier map (Lienkaemper, 1992), which both brings up
to date the evidence for faulting and makes it available formatted both as a
digital database for use within a geographic information system (GIS) and for
broader public access interactively using widely available viewing software.
This pamphlet describes in detail the types of scientific observations used to
make the map, gives references pertaining to the fault and the evidence of
faulting, and provides guidance for use of and limitations of the map.
The term "recently active fault trace" is defined
here as a fault trace that has evidence of movement in the Holocene or
approximately the last 10,000 years.
This definition also satisfies the legal definition of active fault used
in the implementation of the Alquist-Priolo Act of 1972 (Hart, 1990). This map
provides a starting point for planners by showing locations of fault creep and
trench exposures of active traces.
A major scientific goal of this mapping project was to learn
how the distribution of fault creep and creep rate varies spatially, both along
and transverse to the fault. The
results related to creep rate are available in Lienkaemper and others (1991,
1997, 2001) and are not repeated here.
Detailed mapping of the active fault zone contributes to a better
understanding of the earthquake source process by constraining estimates of (1)
the probable recurrence times of major earthquakes, (2) the size of expected
surface displacements, and (3) the expected length of ruptures accompanying
these earthquakes. Following the
1989 Loma Prieta earthquake the Working Groups on California Earthquake
Probabilities (1990, 2003) considered the Hayward Fault the most probable
source of a major earthquake (magnitude 6.7 or larger) in the San Francisco Bay
region in the next few decades.
This map also is of general use to engineers and land-use
planners. The traces shown on the
map are those that can be expected to have the most fault slip in future major
earthquakes on the Hayward Fault.
However, the small scale of the map (nominally 1:24,000) does not
provide sufficient details of the local complexities of the fault zone for site
development purposes.
Minor fault traces may not be recognized because many
sections of the fault were already urbanized by 1939, the date of the earliest
aerial photography for the entire fault.
Thus, geomorphic features indicative of active faulting have been
degraded or destroyed by human activity, especially secondary traces that have
minor cumulative slip. For this
reason, subsurface investigations are usually the main method of recognizing
and precisely locating active fault strands in sites that lack reliable creep
evidence. Mapping of creep
evidence and monitoring of fault creep can be the most definitive method to
precisely locate active traces.
Because subsurface investigations and other evidence of fault activity
continue to become available, this map is considered current to June 1, 2005.
The Hayward Fault is a major branch of the San Andreas Fault
system. Like the San Andreas, it is
a right-lateral strike-slip fault, meaning that slip is mainly horizontal, so
that objects on the opposite side of the fault from the viewer will move to the
viewer's right as slip occurs. For
a better understanding of the basic principles of strike-slip faulting and the
relation of the Hayward Fault to this larger fault system see Wallace (1990).
Because this map
documents only recently active traces of the fault, this text will touch only
briefly on the early geologic history of the fault. The surface trace of the Hayward Fault follows a zone of
crustal weakness that is mid-Cretaceous in age (99 ± 3 Ma) (Rose, 1978) or
older (³125 Ma) (Jones and Curtis, 1991), as suggested by a linear zone of
keratophyric intrusive and volcanic rocks The earliest known offset occurred
about 10 Ma, probably on a dominantly dip-slip fault (Graham and others,
1984). The presently dominant
right-slip style may not have developed until after 8 Ma, and perhaps only as
recently as 4 to 5 Ma (Jones and Curtis, 1991). Most late Tertiary geologic units are incompletely preserved
on the southwest side of the fault due to erosion. Thus, the apparent matching of various tentatively
correlated late Tertiary units across the fault has led to contradictory
estimates of total right slip along the Hayward Fault Zone that range from a
few kilometers or a few tens of kilometers (Graham and others, 1984; Fox and
others, 1985; Liniecki-Laporte and Andersen, 1988) to as much as 190 km
(Curtis, 1989; McLaughlin and others, 1990; Jones and Curtis, 1991). For more about the bedrock geology, the
following references contain geologic maps that include parts of the Hayward
Fault: Crittenden (1951), Robinson (1956), Radbruch (1957), Hall (1958), Case (1963),
Radbruch and Case (1967), Radbruch (1969), Dibblee (1972), Bishop and others
(1973), Wagner (1978), Dibblee (1980a, 1980b, 1980c, 1981), Borchardt and
others (1988c), Graymer (2000) Graymer and others (1994, 1995, 1996 2002,
2005).
Although a 40-km-long surface rupture on the southern
Hayward Fault accompanied a major earthquake in 1868 (M7), this rupture was not
mapped until after the great 1906 earthquake (Lawson, 1908). Another large earthquake, in 1836, had
often been presumed to have occurred along the Hayward Fault (Louderback, 1947;
Ellsworth, 1990; Lienkaemper and others, 1991), but further historical research
supports a location south of the San Francisco Bay Area (Toppozada and
Borchardt, 1998).
Radbruch-Hall (Radbruch, 1968a; Radbruch-Hall, 1974)
compiled the 1868 rupture evidence of Lawson (1908) together with (1) bedrock
fault traces, (2) newly recognized creep evidence, and (3) geomorphically
recent traces. Herd (1977; 1978)
interpreted Quaternary traces of the fault using 1939 aerial photographs. Hart (1979) and Smith (1980a; 1980b;
1981) compiled (1) the first 7 to 8 years of trenching results from
Alquist-Priolo reports; (2) their geomorphic interpretations of Holocene traces
from the 1939 aerial photographs; and (3) creep data from the literature and
field work. Smith argued that many
traces portrayed on earlier maps actually show no evidence of recent movement
based either on his geomorphic analysis or from logs of trenches that crossed
previously mapped bedrock or inferred fault traces.
In this report and map, earlier mapping is brought
up-to-date using new findings from trenching and creep investigations. New methods are introduced for
integrating on a single map geomorphic interpretations with a far greater
amount of trenching and creep data than was available to previous map
compilers. This map also focuses
in much greater detail than its predecessors on the demonstrability of recent
movement for each trace shown.
Lienkaemper (1992) presented the entire length of the
Hayward fault on a single oversized printed sheet at a scale of 1:24,000. As
such, the map was rather unwieldy. To take advantage of advances in digital
technology, the current map is made accessible online in various convenient
formats through viewing programs at http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/2006/177/ and at http://quake.wr.usgs.gov/research/geology/hf_map/index.html. Informal users may zoom in on large
or small areas of interest. Those with a deeper interest in a specific section
of the fault may view and print page-sized maps of the fault composed at
1:12,000-scale and labeled with evidence supporting the location and activity
level of each fault trace.
More technical users
may wish to query the GIS database and develop their own map views of the fault
using either ArcGIS software (proprietary) or ArcReader (free on internet). As
with all GIS data, the reader must be aware of scale limitations of each set of
data. Accuracy limits of these data sets will be discussed further below and in
the metadata of each GIS file. Full documentation of the database fields is
included in the metadata of each GIS file and will not be repeated here.
The projection of all GIS files in the download package is
UTM10-NAD27 to conform to a requirement of the USGS Quaternary fault map that
is currently in preparation.
This fault strip map takes a much different approach than
its predecessor strip maps of other California fault zones (summarized in
Wallace, 1990) by presenting evidence of fault activity in highly abbreviated
labels (see abbreviation lists, Appendixes 1 and 2). This was done for two reasons: (1) geomorphic features,
visible on 1939 aerial photographs, are now largely destroyed by urbanization,
and the map serves as a comprehensive archive of this evidence; and (2) creep
and trench data are now greater in density per kilometer along the Hayward Fault
than any other active fault in the world.
Considerable abbreviation was required to comprehensively
combine the geomorphic, creep, and trench data on a single map sheet. Much simplification was required in
some areas because of map-scale limitations. More trenches may exist at some sites, but they were too
close together to plot or were distant from the fault trace. To minimize cluttering the map where
data are dense, labels may appear next to multiple trenches and relate to the
same cited reference. Map users
needing further site detail should refer to the reference cited. Immediately adjacent creep localities
that share a common description are sometimes described by a single label
midway between the two creep symbols.
For indexing features discussed in this report, the map
includes a kilometer grid oriented along the average strike of the Hayward
Fault, N. 35¡ W. The km 0 mark is
located where the fault intercepts the shoreline at San Pablo Bay near Point
Pinole. This grid coincides with
the grid on the 1:100,000-scale Hayward Fault map in Lienkaemper and others
(1991, 1997, 2001), but it differs from Nason's (1971) distances from Point
Pinole, which are 0.4-0.7 km less for a given locality. This grid is available
in the GIS data package as a shape file.
The idealized grid, a great circle path near the fault, is
rectified against latitude and longitude on the base map at each 5-km
interval. Maximum discrepancies of
10-20 m result from distributing closure errors on the base map, but most
positions can be referred to uniquely on the grid to within ± 10 m (0.01 km),
in accord with the National Map Accuracy Standard of 12 m for well-located
objects on 1:24,000-scale maps (Thompson, 1979). As with the original (1992) hand-drafted grid the digital
version is only rectified against map coordinates at the fault trace.
Geomorphic interpretation, both on aerial photographs and in the field, is a critical element in identifying recently active fault traces (Wallace, 1990).Ê The block diagram (fig. 1) illustrates some of the typical landforms produced by strike-slip faulting.Ê Most of these geomorphic features result when horizontal sliding along the fault brings different materials into contact at the fault, for example, bedrock against unconsolidated alluvium or colluvium.Ê The most visible effect is that fault slip causes abrupt disruptions in the natural drainage system, including interrupted subsurface water flow, and results in offset streams and the formation of ponds and springs.ost disrupted streams along the Hayward Fault are offset
right-laterally and vary widely in the total amount of offset. The two largest stream offsets occur on
large streams and show accumulated slip of 2-3 km. Many smaller streams have offsets ranging from tens of
meters to a few hundred meters.
These smaller streams, particularly those entrenched in weak alluvium,
tend to escape their right-laterally offset lower channels and flow straight
across the fault again. Some
streams have captured the headwaters of adjacent streams and form apparent
left-lateral offsets. The
repetition of these processes over millennia creates linear valleys along the
fault trace, which are commonly called "rift" valleys. These narrow strike-slip rifts in the
San Andreas Fault system are in most locations primarily erosional features and
are not genetically related to true rift valleys that are caused by extension,
such as those in eastern Africa and along oceanic spreading centers.
These geomorphic expressions of faulting occur at many
scales. The size of a geomorphic
feature tends to relate inversely to its age. Typically, smaller features result from the most recent
fault movements. For example,
assuming that late Pleistocene slip rate has been similar to the Holocene rate
of about 9 mm/yr (Lienkaemper and Borchardt, 1996), we deduce that the largest
offsets of streams on the Hayward Fault reflect tens of thousands of years to a
few hundreds of thousands of years of fault slip. Conversely, the smallest recognized right-lateral offset of
a gully is 2-3 m and is the result of a combination of fault creep and
coseismic slip associated with the earthquake in 1868 (and possibly earlier
earthquakes too).
Because the most recent fault features are the smallest and
most fragile, few have survived the intense urbanization of the East Bay that
has occurred since World War II.
Fortunately, aerial photographs of the entire fault were taken in 1939
(U.S. Department of Agriculture, BUU-BUT series, scale 1:20,000, available from
National Archives, Washington, D.C.)
These 1939 photographs are the primary source of geomorphic evidence of
recent fault traces. For greater
detail, I used 1:6,000-scale (1966, U.S. Geological Survey, WRD series) and
1:4,000-scale aerial photographs (1991, U.S. Geological Survey, HFZ series,
color). Other miscellaneous USGS
1:24,000-scale aerial photographic series from the 1940's and 1950's were
marginally useful in some areas to resolve uncertainties in interpretation.
I did not consider all fault features to be equally useful
in accurately delineating complex patterns of recent faulting. Each feature is unique and reflects
varying amounts of fault-trace complexity. However, erosion and degradation of features by human activities
often obscures this geomorphic evidence and can lead the analyst to incorrect
or crudely approximated fault-line interpretations. For example, a well-preserved, narrow, straight fault scarp
(sn) can be confidently attributed to a simple narrow style of fault
rupture. Other scarps have formed
by broadly distributed surface rupturing (sb). Evidence from well-preserved geomorphic expression, detailed
creep investigation, or trenching may confirm that the fault zone is truly
broad and complex and not simply a degraded narrow scarp (sn). Generally one cannot differentiate the
broad fault scarp that represents widely distributed slip from a narrow one
that has been broadened by erosion and degraded by human activities.
The codes G1 (strongly pronounced), G2 (distinct), and G3
(weakly pronounced) are a system to classify my overall judgment about the
reliability of geomorphic features for accurately locating recent fault
traces. For example, considerable
fault complexity might appear as a feature of only G3 quality, or alternatively
the fault trace might originally have been narrow and simple but was later
altered by agricultural or other human activity. We cannot certainly
distinguish the original character of such a feature without either earlier photographic
or subsurface evidence.
Recency of faulting from geomorphic expression is a separate
idea, but difficult to completely separate in fact. I did not specifically intend the G1, G2, and G3
classification to be an evaluation of certainty that traces are of Holocene
age. I intend it to be mainly a
scale of clarity. Not
surprisingly, fault traces that are geomorphically more distinct (G1, G2) can
be precisely delineated and, thus, tend to confirm Holocene activity. Unfortunately, the weakly pronounced
traces (G3) in most cases reflect degradation by human activities, so we cannot
geomorphically delineate the fault precisely. However, I believe that most of the G3 traces shown on the
map are Holocene active.
Even distinct geomorphic features (G1, G2) need to be
corroborated. For example, near
Lake Temescal (km 20-21) at least two earlier maps confidently plotted the
active Hayward Fault using aerial photo-interpretation of geomorphic
expression. I would have described
the geomorphic feature that they mapped as a G2-quality linear fault scarp if I
had not learned that the feature actually is a long-abandoned railroad cut that
is obscured by a canopy of trees.
Recent trenching and creep data suggest that the active fault trace may
be 60-100 m to the southwest of the old railroad cut (California Department of
Transportation, 1991; Rutherford and Chekene, 1991).
I also use geomorphic expression as one means of estimating
the uncertainty of fault location more quantitatively, as shown on the map by
the variable lengths of gaps between dashes in the fault linework as described
in the map explanation.
Fault-related geomorphic features separate smoother and generally more
stable areas on opposite sides of the fault. The width of these features is measurable on aerial
photographs. For geomorphic
features such as a G3-quality linear scarp that is neither narrow nor distinct,
I plot the center of the feature and estimate the uncertainty in locating the
active trace as half the width of the feature. Where precise trench or creep data are available, these
establish the lateral position of the fault, and I use the lower quality
geomorphic features only for the orientation and continuity of the fault
trace. For example, creep data may
show that the active trace is high or low, rather than mid-slope, on a fault
scarp that is geomorphically indistinct.
Higher quality (G1 and G2) geomorphic features tend to agree well with
locations of active traces as identified in trenches and from creep evidence.
The fault traces plotted on the map ideally show the center
of each intense zone of shearing that can be reasonably discretized and plotted
distinctly at a scale of 1:24,000.
Although 90 percent of well-defined cultural features on the base map
are required to be located within ±12 m of their correct position at a scale of
1:24,000, many positions of cultural and natural features that I relied on to
transfer the fault traces do not meet the rigorous definition of well
defined. In my judgment, ±²20 m is
a reasonable estimate of the general reliability of the fault-trace plotting
error. Especially in this revised
digital edition much of the data are plotted much more accurately than this
standard. This is particularly true in the case of creep data and trenching
data. Most of the creep data were documented in the field on aerial photos of
1:6000- and 1:4000-scale with accuracy of about 1-2 meters. These points were
generally easy to transfer to the USGS digital orthophoto quadrangles (doqs)
with little loss of precision locally. Relative accuracy over larger areas is
estimated as similar to National Mapping Standards of ²±12m for 90 percent of
well-located base map features. Trench locations are generally taken from
copies of paper maps from reports in publicly accessible files. For the digital
recompilation these maps were scanned and georeferenced by fitting them to
common points on grayscale USGS doqs using ArcGIS software. In most cases
average registration errors (estimated by the software) for these trench maps
ranged between 2-3 meters. The newer color doqs used to present the digital
data agree well with the older grayscale doqs. The color doqs are more detailed
and accurate than the older ones but were not available in time for most of the
recompilation of creep and trench evidence.
A separate issue from the accuracy of cartographic plotting
is the accuracy of the position of fault trace between points on the fault that
are well located by creep, trench logging, or narrow geomorphic features. Detailed mapping and surveying of creep
evidence show that the deformation zone of the main creeping trace is as much
as 20-m wide (Nason, 1971; Lienkaemper and others, 1991). Although individual creeping traces can
be less than a few meters wide, the fault zone tends to be complex and not
linear at large scales, so I chose ²±20 m as a reasonable upper bound for the
delineation error (meandering of the principal strands of well-located fault
traces between exactly located points).
Exactly located points can in all cases be plotted to within ²±12 m,
because basemaps have improved since the last edition of this map.
The above discussion is rather involved, but the practical
outcome is that faults shown as being located within ²±20 m (see explanation
for fault symbols) are reliably located within ±12 m, compared to other
features, of where the map shows them to be on the doq base maps. The larger estimates of uncertainty
(²±40 m and ²±60 m) derive mostly from aerial photo-interpretation on segments
of the fault where creep and trenching data are sparse. Even highly degraded geomorphic
features constrain the position of the principal fault trace within
interpretable boundaries. The dash
length of fault linework is fixed to cover 30 m on the map for two reasons: (1)
the portrayal of uncertainty can be varied over short distances, and (2) using
the dash length as a frame of reference, with a little practice, the map user
can distinguish the two lengths between dashes (40 m and 60 m on the map).
These approximate dash gap lengths and line weights were set in the digital map
for a data frame reference scale of 1:12,000 and work fairly well for a range
of 1:6,000 to 24,000.
Differing from the 1992 edition, solid lines are now used to
portray fault traces for well-located traces, because available basemaps are
much improved. However, where
active traces are known in great detail, they tend to be complex structures
that form en echelon patterns and are multi-stranded in a way that usually does
not generalize easily into a single smooth fault trace. Therefore, the line on
the map should be thought of as being near the center of an active zone of
complex faulting.
The uncertainty estimates are not intended to represent the
total width of the zone of active faulting. Many cultural features that were surveyed for creep offset
(Lienkaemper and others, 1991, 1997) show significant secondary active faulting
and rotations several tens of meters from the main active trace. Commonly these secondary traces have no
extant geomorphic expression.
Larger errors in location than have been estimated may exist, and many
unrecognized secondary active traces may exist. Therefore, map users who need site-specific information must
verify the local evidence for faulting to satisfy their particular
requirements.
Geomorphic fault-zone features tend to be more distinct in
the southern (km 35-70) and northernmost (km 0-10) parts of the mapped region
as shown in figure 2C. This
tendency may partly depend on rainfall (fig. 2B) and elevation (fig. 2A). However, it may be more important that
the El Cerrito to Oakland areas (km 10-35) were substantially more developed
than the adjacent regions in 1939, the date of the earliest complete aerial
photography that was used to analyze the fault. Two other factors that are both secondary effects of
rainfall (and indirectly of elevation) reduce the distinctness of geomorphic
features in the hilly areas from Oakland to El Cerrito (km 10-35): (1) heavier
vegetation, especially oak and eucalyptus woodlands; and (2) more slope instability
(soil creep and landsliding).
An apparent scarcity of geomorphic data in two areas of the
map (km 40-45 and km 55-65) is largely an artifact of map-editing
decisions. Actually, many
geomorphic features of high quality show in these areas in the 1939 aerial
photographs, but at a scale of 1:24,000 they could not be labeled as
comprehensively as elsewhere. The
trench and creep data are extremely abundant in these areas, and because it is
essential to fully annotate the more exact creep and trench data, little space
remained to annotate the geomorphic data.
Consequently, the geomorphic annotation is less detailed in these areas
than elsewhere, although more important features are still noted, particularly
those that are most relevant to the accurate delineation of the fault traces.
Fault creep, the common name for aseismic slip observed
along the surface trace of a fault, has now been recognized along many branches
and segments of the San Andreas Fault system (Calaveras, Concord, Green Valley,
Hayward, Imperial, Maacama, central San Andreas, Sargent, and Superstition
Hills Faults). Creep was first
discovered on the central San Andreas Fault in 1956 (Steinbrugge and others, 1960),
and we now deduce that creep has been occurring on that fault for at least
several decades. A few years
later, creep was discovered on the Hayward Fault in a few locations (Blanchard
and Laverty, 1966; Bolt and Marion, 1966; Bonilla, 1966; Cluff and Steinbrugge,
1966; Radbruch and Lennert, 1966).
In later years many other creep localities along the Hayward Fault were
reported (Radbruch, 1968b; Nason, 1971; Bishop and others, 1973; Smith, 1980a,
1980b, 1981; Burford and Sharp, 1982; Hirschfeld and others, 1982; Lennert,
1982; Taylor, 1982, 1992; Lennert and Curtis, 1985; and many others too
numerous to cite here.) Because there are so many places where creep evidence
is publicly accessible in the field, and it continues to grow and change, I
have annotated the map primarily with my own observations (1985-2005) and cited
others only in places where I relied heavily on earlier work, such as survey
measurements, creep offsets in tunnels and on private lands, and where the
creep evidence has been altered or destroyed or where previous documentation was
especially thorough and detailed.
I only note on the map those surveyed features and creep monitoring
arrays that I used to locate the fault trace or discriminate traces that are
creeping from those that are not.
Averaged over several decades, rates of creep ranged from
3-6 mm/yr along most of the Hayward Fault (km 0-62), but they were distinctly
higher, 8-10 mm/yr, near the south end (km 63-67). No evidence for creep has been recognized south of km 69. For more detail on long-term creep
rates see Lienkaemper and others (1991, 1997, 2001) and Galehouse and
Lienkaemper (2003). For earlier
creep rates from alinement arrays, see Harsh and Burford (1982); Wilmesher and
Baker (1987); and Galehouse (1991); from creepmeters, see Yamashita and Burford
(1973); Nason and others (1974); Schulz and others (1982); Schulz (1989); and
from regional and local trilateration surveys, see Prescott and Lisowski
(1983); Lisowski and others (1991).
Field recognition of creep evidence has been discussed in
several field guides on the Hayward Fault, including: Nason and Rogers (1970);
Taylor and others (1982); Wahrhaftig (1984); Bortugno (1988); Lienkaemper
(1989). Hirschfeld (1982) is a good introduction to recognizing and
understanding the significance of en echelon pavement cracks in the field. Smith (1982) discusses the common
pitfalls in mistaking nontectonic phenomena for evidence of fault creep. Lienkaemper and others (1991) discuss
many of the most distinctly offset curbs, fences, and other cultural features
along the entire length of the fault and show detailed plots of each one. A
wealth of additional field observations along the fault is available from many
sources within the Field Guide (Taylor and others, 1992) and the Proceedings
(Borchardt and others, 1993) of the Second Conference of Earthquake Hazards in
the Eastern San Francisco Bay Area.
Like geomorphic expression, not all creep evidence is
equally reliable for proving the existence of and establishing the precise
positions of the active traces of the fault. The creep reliability ratings C1 (strongly pronounced), C2
(distinct and certain), and C3 (inconclusive) are intended to distinguish
evidence about which I am reasonably confident (C1 and C2) from evidence that
might be attributable to yet unidentified nontectonic causes (C3), such as soil
creep, landsliding or fill failure, expanding tree roots, broken water pipes,
vehicular collision, uneven loading or thermal and shrink-swell phenomena in
pavements and slabs and their underlying soil, differential settlement, and
other soil-structure interactions.
Where nontectonic forces are known to be acting, and they
provide a more credible explanation of a deformed or distressed feature,
nothing is recorded on the map.
That is, creep best explains all C3 localities, but the creep is not yet
strongly developed nor adequately corroborated by additional nearby
evidence. C1 quality ratings are
assigned sparingly, only for creep evidence that is especially obvious in the
field. Many features given C2
ratings are straight features that have distinct offsets as seen in the results
of alinement surveys, such as those in Lienkaemper and others (1991), but the
offsets may be distributed over several meters and, thus, may be less obvious
in the field. Conversely, many C3
features, such as offset fences that have not been surveyed yet, might be
reclassified as C2 when surveyed.
Creep evidence of all three reliability ratings serves to
locate the fault precisely for purposes of this map and agrees well with good
quality geomorphic evidence. Rare
exceptions to this are the two water tunnels, San Pablo (km 12.93) and
Claremont (km 19.99). The active
trace locations in the tunnels are only approximately known from original
sources (Blanchard and Laverty, 1966; Lennert and Curtis, 1985). Connecting the geomorphic trace to the
approximate location of creep in these tunnels would suggest steep (but not
vertical) northeastward dips.
However, the more precisely located creep evidence in the Bay Area Rapid
Transit tunnels (km 20.28) (Brown and others, 1981) appears to lie vertically
below the geomorphic trace. The
exact creep locations in the water tunnels must be verified before drawing any
conclusions regarding dip.
Much speculation has been offered regarding the scarcity of
creep observations in the hilly areas from El Cerrito to Oakland (km
5-35). Figure 2E summarizes the
number of creep localities shown on the map. Roughly similar to the situation for geomorphic features,
higher rainfall and steep slopes add to the difficulty in reliably locating the
active fault traces using creep evidence.
More tree roots and various slope stability problems in these hilly
areas make creep recognition more difficult. Because these areas were generally built up much earlier,
the fault must intercept many older cultural features. In most places this would make creep
evidence easier to identify, but because most slopes are steep, the roads,
curbs, and fence lines tend to be curved.
Therefore, broadly distributed creep offsets are extremely difficult to
judge reliably, and other creep effects are rarely distinguishable from
abundant nontectonic disruptions.
Prior to 1992 most trenches across the Hayward Fault were done
as part of site-oriented fault investigations to satisfy legal requirements of
the Alquist-Priolo (AP) Special Studies Zones Act of 1972 (Hart and Bryant,
1997) which is administered by the California Geological Survey (CGS, formerly
California Division of Mines and Geology, CDMG), Sacramento, California. For a summary of some products related
to the AP Act see Wills (1991).
Hundreds of AP reports have been filed for the Hayward Fault Zone. These
reports are now available on CD (Wong and others, 2003) from CGS (Menlo
Park). Most AP investigations were
conducted on parcels that showed no probable evidence of active traces, but
trenching was usually required to demonstrate that no concealed secondary fault
traces exist where development was planned. The majority, 38 of 69, trench sites that contained trenches
across major active fault traces (38/69; 55 percent) are along the southernmost
part of the fault (km 55-70, fig. 2D; only pre-1992 shown), because most
development along the rest of the fault occurred before the 1972 Alquist-Priolo
Act. From 1992-2005 only about 10
additional AP sites have become available that include trenches crossing the
fault. However, the current map includes evidence from several other trenching
studies that have been done for other purposes: site studies for public
utilities and other public entities, scientific investigations, and various
other site-specific reports that have not been filed with the AP program.
About seventy AP reports contain logs of trenches that cross
Holocene-active traces. Many of
these trenching investigations involved large tracts and multiple
trenches. The map shows only those
trenches that crossed or came near to Holocene-active fault traces and traces
that show latest Pleistocene to Holocene (?) activity.
For engineering purposes, it would be interesting to know
the approximate likelihood of being able to demonstrate the existence and
location of a Holocene-active fault trace at a given site using the methods of
trench logging that have actually been used to date. To get a rough idea of what proportion of trenching sites
show distinct evidence of Holocene faulting, I summed the different categories
of trenching evidence (see Trench Exposures" explanation) for those 69
trenching sites that had trenches across independently identified "major
active fault traces" (MAFT sites.) The logs show distinctly Holocene fault
traces (H1, H2 evidence) at most MAFT sites (50/69; 72 percent), but evidence
is at best weakly conclusive or permissible of faulting (H?, F?, NF) at some
MAFT sites (11/69; 16 percent). At a few other MAFT sites (8/69; 12 percent)
significant faulting was evident, but evidence of Holocene age was not clearly
demonstrable (HP, P, U). The above
percentages reflect the most conclusive evidence at a given site, but other
exposures at the same site in some cases showed inconclusive results. I suspect that in most cases of weak or
permissible evidence (H?, F?, NF), the fault was identified only because the
investigator was cued by nearby geomorphic or creep evidence. The category NF as included in the
above statistics covers a few difficult cases where no discrete fault offset
appears in the trench log, but investigators acknowledge a highly approximate
location of the trace from miscellaneous indirect evidence.
The above results for trenching across recognizable main
traces of the fault suggest we may not always identify secondary traces when
they do exist, particularly where no Holocene cover exists. Most consultants and reviewers are
conservative and presume pre-Holocene (HP, P, U) shears are active or treat
weak or permissible evidence of faulting (H?, F?, NF) as genuinely active
traces for purposes of development.
Therefore, some building exclusion zones might avoid nonexistent or
inactive fault traces, and other exclusion zones might reflect incorrectly
located active traces. These
problems can be avoided in some cases by adopting the following practices: (1)
placing corroborative trenches through nearby areas that are more likely to have
stratified Holocene units; (2) logging both trench walls in detail where
faulting is suspected including noting orientations of soil shears and
slickensides; and (3) in monotonous fine soil horizons, performing array
sampling of soil transverse to the fault and plotting clay-sand ratios or other
factors indicating subtle material contrasts (Borchardt and others,
1988b). For further discussion of
factors affecting the visibility and recognition of faulting in exploratory
trenches, and for a more detailed treatment see Bonilla and Lienkaemper (1990,
1991).
Ideally, this strip map of the Hayward Fault is one in a
series of progress reports that summarizes our present knowledge of active
fault traces. It is important for
both scientific and engineering reasons that we continue to discover and map
all the active traces and monitor creep distribution in greater detail so that
we can better understand and cope with this highly urbanized fault zone.
In some areas the main fault trace continues to be located
with large uncertainty, for example (1) near Point Pinole (km 0.0-1.1); (2)
near Wildcat Creek (km 6.3-7.9); (3) in Kensington (km 11.9-13.6); (4) near
Lake Temescal (km 20.3-21.3); and (5) in central Oakland between High Street
and 82nd Avenue (km 28.1-32.0).
Except near Lake Temescal, the dominant problem is the ambiguity
produced by the interaction of the fault zone and landsliding. Particularly in the case of central
Oakland, the fault may also be genuinely complex with multiple strands and en
echelon stepovers.
Where multiple strands exist, the most active strand does
not in all cases correspond to the most geomorphically distinct trace. For example, north of the Masonic Home
in Union City (km 54) two active traces are spanned by the trilateration array,
UNION (Prescott and Lisowski, 1983).
Surprisingly, the geomorphically more distinct eastern trace exhibits no
creep above the detectable limit (<1 mm/yr), while the geomorphically weaker
western trace creeps at about 5 mm/yr.
Geomorphic distinctness is a better indicator of relative activity at
the MAR trilateration array in El Cerrito (km 9) (Prescott and Lisowski,
1983). The MAR array spans only
the western and geomorphically less pronounced of two active traces and shows
no creep (<1 mm/yr), while the slightly more pronounced eastern trace creeps
at about 5 mm/yr at nearby Olive Avenue (km 8.35).
Special thanks go to the Alquist-Priolo project staff and
others in the California Geological Survey, E.W. Hart, P. Wong, C.J. Wills, and
G. Borchardt for their many kind efforts in helping me cope with seemingly
endless AP and other reports essential to the original map. Likewise many
thanks to W.A. Bryant, California Geological Survey, Sacramento for giving me
access to the most recent AP reports.
Thanks to J. Peter of the City of Oakland, L. Brown and R. L. Fong of
the City of Fremont, P. McClellan of the City of San Leandro, N.T. Hall, D.L.
Wells and J.R. Wesling of Geomatrix Consultants, K. Kelson of Wm. Lettis
Associates and A. Johns of Kleinfelder, Inc. for providing key trenching
reports. I thank the many other
consultants and their clients who supplied early releases or pre-AP reports:
Earth Systems Consultants, Harding Lawson Associates, Kaldveer and Associates,
Geotechnical Consultants Inc., and Rutherford and Chekene. Without the excellent surveying data
supplied by W.R. Dvorak of the City of San Leandro I would not know the main
trace location under all those oak trees.
Reviews by M.G. Bonilla and C.S. Prentice and an edit by J.S. Detterman
improved the clarity of the text of the 1992 edition. Detailed reviews by H.D.
Stenner and J.L. Blair and a rigorous text edit by J.S. Ciener greatly improved
the 2006 edition.
Berlogar Long and Associates, 1975,
Soils engineering and engineering geologic investigation, mechanics work shed,
La Vista Quarry, Hayward : California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP
report 70.
Bishop, C.C., Knox, R.D., Chapman,
R.H., Rodgers, D.A., and Chase, G.B., 1973, Geological and geophysical
investigations for Tri-Cities [El Cerrito, Richmond, and San Pablo] seismic
safety and environmental resources study: California Division of Mines and
Geology Preliminary Report 19, 44 p.
Blanchard, F.B., and Laverty, G.L.,
1966, Displacements in the Claremont water tunnel at the intersection with the
Hayward Fault: Seismological Society of America Bulletin, v. 56, no. 2, p.
291-294.
Bolt, B.A., and Marion, W.C., 1966,
Instrumental measurement of slippage on the Hayward Fault: Seismological
Society of America Bulletin, v. 56, no. 2, p. 305-316.
Bonilla, M.G., 1966, Deformation of
railroad tracks by slippage on the Hayward Fault in the Niles district of
Fremont, California: Seismological Society of America Bulletin, v. 56, no. 2,
p. 281-290.
Bonilla, M.G., and Lienkaemper,
J.J., 1990, Visibility of fault strands in exploratory trenches and timing of
rupture events: Geology, v. 18, no. 2, p. 153-156.
____ 1991, Factors affecting the recognition
of faults in exploratory trenches: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1947, 54 p.
Borchardt, G., 1988, Soil
development and displacement along the Hayward Fault, Point Pinole, California:
California Division of Mines and Geology Open-File Report 88-13, 233 p.
Borchardt, G., Hirschfeld, S.E.,
Lienkaemper, J.J., McClellan, P., and Wong, I.G., eds., 1993, Proceedings of
the Second Conference on Earthquake Hazards in the Eastern San Francisco Bay
Area, March 25-29, 1992, California State University, East Bay (formerly
Hayward): California Geological Survey Special Publication 113, 569 p.
Borchardt, G., Lienkaemper, J.J.,
Budding, K.E. and Schwartz, D.P., 1988a, Holocene slip rate of the Hayward
Fault, Fremont, California: California Division of Mines and Geology Open-File
Report 88-12, p. 17-52.
Borchardt, G., Lienkaemper, J.J.,
and Schwartz, D.P., 1988b, Soil development and tectoturbation produced by
Holocene downwarping along the Hayward Fault, Fremont, California: California
Division of Mines and Geology Open-File Report 88-12, p. 53-114.
Borchardt, G., and Mace, N., 1993,
Clastic dike as evidence for a major earthquake along the northern Hayward
fault in Berkeley: California Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication, v. 113, p. 143-151.
Borchardt, G., Seelig, K.A., and
Wagner, D.L., 1988c, Geology, paleosols, and crustal stability of Point Pinole
Regional Shoreline, Contra Costa County, California: California Division of
Mines and Geology Open-File Report 88-13, p. 3-94.
Bortugno, E., 1988, Living on the
fault, a field guide to the visible evidence of the Hayward Fault (Catalog no.
94604-2050): Oakland, California, Association of Bay Area Governments.
Brown, I.R., Brekke, T.L., and
Korbin, G.E., 1981, Behavior of the Bay Area Rapid Transit tunnels through the
Hayward Fault, Final Report: U.S. Department of Transportation, Urban Mass
Transportation Administration Report UMTA-CA-06-0120-81-1, 208 p.
Burford, R.O., and Sharp, R.V.,
1982, Slip on the Hayward and Calaveras Faults determined from offset
powerlines: California Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 62, p.
261-269.
Burkland and Associates, 1972,
Engineering geologic investigation, Mission Meadows, Union City, California:
California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 671.
____ 1973, Preliminary geologic
investigation, Glenmoor Hills unit 4, Fremont, California (Tract 3723):
California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 679.
____ 1975, Geologic and seismic
hazards investigation, Tract 3450, Lot 50, Fremont, California: First Church of
the Nazarene site: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 170.
____ 1976a, Geologic and seismic
hazards investigation, Tract 3227, Unit 2, Fremont, California: California
Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 511.
____ 1976b, Updated geologic and
seismic hazards investigation report, Mission Peak Knolls (Tract 3756),
Fremont, California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report
672.
____ 1976c, Geotechnical
investigation, Lynde property, Union City, California: California Geological
Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 716.
____ 1977a, Supplementary geologic
investigation, Motozaki property, Fremont, California: California Geological
Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 1475.
____ 1977b, Geologic and seismic
hazards investigation, Tract 3857, Fremont, California: California Geological
Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 618.
____ 1977c, Geologic and seismic
hazards investigation, Paseo Villages, Fremont, California: unpublished report
filed with City of Fremont.
____ 1978, Geologic and seismic
hazards investigation, Community Center building addition, Fremont, California:
California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 943.
California Department of
Transportation, 1991, Geotechnical report for fault evaluation: of [highway]
Construct E[astbound]24/S[outhbound]13Ñ[to]N[orthbound]13/W[estbound]24
Connector [Oakland, California]: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01,
AP report 2514.
Case, J.E., 1963, Geology of a
portion of the Berkeley and San Leandro Hills, California: University of
California, Ph. D. dissertation, 216 p.
Cleary Consultants Incorporated,
1989, Fault location investigation, Tiffany Parcel, Fremont, California:
California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2460.
Cluff, L.S. and Steinbrugge, K.V.,
1966, Hayward Fault slippage in the Irvington-Niles districts of Fremont,
California: Seismological Society of America Bulletin, v. 56, no. 2, p.
257-279.
Consolidated Engineering
Laboratories, 2000, Fault investigation report, Fremont Vista Assisted Living
Facility, 35450/35540 Mission Boulevard, Fremont, California: California
Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 3186.
Cooper Engineers, 1986, Geologic
hazards investigation, proposed residential development, 1694-164th Avenue, San
Leandro, California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report
2582.
Cooper-Clark and Associates, 1968,
Soil investigation A709, southern Alameda-Fremont: unpublished report: San
Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, Oakland, California.
____ 1974, Phase II fault
investigation, 35-acre parcel, vicinity of Overhill Drive, Hayward, California:
California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 477.
Cotton, W., and Associates, 1979, Seismic
hazards investigation, Catholic Church property, East Warren Avenue, Fremont,
California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 1153.
Cotton, W.R., Hall, N.T., and Hay,
E.A., 1986, Holocene behavior of the Hayward-Calaveras Fault system, San
Francisco Bay area, California, Final technical report: U.S. Geological Survey:
contract report on file at U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California, 15
p.
Crittenden, M.D., 1951, Geology of
the San Jose-Mt. Hamilton area, California: California Division of Mines and
Geology Bulletin 157, 74 p.
Crosby, J., and Associates, 1989,
Geotechnical investigation at 44,885 Gardenia Way, Fremont, California:
California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2457.
Curtis, G.H., 1989, Berkeley Hills
in C. Wahrhaftig, ed., Geology of San Francisco and vicinity, 28th
International Geological Congress, Field Trip Guidebook T105: American
Geophysical Union, Washington, D.C.
Dibblee, T.W., Jr., 1972,
Preliminary geologic map of the Milpitas, Lick, and San Jose quadrangles,
Alameda and Santa Clara Counties, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File
Report, scale 1:24,000, 3 sheets.
____ 1980a, Preliminary geologic map
of the Hayward quadrangle: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 80-540,
scale 1:24,000.
____ 1980b, Preliminary geologic map
of the Richmond quadrangle, Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, California: U.S.
Geological Survey Open-File Report 80-1100, scale 1:24,000.
____ 1980c, Preliminary geologic
maps of the La Costa Valley, Livermore, and Niles quadrangles, Alameda and
Contra Costa Counties, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report
80-533, scale 1:24,000, 3 sheets.
____ 1981, Preliminary geologic map
of the Mare Island quadrangle, Solano and Contra Costa Counties, California: U.S.
Geological Survey Open-File Report 81-234, scale 1:24,000.
Earth Systems Consultants, 1979,
Geologic and seismic hazards investigations, Eaton Square, Fremont, California:
California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 1080.
____ 1980a, Geologic and seismic
hazards investigation, Sands property, Fremont, California: California
Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 1240.
____ 1980b, Supplemental subsurface
investigation, Inverness Glen, Hayward, California: on file at California
Division of Mines and Geology, San Francisco, California; file no. C-487.
____ 1980c, Geologic and seismic
hazards investigation, McIntyre property, Fremont, California: California
Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 1304.
____ 1981, Geotechnical report, Fremont
Station project, Tyson Lane, Fremont, California: California Geological Survey
CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 1473.
____ 1983, Geologic and seismic
hazards evaluation, proposed city library, Fremont, California: California
Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 1898.
____ 1985, Geotechnical report,
Niles school site development, Fremont, California: California Geological
Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2454.
____ 1986, Special Studies Zone
trenching: Fremont Civic Center, Fremont, California: California Geological
Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 1898.
____ 1987a, Geotechnical evaluation,
Fremont Apostolic Church property, 2390 and 2400 Durham Road, Fremont,
California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2462.
____ 1987b, Geotechnical report,
Mission property north, Fremont, California: California Geological Survey CGS
CD 2003-01, AP report 1281b.
____ 1988a, Updated geologic study,
Hillyer property, Fremont, California: California Geological Survey CGS CD
2003-01, AP report 2458.
____ 1988b, Geologic and seismic
hazards evaluation, 1.12 acre parcel, East Warren Avenue, Fremont, California:
California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2461.
____ 1990, Supplementary geologic
and geotechnical engineering studies, Bettencourt Ranch project, Fremont,
California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2456.
____ 1996, Soil engineering study
Mission Estates, tract 6891, Fremont, California: California Geological Survey
CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2460.
____ 2000, Update geologic and soil
engineering study, tract 7153, 2390 Durham Road, Fremont, California:
California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2462.
Ellsworth, W.L., 1990, Earthquake
history, 1769-1989: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1515, p. 153-187.
Engeo Incorporated, 1977,
Alquist-Priolo investigation of the Hayward Fault Zone, property along 35th
Avenue and Redwood Road, Oakland, California: California Geological Survey CGS
CD 2003-01, AP report 538.
Epigene Incorporated, 1986, Revised
fault setback zones for property located adjacent to and north of 16,790 Los
Banos Street, Castro Valley area, Alameda County: California Geological Survey
CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2586.
____ 1990, Geologic and fault investigation
for site, located at the north end of Scenic Way, Alameda County, California:
California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2566.
Fox, K.F., Jr, Fleck, R.J., Curtis,
G.H., and Meyer, C.E., 1985, Implications of the northwestwardly younger age of
the volcanic rocks of west-central California: Geological Society of America
Bulletin, v. 96, no. 5, p. 647-654.
Galehouse, J.S., 1991, Theodolite
measurements of creep rates on San Francisco Bay region faults: U.S. Geological
Survey Open-File Report 91-352, p. 375-384.
Galehouse, J.S., 2002, Data from
theodolite measurements of creep rates on San Francisco Bay region faults,
California: 1979-2001: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 02-225, 94 p.
Galehouse, J.S., and Lienkaemper,
J.J., 2003, Inferences drawn from two decades of alinement array measurements
of creep on faults in the San Francisco Bay region: Bulletin Seismological
Society America, v. 93, p. 2415-2433.
Galehouse, J.S., Brown, B.D.,
Pierce, B., and Thordsen, J.J., 1982, Changes in movement rates on certain East
Bay faults: California Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 62, p.
236-250.
Geotechnical Engineering Inc., 2002,
Soil investigation including geologic faulting investigation, additions to
Moliga family residence, 1226 Ash Street, Hayward, California,: California
Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 3224.
Geotechnical Engineering Inc., 2004,
Geologic faulting and soil investigation, new residential developments, two
parcels at 21365 Ocean View Drive, Hayward, California: California Geological
Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 3317.
Graham, S.A., McCloy, C., Hitzman,
M., Ward, R., and Turner, R., 1984, Basin evolution during change from
convergent to transform continental margin in central California: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 68, no. 3, p. 233-249.
Graymer, R.W., 2000, Geologic map
and map database of the Oakland metropolitan area, Alameda, Contra Costa, and
San Francisco counties, California: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field
Studies Map MF-2342.
Graymer, R.W., Jones, D.L., and
Brabb, E.E., 1994, Preliminary geologic map emphasizing bedrock formations in
Contra Costa County, California; a digital database: U. S. Geological Survey
Open-File Report 94-0622, 11 p.
Graymer, D.L., Jones, D.L., and
Brabb, E.E., 1995, Geologic map of the Hayward Fault Zone, Contra Costa,
Alameda, and Santa Clara Counties, California: U. S. Geological Survey
Open-File Report 95-597, 8 p.
Graymer, R.W., Jones, D.L., and
Brabb, E.E., 1996, Preliminary geologic map emphasizing bedrock formations in
Alameda County, California; a digital database: U. S. Geological Survey
Open-File Report 96-252.
Graymer, R.W., Ponce, D.A., Jachens,
R.C., Simpson, R.W., Phelps, G.A., and Wentworth, C.M., 2005, Three-dimensional
geologic map of the Hayward Fault, Northern California; correlation of rock
units with variations in seismicity, creep rate, and fault dip: Geology, v. 33,
no. 6, p. 521-524.
Graymer, R.W., Sarna-Wojcicki, A.M.,
Walker, J.P., McLaughlin, R.J., and Fleck, R.J., 2002, Controls on timing and
amount of right-lateral offset on the East Bay fault system, San Francisco Bay
region, California: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 114, no. 12, p.
1471-1479.
Gribaldo Jones and Associates,
1970a, Soil and geologic investigation for California Nursery Company property,
Fremont, California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 64.
____ 1970b, Geologic investigation
for Indian Hills, Planned Urban Development, Unit Number 2, Fremont, California:
consultant report in U.S. Geological Survey library, Menlo Park, California.
____ 1978, Soil and geologic
investigation for Branson Apartments, Fremont, California: California
Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 735.
Hall, C.A., 1958, Geology and
paleontology of the Pleasanton area, Alameda and Contra Costa Counties,
California: University of California Publications in the Geological Sciences
Bulletin 34, 90 p.
Hall, N.T., 1996, Fault rupture
hazard investigation, Founders Common, Mills College, Oakland, CA: Geomatrix,
Project No. 3226.03.
Harding Lawson Associates, 1986,
Geologic and fault investigation, proposed student housing, University of
California: Berkeley, California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01,
AP report 2529.
____ 1987, Fault investigation
report, additions to Claremont Resort Hotel, Oakland, California: California
Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 1992.
____ 1991, Fault hazard evaluation,
Hillside School, Berkeley, California: Berkeley Unified School District,
Berkeley, California, 21 p.: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP
report 2601.
Harsh, P.W., and Burford, R.O.,
1982, Alinement-array measurements of fault slip in the eastern San Francisco
Bay area, California: California Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 62, p. 251-260.
Hart, E.W., 1979, Fault evaluation
report, Hayward, Mission, and Calaveras Faults, Niles quadrangle, on file at
California Division of Mines and Geology, San Francisco, California; file no.
FER-88, 13 p.
Hart, E.W., and Bryant, W.A., 1997,
Fault-rupture hazard zones in California: California Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42, 47 p.
Harza Consulting Engineers and
Scientists, 1994, Geologic hazards evaluation, Redwood Heights Elementary School
modernization, 4401 Thirty-Ninth Avenue, Oakland, California: California
Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2961
Hayward Fault Paleoearthquake Group,
1999, Timing of paleoearthquakes on the northern Hayward fault, CA ÑPreliminary
evidence in El Cerrito, CA: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99-318, 33
p.
Herd, D.G., 1977, Map of Quaternary
faulting along the Hayward Fault Zone, Niles and Milpitas 7.5-minute
quadrangles, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 77-645, scale 1:24,000,
2 sheets.
____ 1978, Map of Quaternary
faulting along the northern Hayward Fault Zone; Mare Island, Richmond, Briones
Valley, Oakland West, Oakland East, San Leandro, Hayward, and Newark 7.5-minute
quadrangles, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 78-308, scale
1:24,000, 8 sheets.
Herzog Associates, 1990,
Geotechnical Investigation, El Portal School, Richmond, California: California
Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2616.
Hillebrandt, D., Associates, 1978,
Engineering geologic study and foundation investigation, four proposed
residential sites, Monterey and Leimert Boulevards, Oakland, California:
California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 808.
Hilley, G.E., BŸrgmann, R.,
Ferretti, A., Novali, F., and Rocca, F., 2004, Dynamics of slow-moving
landslides from permanent scatterer analysis: Science, v. 304, n. 5679,
1952-1955.
Hirschfeld, S., Ridley, A., and
Nason, R., 1982, Field trip stop 2, Hayward in Conference on Earthquake Hazards in
the: Eastern] San Francisco Bay Area, Field Trip Guidebook: Hayward, California, California State
University, p. 45-59.
Hirschfeld, S.E., 1982, Creep
patterns and surface deformation within the Hayward Fault Zone, Hayward,
California: California Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 62, p.
65-74.
Hull, J., and Associates, 1976,
Geotechnical investigation [of] AssessorÕs Map 414, Block 51, Lots 7, 8, 19,
20, and 21, between Locust and Birch Streets, near Hayward in Alameda County,
California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 784.
____ 1979, Soil and geology
investigation, proposed apartment complex, 5.4 acres, Calhoun Street, Hayward,
California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 1075.
____ 1981, Seismic hazard
investigation, proposed self-service station, Foothill Boulevard and Main
Street, Hayward, California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP
report 2589.
Johns, A., Finnigsmier, J. L., and
Short, R. D., 2001, Surface fault rupture hazard study, Oakland Zoo, Oakland,
CA: Kleinfelder, Inc. File No.44-000294/005.
Jones, D.L., and Curtis, G., 1991,
Guide to the geology of the Berkeley Hills, central Coast Ranges, California:
California Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 109, p. 63-73.
Jones, W.F., Incorporated, 1980,
Geotechnical hazards investigation for Windmill project, Fremont, California:
California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 1153.
Kaldveer and Associates, 1981, Fault
rupture hazard investigation for proposed shopping center, Oakland, California:
California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2522.
____ 1982, Fault location study,
Shell Oil Company, self-serve facility, Oakland, California: California
Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 1519.
Kelson, K.I., Koehler, R.D., Witter,
R.C., Andrew D. Barron, Sojourner, A.C., Fite, M.R., Baldwin, J.N., and Lettis,
W.R., 2000, Earthquake History of the Southern Hayward Fault, San Francisco Bay
Area, California: Lettis and Associates Final Report for U. S. Geological
Survey National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program, Award Number
99-HQ-GR-0102.
Lawson, A.C., 1908, The earthquake
of 1868, in A.
C. Lawson, A.C., ed., The California earthquake of April 18, 1906; Report of
the State Earthquake Investigation Commission (Volume I): Carnegie Institution
of Washington Publication 87, p. 434-448.
Lennert, B.J., 1982, Accurate
location of the active trace of the Hayward fault between Ashby and Marin
Avenues in Berkeley, with proposed models of stress-strain conditions for creep
and rapid offset: California Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication
62, p. 45-54.
Lennert, B.J., and Curtis, G.H.,
1985, Final fault hazard study, Dwight-Derby project, University of California,
Berkeley, California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report
2530.
Lettis and Associates, 1991, Fault
hazard investigation, Hayward Fault, Lakepointe development site, Fremont,
California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2459.
Lettis and Associates, 1999, Surface
fault hazard evaluation, proposed George Mark ChildrenÕs House, Alameda County,
California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2721.
Lettis and Associates, 2000,
Earthquake history of the southern Hayward fault, San Francisco Bay region,
California: U.S. Geological Survey, National Earthquake Hazard Reduction
Program, Final Report for Award No. 99-HQ-GR-0102, 23 p.
Lettis and Associates, 2003,
Geologic evaluation of the Hayward fault crossing, Pacific Gas & Electric
Company Line B1, Fremont, CA. (unpublished report).
Lienkaemper, J.J., 1989, Field trip
guide to the Hayward Fault: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 89-500, 23
p.
Lienkaemper, J.J., 1992, Map of
recently active traces of the Hayward fault, Alameda and Contra Costa Counties,
California: U. S. Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Field Studies Map, MF-2196,
13 p., 1 plate.
Lienkaemper, J. J., and Borchardt,
G., 1996, Holocene slip rate of the Hayward fault at Union City, California:
Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 101, no, B3, p. 6099-6108.
Lienkaemper, J.J., Borchardt, G.,
and Lisowski, M., 1991, Historic creep rate and potential for seismic slip
along the Hayward Fault, California: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 96,
no. B11, p. 18,261-18,283.
Lienkaemper, J.J., and Galehouse,
J.S., 1997a, Revised long-term creep rates on the Hayward Fault, Alameda and
Contra Costa counties, California: U. S. Geological Survey Open-File Report
97-690.
Lienkaemper, J.J., Galehouse, J.S., and
Simpson, R.W., 1997, Creep response of the Hayward Fault to stress changes
caused by the Loma Prieta earthquake: Science, v. 276, p. 2014-2016.
Lienkaemper, J.J., Galehouse, J.S.,
and Simpson, R.W., 2001, Long-term monitoring of creep rate along the Hayward
fault and evidence for a lasting creep response to 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake:
Geophysical Research Letters, v. 28, no. 11, p. 2265-2268.
Lienkaemper, J.J. and Hamilton,
J.C., 1992, Stop A-3, Holy Sepulchre fault scarp: in Field Trip Guidebook, Second
Conference on Earthquake Hazards of the Eastern San Francisco Bay Area,
California State University, Hayward [East Bay], p. 151-156.
Lienkaemper, J., Dawson, T.,
Personius, S., and Seitz, G., Reidy, L. and Schwartz, D., 2002a, Logs and data
from trenches across the Hayward Fault at Tyson's Lagoon (Tule Pond), Fremont,
Alameda County, California: U. S. Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Field
Studies Map, MF-2386, 12 p., 2 plates.
Lienkaemper, J.J., Dawson, T. E.,
Personius, S. F. and Seitz, G.G., Reidy, L. M. and Schwartz, D. P., 2002b, A
record of large earthquakes on the southern Hayward fault for the past 500
years: Bulletin Seismological Society America, v. 92, no. 7, p. 2637-2658.
Lienkaemper, J.J., and Williams,
P.L. 1999, Evidence for surface rupture in 1868 on the Hayward Fault in North
Oakland and major rupturing in prehistoric earthquakes: Geophysical Research
Letters, v. 26, no. 13, p. 1549-1952.
Lienkaemper, J.J., Williams, P. L.,
Dawson, T. E., Personius, S. F., Seitz, G. G., Heller, S. J., and Schwartz, D.
P., 2003, Logs and data from trenches across the Hayward Fault at Tyson's
Lagoon (Tule Pond), Fremont, Alameda County, California: U.S. Geological Survey
Open-File Report 2003-488, 6 p., 8 plates.
Lienkaemper, J.J., Williams, P.L.,
Sickler, R.R., and Fumal, T.E., 2005, Log of Trench 04A across the Hayward
Fault at Tyson's Lagoon (Tule Pond), Fremont, Alameda County, California: U.S.
Geological Survey Open-File Report 2005-1350, 2 plates.
Liniecki-Laporte, M., and Andersen,
D.W., 1988, Possible new constraints on late Miocene depositional patterns in
west-central California: Geology, v. 16, no. 3, p. 216-220.
Lisowski, M., Savage, J.C., and
Prescott, W.H., 1991, The velocity field along the San Andreas Fault in central
and southern California: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 96, no. B5, p.
8369-8390.
Louderback, G.D., 1947, Central
California earthquakes of the 1830's: Seismological Society of America
Bulletin, v. 34, no. 1, p. 33-74.
Mace, N., and Petersen, M., 1993,
Hayward fault investigation at the BART Irvington Station site for the Warm
Springs Extension: Geotechnical Consultants, Inc.
Maison, B., Fuette, T., and Lee, D.,
1998, Hayward fault creep mitigation for a major water aqueduct: in 6th National Conference on
Earthquake Engineering, Seattle, WA., 12 p.
McLaughlin, R.J., Sliter, W.V.,
Elder, W.P., McDougall, K., and Russell, P.C., 1990, 190-km post-middle Miocene
offset on the Tolay-Hayward-Calaveras Fault system superposed on large-scale
Late Cretaceous to early Eocene translation [abs.]: Geological Society of
America Abstracts with Programs, v. 22, no. 3, p. 67.
Merrill and Seeley Incorporated,
1979, Active fault investigation, 6.6 acre parcel, Briar Place, Fremont,
California, Tract 4661thatCalifornia Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP
report 1299.
Myers, D., Associates, 1980,
Geologic hazards investigation, Rancho Arroyo, AssessorÕs Parcel 507-124-22, 23
and portions of -16 and 17, City of Fremont, California: California Geological
Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 1281a.
____ 1981, Geologic hazards
investigation, Delucchi property, City of Fremont, California: California
Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 1339.
____ 1984, Fault hazard evaluation,
Tana Development Company property, northeast side of Fletcher Lane, Hayward, California:
California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 1705.
____ 1987, Fault hazard
investigation, San Pablo Ministorage Project, San Pablo, California: California
Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2046.
____ 1989, Fault hazard investigation,
Subdivision 5496, 3156-73rd Avenue, Oakland, California: California Geological
Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2341.
____ 1995, Fault hazard
investigation, El Cerrito fire station property, 1520 Arlington Boulevard, El
Cerrito, California, DMA Project 2003.95: California Geological Survey CGS CD
2003-01, AP report 2893.
Nason, R.D., 1971, Investigation of
fault creep slippage in northern and central California: San Diego, University
of California, Ph. D. dissertation, 231 p.
Nason, R.D., Phillipsborn, F.R., and
Yamashita, P.A., 1974, Catalog of creepmeter measurements in central California
from 1968 to 1972: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 74-31, 287 p.
Nason, R.D., and Rogers, T.H., 1970,
Active slippage on the Calaveras, Hayward and San Andreas Faults: Geological
Society of America, Cordilleran Section, guide book for field trip excursions,
1970 Field Trip 5, 26 p.
Prescott, W.H., and M. Lisowski,
1983, Strain accumulation along the San Andreas Fault system east of San
Francisco Bay, California: Tectonophysics, v. 97, p. 41-56.
Purcell Rhoades and Associates,
1976, Soil and geologic investigation for two 30-unit apartment complexes,
northeast of Gilbert street, Castro Valley, California: California Geological
Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 807.
____ 1989, Soil engineering and
fault study: proposed residential apartment complex, 1472 Mowry Avenue,
Fremont, California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report
2288.
Radbruch, D.H., 1957, Areal and
engineering geology of the Oakland West quadrangle, California: U.S. Geological
Survey Miscellaneous Geologic Investigations Map I-239, scale 1:24,000.
____ 1968a, Map showing recently
active breaks along the Hayward Fault Zone and the southern part of the Calaveras
Fault Zone, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, scale
1:24,000.
____ 1968b, New evidence of historic
fault activity in Alameda, Contra Costa, and Santa Clara Counties, California: in Dickinson, W. R., and Grantz, A.,
eds., Geologic problems of San Andreas Fault System: Stanford University:
California Publications in the Geological Science Series 11, p. 46-49.
____ 1969, Areal and engineering
geology of the Oakland East [7.5 minute] quadrangle, California: U.S.
Geological Survey Miscellaneous Geologic Quadrangle Map GQ-769, scale 1:24,000,
15 p.
Radbruch, D.H., and Case, J.E.,
1967, Preliminary geologic map of Oakland and vicinity, California: U.S.
Geological Survey Open File Report 67-183, scale 1:24,000.
Radbruch, D.H., and Lennert, B.J.,
1966, Damage to culvert under Memorial Stadium, University of California,
Berkeley, caused by slippage in the Hayward Fault Zone: Seismological Society
of America Bulletin, v. 56, no. 2, p. 295-304.
Radbruch-Hall, D.H., 1974, Map
showing recently active breaks along the Hayward Fault Zone and the southern
part of the Calaveras Fault Zone, California: U.S. Geological Survey
Miscellaneous Investigations Map I-813, scale 1:24,000, 2 sheets.
Rantz, S.E., 1971, Mean annual
precipitation and precipitation depth-duration-frequency data for the San
Francisco Bay region, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report,
scale 1:500,000, 23 p.
Robinson, G.D., 1953, The Leona
rhyolite, Alameda County, California: American Mineralogist, v. 38, no. 11-12,
p. 1204-1217.
____ 1956, Geology of the Hayward
quadrangle, California: U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Quadrangle Map GQ-88,
scale 1:24,000.
Rose, R.B., 1974, Geological report,
Jefco Development, minor subdivision MS-74-12, Fremont, California: California
Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 108.
Rose, R.L., 1978, Age of the Alum
Rock rhyolite [abs.]: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v.
10, p. 144.
Rutherford and Chekene, 1991,
Supplemental report, fault hazard evaluation, Kiwanis building, Temescal
Regional Recreation Area, Oakland, California: East Bay Regional Parks
District, Oakland, California.
Schulz, S.S., 1989, Catalog of
creepmeter measurements in California from 1966 through 1988: U.S. Geological
Survey Open-File Report 89-650, p. 193.
Schulz, S.S., Mavko, G.M., Burford,
R.O., and Stuart, W.D., 1982, Long-term fault creep observations in central
California: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 87, no. B8, p. 6977-6982.
Sharp, 1972, Map showing recently
active breaks along the San Jacinto Fault Zone between the San Bernardino area
and Borrego Valley, California: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous
Investigations Map I-675, scale 1:24,000, 3 sheets.
Smith, T.C., 1980a, Fault evaluation
report, Hayward Fault, Richmond segment: on file at California Division of
Mines and Geology, San Francisco, California; file no. FER-101.
____ 1980b, Fault evaluation report,
Hayward Fault, Oakland segment: on file at California Division of Mines and
Geology, San Francisco, California; file no. FER-102.
____ 1981, Fault evaluation report,
Hayward Fault, Hayward segment: on file at California Division of Mines and
Geology, San Francisco, California; file no. FER-103.
____ 1982, Self-guided field trip 4,
fault creep along the Hayward Fault in the Richmond-San Pablo area in
Conference on Earthquake Hazards in the [Eastern] San Francisco Bay Area, Field
Trip Guidebook: Hayward, California, California State University (East Bay), p.
93-101.
Soares, A., and Associates, 1986,
Fault hazard investigation for Assessor's Parcel Number 37-2538-20, Cunningham
Street, Oakland, California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP
report 2430.
Soares, A., and Associates, 1981,
Geotechnical investigation for Assessor's Parcel Number 48-200-11, Poplar Avenue
in the Richmond area of Contra Costa County, California: California Geological
Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 2903.
Soil Engineering Construction
Company, 1973, Engineering geology investigation for Mission View Greens
[Hayward, California]: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report
29.
Steinbrugge, K.V., Zacher, E.G.,
Tocher, D., Whitten, C.A., and Clair, C.N., 1960, Creep on the San Andreas
Fault: Seismological Society of America Bulletin, v. 50, p. 389-415.
Taylor, C.L., 1982, Geologic studies
conducted for the Alameda County Fairmont Hospital-Juvenile Hall complex:
California Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 62, p. 299-308.
____ 1992, Active
fault creep better defines location of fault traces in the Montclair area of
Oakland, California [abs.]: Earthquake Hazards in the Eastern San Francisco Bay
Area, 2nd Conference, Abstracts with Program.
Taylor, C.L., Cluff, J., and
Hirschfeld, S., eds., 1982, Field Trip Guidebook, Conference on Earthquake
Hazards in the [Eastern] San Francisco Bay Area: Hayward, California,
California State University
(East Bay), 142 p.
Taylor, C.L., compiler, and Hall,
N.T., and Melody, M., eds., 1992, Field Trip Guidebook of the Second Conference
on Earthquake Hazards in the Eastern San Francisco Bay Area, March 25-29, 1992,
California State University, East Bay (formerly Hayward): Oakland, Geomatrix
Consultants Inc., 225 p.
Taylor, C.L., and Lienkaemper, J.L.
1992, Location of Hayward fault traces at Montclair Village area of Oakland,
California: Field Trip Guidebook, Second Conference on Earthquake Hazards of
the Eastern San Francisco Bay Area, California State University, Hayward [East
Bay], p. 83-93.
Taylor, C.L., and Page, B.M., 1982, Man
made exposures of the Hayward Fault, Niles, [Fremont,] California in Conference on Earthquake Hazards in
the [Eastern] San Francisco Bay Area, Field Trip Guidebook: Hayward, California, California State
University, p. 37-43.
Taylor, C.L., and Power, M. S.,
1994, Geologic/geotechnical studies for fault crossings of major pipelines East
Bay Municipal Utility District Seismic Hazard Evaluation Program: Geomatrix
Consultants Project No. 2683.
Terrasearch Incorporated, 1977a,
Geologic investigation on lands of Harry Duncan (Tract 3822), Fremont,
California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 459.
____ 1977b, Soil and geologic
investigation on proposed residential development, Driscoll Road, Fremont,
California [Tentative Tract 3885]: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01,
AP report 602.
____ 1977c, Soil and geologic
investigation on proposed residential development, Mowry Avenue and Bonner
Avenue, Fremont, California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP
report 704.
____ 1978, Geologic
investigation on Tract 3449, lands of Amaral, Mission Boulevard and Nursery
Avenue, Fremont, California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP
report 871.
____ 1990, Supplemental
geologic/seismic investigation on Lake Chabot Terrace, 13575 Lake Chabot Road,
Alameda County, California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP
report 2590, 4 p.
____ 1991, Geologic/seismic
investigation on Parcel A and Lots 52 and 53, Tract 2123, San Pablo Dam Road,
San Pablo, California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report
2516.
Thompson, M.M., 1979, Maps for
America, Cartographic products of the U.S. Geological Survey and others: U.S.
Geological Survey, 265 p.
Toppozada, T.R., and Borchardt, G.,
1998, Re-evaluation of the 1836 "Hayward Fault" earthquake and the
1838 San Andreas Fault earthquake: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America, v. 88, p. 140-159.
Wagner, J.R., 1978, Late Cenozoic
history of the Coast Ranges east of San Francisco Bay: University of
California, Berkeley, Ph.D. dissertation, 161 p.
Wahrhaftig, C., 1984, Streetcar to
subduction and other plate tectonic trips by public transport in San Francisco:
Washington, D.C., American Geophysical Union, 76 p. [Trip 7, Hayward Fault, p.
55-63
Wallace, R.E., 1990, Geomorphic
expression, in
R. E. Wallace, ed., The San Andreas Fault System, California: U.S. Geological
Survey Professional Paper 1515, p. 14-58.
____ ed., 1990, The San Andreas
Fault System, California: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1515, 283
p.
Water Infrastructure
Partners, 2004, Geotechnical investigation seismic upgrade of [Bay Division
Pipeline] BDPL Nos. 3 and 4 at the Hayward fault zone crossing, Fremont,
California: San Francisco, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission.
Wells, D.L., Hall, N. T., and Swan,
F. H., 2001, Fault rupture hazard evaluation, California Memorial Stadium,
University of California, Berkeley, CA: Geomatrix Consultants, Project No.
5442.
Williams, P.L., 1991, Evidence of
late Holocene ruptures, southern Hayward Fault, California: Seismological
Research Letters, v. 62, no. 1, p. 14.
Williams, P.L., and Hosokawa, A.M.,
1992, Geomorphic features related to the Hayward Fault at the University of
California, Berkeley, in Field Trip Guidebook, Second Conference on Earthquake Hazards of the
Eastern San Francisco Bay Area: California State University, Hayward [East
Bay], p. 65-69.
Williams, P.L., 1993, Geologic
record of southern Hayward fault earthquakes: California Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication, v. 113, p. 171-179.
Wills, C.J., 1991, Products of the
Alquist-Priolo Fault Evaluation and Zoning Project: California Geology, v. 44,
no. 3, p. 59-63.
Wilmesher, J.F., and Baker, F.B.,
1987, Catalog of alinement array measurements in central and southern California
from 1983 through 1986: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 87-280, 157 p.
Wong, P., Bryant, W.A., and Treiman,
J.A., 2003, Fault investigation reports for development sites within
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones in northern California, 1974-2000:
California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01.
Woodward-Clyde and Associates,
1970a, Active fault risk investigation and evaluation, Hayward Commercial
Development Center: consultant report in U.S. Geological Survey library, Menlo
Park, California.
____ 1970b, Fremont Meadows active
fault investigation and evaluation, Fremont, California: California Geological
Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 744.
____ 1976, Alquist-Priolo Special
Study Zone report, Shinn property, Tract 3613, Fremont, California: California
Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 380.
____ 1977, Active fault
investigation, proposed mausoleum, Holy Sepulchre Cemetery, Hayward,
California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 436.
____ 1978a, Geologic/seismic hazards
evaluation, Fairmont Hospital-Juvenile Hall, San Leandro, California: Alameda
County Public Works Agency, Hayward, California: on file at California Division
of Mines and Geology, San Francisco, California; file no. A2721.
____ 1978b, Phase II geologic assessment,
San Pablo Redevelopment Agency Hillside Neighborhood, San Pablo, California:
California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 727.
____ 1978c, Active fault
investigation, Hillcrest School, Hayward Unified School District, Hayward, California:
on file at California Division of Mines and Geology, San Francisco, California;
file no. C-341.
Woodward-Lundgren and Associates,
1972, Geologic and seismic site evaluation, Masonic Home of California, Union
City, California: consultant report in U.S. Geological Survey library, Menlo
Park, California.
Working Group on California
Earthquake Probabilities, 1990, Probabilities of large earthquakes in the San
Francisco Bay Region, California: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1053, 51 p.
Working Group on California
Earthquake Probabilities, 2003, Earthquake probabilities in the San Francisco
Bay Region: 2000-2030: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 03-214,
235 p.
Yamashita, P.A. and Burford, R.O.,
1973, Catalog of preliminary results from an 18-station creepmeter network
along the San Andreas Fault system in central California for the time interval
June 1969 to June 1973: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, 215 p.
Zickefoose and Associates, 1981,
Geologic fault study, minor subdivision, Lots 3, 4, and 41, Block 24, Bernhard
and Felix Avenues, Tewksbury Heights, Richmond, Contra Costa County,
California: California Geological Survey CGS CD 2003-01, AP report 1356.
.
APPENDIX 1
MAP ABBREVIATIONS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C
- CREEP EVIDENCE
1 - strongly pronounced fault creep
2 - distinct and certain creep evidence
3 - inconclusive evidence for creep
? - additional
uncertainty in tectonic origin
aa - alinement
array
cb - concentration
of cracks in above-grade structure
cc - concentration
of cracks in concrete slab
cp - concentration
of pavement cracks
cr - clockwise
rotation of sidewalk
cs - curb
separating from sidewalk or pavement
cw - clockwise rotation of wall
ec - en
echelon left-stepping cracks in pavement
jo - opening
of joints or cracks in concrete
pp - multiple
patches in pavement
pu - compressional pop-up or buckle in
concrete
ra - right-laterally offset aqueduct, water
pipe, or tunnel
rb - distortion of above-grade structure
(including separating additions and stairways)
rc - right-laterally offset curb or form
line or railing
rf - right-laterally offset fence
line
rp - right-laterally offset painted line
rr - right-laterally offset
railroad tracks or guardrail
rs - right-laterally offset
sidewalk
rt - right-laterally
offset line of trees
rw - right-laterally offset wall
so - surveyed offset feature
u - unspecified
evidence ___________________________________________________________________________
G
- GEOMORPHIC FEATURES
1 - strongly pronounced feature
2 - distinct feature
3 - weakly pronounced feature
? - additional uncertainty in
tectonic origin
af - alignment
of multiple features as listed
as - arcuate
scarp
bt - downthrown surface tilts back toward
fault
df - depression formed by some aspect of fault
deformation, undifferentiated
dr - sag, depression formed in right stepover
of fault trace
gi - linear break (or gradual
inflection) in slope
hb - linear hillside bench
hv - linear
hillside valley
ls - fault scarp height enlarged by
landsliding
lv - linear valley or trough
mp - Youngest
traces disturbed by human activities.
Mapped trace bisects disturbed zone. Location uncertainty (dash gap in linework) equals half
width of disturbed zone.
n -
notch
pr - pressure ridge in left stepover
rr - right-laterally offset ridge
line
rs - right-laterally offset stream or
gully
sb - broad linear scarp (implies multiple
traces)
sc - scissor point, sense of vertical
separation reverses
se - subsoil
exposed
sl - linear
scarp, undifferentiated
sn - narrow
linear scarp (implies dominant trace)
sp - spring
ss - swale
in saddle
vl - line
of vegetation
_______________________________________________________________
T
- TRENCH EXPOSURES (and other
geologic evidence)
H1 - Holocene
age of offset determined by radiocarbon (14C) dating
H2 - Modern
soil or alluvial unit distinctly offset, or contains features conclusive of
shearing, such as gouge, rotated pebbles, transported materials in shear zone,
and filled fissures over distinct Pleistocene faults
H? - Inconclusive
signs of Holocene offset, such as steps in base of soil or apparent shears in
clay-rich materials. Without
corroboration such evidence neither proves nor disproves either existence or
age of faulting
H
- Active trace reported in trench, trench logs not in public file
HP - Distinct
faulting in unconsolidated alluvium of possibly Holocene or more likely latest
Pleistocene age
F? - Feature
shown as fault in log resembles nontectonic feature such as bedrock-alluvial
contact, buried terrace riser, or landslide plane
NF - No
fault observed
P
- Distinct evidence of significant faulting in
Pliocene or Pleistocene sediments
RC - Roadcut log
WB - Ground
water barrier
U
- Age of faulting unobtainable
because surficial deposits removed
REFERENCE
CODES (see also Abbreviated Map
References and text for full references.)
A2456 - Trench log or creep evidence in Alquist-Priolo
report AP-2456, available on CD from California Geological Survey [Wong and
others, 2003]
C200 -
Trench log or creep evidence in non-Alquist-Priolo consultantÕs report filed at
CDMG.
G70 -
Non-Alquist-Priolo unpublished report referenced in abbreviated
references as G70.
APPENDIX 2
ABBREVIATED MAP REFERENCES
(See text for full references)
A29 Soil Engineering Construction
Company (1973)
A64 Gribaldo Jones and Associates
(1970a)
A70 Berlogar Long and Associates (1975)
A108 Rose (1974)
A170 Burkland and Associates (1975)
A380 Woodward-Clyde Consultants (1976)
A436 Woodward-Clyde Consultants (1977)
A459 Terrasearch Incorporated (1977a)
A477 Cooper-Clark and Associates (1974)
A511 Burkland and Associates (1976a)
A538 Engeo Incorporated (1977)
A602 Terrasearch Incorporated (1977b)
A618 Burkland and Associates (1977b)
A671 Burkland and Associates (1972)
A672 Burkland and Associates (1976b)
A679 Burkland and Associates (1973)
A704 Terrasearch Incorporated (1977c)
A716 Burkland and Associates (1976c)
A727 Woodward-Clyde Consultants (1978b)
A735 Gribaldo Jones and Associates (1978)
A744 Woodward-Clyde and Associates (1970b)
A784 Hull and Associates (1976)
A807 Purcell Rhoades and Associates (1976)
A808 Hillebrandt Associates (1978)
A871 Terrasearch Incorporated (1978)
A943 Burkland and Associates (1978)
A1075 Hull and Associates (1979)
A1080 Earth Systems Consultants (1979)
A1153 Cotton and Associates (1979)
A1153 Jones, W.F., Incorporated (1980)
A1240 Earth Systems Consultants (1980a)
A1281a Myers
Associates (1980)
A1281b Earth
Systems Consultants (1987b)
A1299 Merrill and Seeley Incorporated (1979)
A1304 Earth Systems Consultants (1980c)
A1339 Myers Associates (1981)
A1356 Zickefoose and Associates (1981)
A1473 Earth Systems Consultants (1981)
A1475 Burkland and Associates (1977a)
A1519 Kaldveer and Associates (1982)
A1705 Myers Associates (1984)
A1898 Earth Systems Consultants (1983, 1986)
A1992 Harding Lawson Associates (1987)
A2046 Myers Associates (1987)
A2288 Purcell Rhoades and Associates (1989)
A2341 Myers Associates (1989)
A2430 Soares and Associates (1986)
A2454 Earth Systems Consultants (1985)
A2456 Earth Systems Consultants (1990)
A2457 Crosby and Associates (1989)
A2458 Earth Systems Consultants (1988a)
A2459 Lettis and Associates (1991)
A2460 Cleary Consultants Incorporated (1989)
A2461 Earth Systems Consultants (1988b)
A2462 Earth Systems Consultants (1987a)
A2514 California Department of Transportation (1991)
A2516 Terrasearch Incorporated (1991)
A2522 Kaldveer and Associates (1981)
A2529 Harding Lawson Associates (1986)
A2530 Lennert and Curtis (1985)
A2566 Epigene Incorporated (1990)
A2582 Cooper Engineers (1986)
A2586 Epigene Incorporated (1986)
A2589 Hull and Associates (1981)
A2590 Terrasearch Incorporated (1990)
A2601 Harding Lawson Associates (1991)
B66 Bonilla (1966)
B77 Burkland and Associates (1977c)
B81 Brown, Brekke, and Korbin (1981)
B88A Borchardt, Lienkaemper, Budding, and
Schwartz (1988a)
B88B Borchardt (1988)
BL66 Blanchard and Laverty (1966)
BM93 Borchardt and Mace (1993)
BS82 Burford and Sharp (1982)
C86 Cotton, Hall and Hay (1986)
C341 Woodward-Clyde Consultants (1978c)
C375 Woodward-Clyde Consultants (1978a)
C487 Earth Systems Consultants (1980b)
CC68 Cooper-Clark and Associates (1968)
CS66 Cluff and Steinbrugge (1966)
FER101 Smith (1980a)
G01 Geomatrix (2001)
G70 Gribaldo Jones and Associates
(1970b)
G91 Galehouse (1991)
G94 Geomatrix (1994)
G96 Geomatrix (1996)
GC93 Geotechnical Consultants Inc (1993)
GEI90 Geotechnical Engineering Inc. (1990)
H82A Hirschfeld (1982)
H82B Hirschfeld, Ridley, and Nason (1982)
HB82 Harsh and Burford (1982)
L82 Lennert (1982)
L01 Lienkaemper and others (2001)
L03 Lienkaemper and others (2003)
L05 Lienkaemper and others (2005)
L91 Lienkaemper, Borchardt, and
Lisowski (1991)
L97 Lienkaemper Galehouse (1997)
N71 Nason (1971)
NC70 Nason, R.D. and Carey, J.P., 1970,
unpublished data; see Woodward-Clyde (1970a).
PL83 Prescott and Lisowski (1983)
RC91 Rutherford and Chekene (1991)
RH74 Radbruch-Hall (1974)
RL66 Radbruch and Lennert (1966)
TP82 Taylor and Page (1982)
W91 Williams (1991)
WB87 Wilmesher and Baker (1987)
WC70 Woodward-Clyde and Associates (1970a)
WL72 Woodward-Lundgren and Associates (1972)