Professional Documents
Culture Documents
AppendixAFigures A/1
AppendixBHUZUSMethodOverview(asAdoptedbyOSHPD) B/1
AppendixCComputerModelsandDeformedBuildingShapes C/1
AppendixDStructuralCalculations
a) LoadingCriteria D/1
b) MaterialPropertiesusedinETABSModel&LoadCombinations D/2
c) SeismicParametersandResponseSpectrum D/3
d) SeismicCoefficients D/6
e) ETABSAnalysisSummaryReports D/12
f) TorsionIrregularityCheck D/68
g) NatatoriumBuilding,DeflectionIncompatibilityCheck D/71
h) EvaluationofSignificantStructuralDeficiencies D/77
i) ResultsofCollapseProbabilityCalculations D/85
j) DivingPlatform,OverturningCheck D/92
AppendixEEarthquakeDamagetoBuildingSimilartoNatatoriumBuilding E/1
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|1
EXECUTIVESUMMARY
In late 2008, the City of Long Beach began assessing the existing conditions of the Belmont Plaza
Pool Buildings and developing preliminary cost estimates to rehabilitate or replace the Buildings.
Unfortunately, those efforts were postponed because of funding constraints. The City recently
reinitiateditsefforttodevelopalongtermplanforBelmontPlazaPoolandhiredTTGtoevaluate
itsstructuralconditions.BasedontheCityspriorassessmentsofBelmontPoolandtheirdesireto
evaluatewhetherthebuildingswouldbesafeforusebythepublicwhileplansforarehabilitation
ofnewaquaticsfacilityhavebeendeveloped,TTGrecommendedacollapseprobabilityassessment
based on an Office of Statewide Health Planning & Development (OSHPD) Hazards U.S. (HAZUS)
evaluation for the Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings at 4000 East Olympic Plaza in Long Beach,
California. A collapse probability assessment for the existing buildings will help to determine their
currentandlongtermoperationalstatus.
OSHPD developed a version of the HAZUS method to calculate the probability of a structural
collapse of an individual building in the event of an earthquake. Developed by FEMA and the
National Institute of Building Science, HAZUS is a methodology that evaluates potential structural
damage,death,andeconomiclossduetonaturaldisasterslikeearthquakes,hurricanes,orfloods.
WhileonlyCaliforniahospitalbuildingsarerequiredbylawtobeassessedusingHAZUS,itcurrently
isthemostadvancedmethodforassessinganyindividualbuildingscollapseprobabilityduringan
earthquake.Whereothermethodsforevaluatingabuildingsseismicperformance,specificallythe
old Tier 1 evaluations per FEMA 310 (now known as ASCE 3103), may only reveal potential
structural deficiencies of the building during an earthquake, HAZUS produces solid quantitative
results illustrating the relative severity of structural deficiencies. Therefore, the HAZUS method is
themostappropriateonetouseforevaluationoftheBelmontPlazaPoolBuildingsatthisstage.
The goal of this evaluation is to utilize OSHPDs version of HAZUS to calculate the probability of a
structural collapse in the three existing Belmont Plaza buildings. Currently, buildings with an
OSHPDHAZUScollapseprobabilitythresholdof1.2%orlessareconsiderednotatriskofcomplete
collapse, but may not be reparable or functional following a Design Earthquake A (moderate
earthquakewithamagnitudeofabout5.0,havinga10%probabilitytobeexceededin5years).
Both the Belmont Private Event Building and Locker Building have an acceptable collapse
probability of less than 1.2%. However, the Natatorium Building, in its current condition, has a
1.5%probabilityofcollapse,whichexceedsOSHPDsHAZUScollapsethreshold.Thisbuildingposes
asignificantriskofcollapseintheeventofaDesignEarthquakeA.
Per the HAZUS evaluation, TTG recommends that the Natatorium concrete columns be
strengthenedtoreducetheriskofbuildingcollapseintheeventofaDesignEarthquakeA,allowing
theBelmontPlazaPoolComplextoremainoperationalthroughthenext5years.This,however,is
a limited structural retrofit which can only achieve a shortterm collapse prevention objective.
Longterm collapse prevention of the site will either be achieved through a comprehensive
structural upgrade of the existing buildings to mitigate earthquake risk, or the removal of the
buildingsfromservice.
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|2
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 KEYTERMDEFINITIONS
BuildingType
BuildingstructuralsystemsaretobeclassifiedastotheirModelBuildingTypepertheTablebelow.
For buildings with multiple types, all types will be listed. The building type resulting in the
maximumcollapseprobabilitywillbeutilizedtodeterminecollapseprobability.
ModelBuilding
Type
(MBT)
Description
W1 Wood,LightFrame(5,000sq.ft.)
W2 Wood,Greaterthan5,000sq.ft.
S1 SteelMomentFrame
S2 SteelBracedFrame
S3 SteelLightFrame
S4 SteelFramewithCastInPlaceConcreteShearWalls
S5 SteelFramewithUnreinforcedMasonryInfillWalls
C1 ConcreteMomentFrame
C2 ConcreteShearWalls
C3 ConcreteFramewithUnReinforcedMasonryInfillWalls
PC1 PrecastConcreteTiltUpWalls
PC2 PrecastConcreteFrameswithConcreteShearWalls
RM1 ReinforcedmasonryBearingWallswithWoodorMetalDeckDiaphragms
RM2 ReinforcedmasonryBearingWallswithConcreteDiaphragms
URM UnreinforcedmasonryBearingWalls
MH ManufacturedHousing
DesignEarthquakeA
The sitespecific response spectra of a moderate earthquake with magnitude of about 5~5.9,
having a 10% probability of being exceeded in 5 years, selected for a threedimensional linear
dynamicanalysis(refertoSiteSpecificResponseSpectrainthissectionforfurtherexplanation).
DesignEarthquakeB
Thesitespecificresponsespectraofastrongearthquakewithmagnitudeofabout6~6.9,havinga
10%probabilityofbeingexceededbyanearthquakeoverthenext50years,typicallyusedfornew
buildingdesigns(refertoSiteSpecificResponseSpectrainthissectionforfurtherexplanation).
DynamicAnalysis
Analysis of structures subjected to dynamic loads (earthquake, wind) involves consideration of
timedependent forces. The resistance (responses) to displacement exhibited by a structure may
includeforceswhicharefunctionsofthedisplacementandinertialforces.
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|3
EarthquakeClassification
Class Magnitude
Great 8ormore
Major 7 7.9
Strong 6 6.9
Moderate 5 5.9
Light 4 4.9
Minor 3 3.9
HAZUS
DevelopedbyFEMAandtheandNationalInstituteofBuildingScience,HAZUSstandsforHazards
U.S., and is now considered a standardized, nationally applicable loss estimation methodology
used to evaluate potential structural damage, death, and economic loss due to natural disasters
likeearthquakes,hurricanes,orfloods.
HAZUSasadoptedbytheOfficeofStatewideHealthPlanning&Development(OSHPD)
California Building Standards Commission approved the implementation of HAZUS on November
14,2007toreexaminetheseismicriskStructuralPerformanceCategory1(SPC1)hospitalbuildings
(refertoStructuralPerformanceCategoriesinthissectionforfurtherexplanation).Thesebuildings
are considered at risk of collapse in the event of an earthquake or other natural disaster. This
reassessment allows OSHPD to reprioritize SPC1 hospital buildings based on their level of seismic
risk, and if they meet specified criteria, they can be reclassified to the SPC2 category. If
reclassified, these buildings move from a 2008/2013 seismic retrofit/replacement deadline to a
2030deadline.PerOSHPDsestimate,50%to60%ofthe1100SPC1hospitalbuildingretrofitsand
replacements qualified for the reclassification under the new HAZUS methodology. The goal of
OSHPDs version of HAZUS is to calculate the probability of collapse of an individual hospital
buildinginanearthquake.Forthisproject,TTGisapplyingthemethodologyofOSHPDsHAZUSfor
evaluationofthecollapseprobabilityofthebuildingsinBelmontPlazaPoolcomplex.
MoreinformationabouttheOSHPDHAZUScanbefoundathttp://www.oshpd.ca.gov.
LateralForceResistingSystem(LFRS)
ApartofthestructuralsystemdesignedtoresisttheDesignSeismic/WindForces.
Liquefaction
The process by which saturated, unconsolidated sediments are transformed into a substance that
actslikealiquid.
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|4
PeakGroundAcceleration(PGA)
Peakgroundaccelerationisameasureofearthquakeaccelerationonthegroundsurface,meaning
it is a measure of how hard the earth shakes in a given geographic area (otherwise known as the
earthquakesintensity).Inanearthquake,damagetobuildingsandinfrastructureisrelatedmore
closely to ground motion rather than the magnitude of the earthquake. For moderate
earthquakes, PGA is the more accurate determinate of damage. In major earthquakes, damage is
moreoftencorrelatedwithpeakgroundvelocity.
P[COL]
The probability of collapse is equal to the multiplication of HAZUS collapse factor and the
probabilityofcompletestructuraldamage.TheOfficeofStatewideHealthPlanning&Development
(OSHPD) determines that a hospital building is at high risk of collapse when its probability of
collapseisgreaterthan1.2%.
SeismicBaseShearCoefficient
Thecoefficienttocalculatethetotaldesignseismicforceorshearatthebaseofa structure.The
design seismic shear is equal to the multiplication of this coefficient and the building effective
seismicweight.
SignificantStructuralDeficiencies(SSD)
Anattributeofthestructureconsideredtobesignificantwithrespecttotheprobabilityofcollapse.
FollowingisalistofthesignificantstructuraldeficienciestobeconsideredintheHAZUSanalyses.
1. AgePre1993
2. MaterialTesting
3. LoadPath
4. MassIrregularity
5. VerticalDiscontinuity
6. ShortCaptiveColumn
7. MaterialDeterioration
8. WeakColumns
9. WallAnchorage
10. Redundancy
11. WeakStoryIrregularity
12. SoftStoryIrregularity
13. TorsionalIrregularity
14. DeflectionIncompatibility
15. CrippleWalls
16. Openings(indiaphragm)atShearWalls
17. ToppingSlabMissingorBuildingTypeisofLiftSlabConstruction
light
Damaze State
Moderate
Exrensive
omplete
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|5
SiteSpecificResponseSpectra
Aresponsespectrumissimplyaplotofthepeakorsteadystateresponse(displacement,velocity,
oracceleration)ofaseriesofoscillatorsofvaryingnaturalfrequencythatareforcedintomotionby
thesamebasevibrationorshock.Theresultingplotcanthenbeusedtoassessthepeakresponse
ofbuildingstoearthquakes.Asitespecificelasticdesignresponsespectrumbasedonthegeologic,
tectonic, seismologic and soil characteristics associated with the specific site. The Geotechnical
consultant, Marshall Lew of AMEC, integratedthe effects of all the earthquakes of different sizes,
occurring at different sources at different probabilities of occurrence, to provide an estimate of
probability of exceeding different levels of ground motion at a site during a specified period of
time.Basedontheestimatedremaininglifeof5to10yearsforthefacility,sitespecificresponse
spectraweredevelopedforgroundmotionshavinga10%probabilityofbeingexceededin5years.
StructuralDamageStates
Theextentandseverityofstructuraldamagetoabuildingisdescribedbyoneofthefourdamage
states.
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|6
StructuralPerformanceCategories(SPC)
ThisisthestructuralperformanceofabuildinginrelationtothestructuralprovisionsoftheAlquist
HospitalFacilitiesSeismicSafetyAct.
SPC DESCRIPTION
SPC1 Buildingsposingasignificantriskofcollapseandadangertothepublic.Buildingswitha
ProbabilityofCollapsegreaterthan1.20%shallbeplacedinthiscategory.
SPC2 Buildingsincompliancewiththepre1973CaliforniaBuildingStandardsCodeorotherapplicable
standards,butarenotincompliancewiththestructuralprovisionsoftheAlquistHospital
FacilitiesSeismicSafetyAct.Thesebuildingsdonotsignificantlyjeopardizelife,butmaynotbe
repairableorfunctionalfollowingstronggroundmotion.BuildingswithaProbabilityofCollapse
lessthanorequalto1.20%shallbeplacedinthiscategory.
SPC3 BuildingsincompliancewiththestructuralprovisionsoftheAlquistHospitalFacilitiesSeismic
SafetyAct,utilizingsteelmomentresistingframesinregionsofhighseismicityandconstructed
underapermitissuedpriortoOctober25,1994.Thesebuildingsmayexperiencestructural
damagewhichdoesnotsignificantlyjeopardizelife,butmaynotberepairableorfunctional
followingstronggroundmotion.
SPC4 BuildingsincompliancewiththestructuralprovisionsoftheAlquistHospitalFacilitiesSeismic
SafetyAct,maynotexperiencestructuraldamagewhichmayinhibittheabilitytoprovide
servicestothepublicfollowingstronggroundmotion.
SPC5 BuildingsincompliancewiththestructuralprovisionsoftheAlquistHospitalFacilitiesSeismic
SafetyAct,andisreasonablycapableofprovidingservicestothepublicfollowingstrongground
motion.
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|7
1.2 BUILDINGDESCRIPTION
The Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings, constructed circa 1968, are likely designed based on the
requirementsofthe1964editionoftheUniformBuildingCode.Fromtheinformationprovidedby
the City including original blueprints, these three buildings were built to the codes of the time.
The existing building complex is composed of three separate structures: the main onestory
NatatoriumBuilding,thetwostoryPrivateEventBuilding,andtheonestoryLockerRoomBuilding.
TheNatatoriumBuildingissituatedinthemiddleofthesite,anditisflankedbythePrivateEvent
Building to the west, and the Locker Building to the east (see Appendix A, Figure 1 to 15). These
three buildings are separated by 2 wide joints. The twostory Private Event Building shares a
partialbasementwiththeNatatoriumBuilding.TheonestoryNatatoriumBuildingisbuiltona4
0 high podium, and the onestory Locker Building raises 40 above the adjacent grade to share
the same ground floor elevation as the Natatorium. All three structures are concrete frame
buildingswithamixtureofcastinplaceconcreteandprecastconcreteconstruction.
The Natatorium Building has an approximate footprint of 224x148. The Natatorium is a very tall,
onestory,slopedroofstructurewithaheightthatvariesbetween48and50abovethefloordeck.
The structures Lateral Force Resisting System consists of a shear wallframe interactive system
with fullheight, castinplace concrete columns supporting discontinuous 250 high precast
concreteshearwallsabove230highglasscurtainwall(seeAppendixA,Figure1,5,9and10).
The Private Event Building has an approximate footprint of 127x78. The Lateral Force Resisting
System of the Private Event Facility consists of perimeter precast concrete shear walls above the
2ndfloor,andcastinplaceconcretewallsbelow.Theeastsideofthe2ndfloorismostlyopento
theNatatoriumwithonlytwo10wideprecastconcretepanelslocated25fromtheeastend.All
oftheabovementionedwallsarenotcontinuoustothefoundation,andaresupportedbycastin
place overhang concrete beams on the 2nd floor. The 1st floor concrete shear walls are set back
260and110fromthe2ndflooronthewestsideandthenorth/southdirection,respectively.
The north exterior ramp and south exterior stair provide access to the 2nd floor (see Appendix A,
Figure2,3,6and7).
The Locker Building has an approximate footprint of 148x85. It is a onestory building similar in
constructiontothePrivateEventBuilding.Itslateralforceresistingsystemconsistsofcastinplace
and precast concrete shear walls (see Figure 4, 5 and 9). For its relatively small size, the Locker
Buildingiscomposedofarelativelylargenumberofshearwalls.
Themaincharacteristicsofthebuildingsaresummarizedbelow.
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|8
ThePrivateEventBuildingisconstructedasfollows:
Roof: PrecastconcretedoubleTslabwith2.5thickcastinplace
concretetopping,whichissupportedbyconcretebeamsand
columns.
Floor: 4.5thickcastinplaceconcreteslabssupportedbyconcretejoists,
beams,andcolumns.
Foundation: Timberpileswithconcretepilecapssupportingcolumnsandwalls.
LateralSystem: Concretediaphragmwithconcreteshearwallsfortheboththe
EastWestdirectionandtheNorthSouthdirection.
Ceiling: Finishedceiling
FloortoFloorHeights: BasementLevel:90 1
st
Level:150; 2
nd
Level:160
TheNatatoriumBuildingisconstructedasfollows:
Roof: 4.5thickcastinplaceroofconcreteslabssupportedbyprecast
concretebeams,prestressedconcretegirdersandcastinplace
concretecolumns.
Foundation: Timberpileswithconcretepilecapssupportingcolumnsandwalls.
LateralSystem: Concreteroofdiaphragmsupportedbyashearwallframe
interactivesystemwithfullheight,castinplaceconcretecolumns,
whichsupportdiscontinuousprecastconcreteshearwallsabove
230highglasscurtainwallinboththeEastWestdirectionand
theNorthSouthdirection.
Ceiling: ExposedConcreteSoffit
FloortoRoofHeight: 480~500
TheLockerBuildingisconstructedasfollows:
Roof: 4.5thickcastinplaceroofconcreteslabssupportedbyconcrete
joistsandbeams.
Foundation: Timberpileswithconcretepilecapssupportingcolumnsandwalls.
LateralSystem: Concreteroofdiaphragmsupportedbyprecastconcreteframes
withshearwallsinfillinboththeEastWestdirections,andthe
NorthSouthdirections.
Ceiling: Finishedceiling
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|9
FloortoRoofHeight: 116
1.3 DOCUMENTSREVIEWED
1. Review of the original structural drawings of the Belmont Plaza Beach Center by Bole &
WilsonStructuralEngineers,dated14February1967.
2. ReviewoftheoriginalarchitecturaldrawingsoftheBelmontPlazaBeachCenterbyHeusel,
Homolka&Associates,Dated14February1967.
3. ReviewoftheReportofGeotechnicalConsultation,preparedbyAMEC,datedOctober10,
2012.
1.4 SCOPEOFWORK
1. Perform a shortterm collapse probability assessment using the Office of State Health
PlanningandDevelopment(OSHPD)versionoftheHAZUSevaluationmethod,asadopted
by Chapter 6 of 2010 California Administration Code for seismic evaluation of hospital
buildings, for the existing Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings and pool structure. The seismic
parameters are based on a site specific response spectrum of Design Earthquake A. The
sitespecificresponsespectraforDesignEarthquakeAareselectedfortheinvestigationin
order to assist the City of Long Beach in its decision making process involving the current
andlongtermoperationalstatusoftheBelmontPoolfacilities.
2. Coordinate with the geotechnical subconsultant to study the liquefaction probability of
thesiteandtodevelopsitespecificresponseparametersforanearthquakeeventhavinga
10%probabilityofbeingexceededin5years,aswellasforanearthquakeeventhavinga
10%probabilityofbeingexceededin50years.
3. PrepareanevaluationreportsummarizingTTGsfindings.
2. BUILDINGMATERIALPROPERTIES
The properties listed below are indicated on the existing structural drawings and have not been
verified by tests or existing test reports. The buildings lateral components and their material
strengthsasindicatedontheoriginalconstructiondocumentsareasfollows:
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|10
Concrete: fc=3,000psinormalweightconcreteforfoundations,slabs,
Beams,columnsandwalls;
fc=5,000psiLightWeightconcreteforprecastdoubleTslabs
inPrivateEventBuildingroofconstruction.
fc=5,000psiNormalWeightconcreteforcolumnsin
NatatoriumBuilding
Reinforcement: ASTMA615,IntermediateGrade,40ksitypicalreinforcement.
ASTMA16HardGrade50ksiforcolumnlongitudinal
reinforcementinNatatoriumBuilding
Note: Per standard policy and general practice of the Building Safety Agency, original test and
inspection reports, material certifications, project specifications, and structural calculations are
only kept for 7 years after the completion of construction, meaning these documents are not
availableforreview.
3. SITE&SOILPARAMETERS
The geotechnical investigation reports by AMEC Inc. dated October 10, 2012 are used as a
referencebyTTGduringtheevaluation.
Availablegeotechnicalreportsstatethatthesiteisunderlainbyartificialfill,consistingofsiltysand,
placedfortheexistingdevelopment.Thefillisunderlainbybeachandestuarydepositsconsisting
ofpoorlygradedsandwithsiltysand,sandysiltandsiltyclay.
The following SB 1953 seismic coefficients are developed per Chapter 6, Seismic Evaluation
Procedure for Hospital Buildings, of the 2010 California Building Standards Administrative Code
(2010CBSAC),andareprovidedinthegeotechnicalreport.
AccelerationCoefficient: Aa=0.4
VelocityCoefficient: Av=0.4
SoilProfileType: S3
SiteCoefficient: S=1.5
The geotechnical consultant for the project, AMEC Inc., also provides site specific response
parameters for a Design Earthquake A, as well as parameters for a Design Earthquake B. The
seismiccoefficientsfortheDesignEarthquakeAarelistedbelow.
AccelerationCoefficient: Aa=0.11
VelocityCoefficient: Av=0.13
SoilProfileType: S2
SiteCoefficient: S=1.2
SitespecificresponsespectrumforaDesignEarthquakeAinthegeotechnicalreportsareusedfor
the dynamic analysis of the structures. The response spectrum is scaled to SB1953 static base
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|11
shearlevelswhereapplicable.Thepeakgroundacceleration(PGA)fortheDesignEarthquakeAis
0.13g,andthePGAfortheDesignEarthquakeBis0.37g.
Based on the available geologic data, active or potentially active faults with the potential for
surface fault ruptures are not known to be located beneath, or projecting towards, the Belmont
Plaza site. The potential for surface ruptures at the site due to fault plane displacement
propagating to the grounds surface during the design life of the project is considered low.
Liquefaction potential is greatest where the groundwater level is shallow, and submerged, loose,
fine sands occur at a depth of around 15 meters (50 feet) or less. The groundwater level for
liquefaction analysis is assumed to be 7 below the existing grade based on measurements of the
groundwater level. The results of AMECs sitespecific liquefaction evaluation indicate that the
medium dense granular soils encountered in AMECs exploratory borings are susceptible to
liquefactionandseismicallyinducedsettlement.Thetotalseismicallyinducedsettlementsforthe
differenttargetedrisklevelsareshowninthefollowingtable.
Type RiskLevel TotalSeismicallyInduced
Settlement
DesignEarthquakeA 10%in5years 0(inch)
DesignEarthquakeB 10%in50years 0.5to1.8(inch)
Some, but not all, liquefiable soils are susceptible to lateral spreading. Up to 5 of lateral
movement may occur at the site in the event of ground motion during a Design Earthquake B.
However, the potential for lateral spreading at the site in the event of ground motions during a
DesignEarthquakeAisconsideredlow.
4. BUILDINGTYPE
ThePrivateEventBuildingisareinforcedconcreteshearwallbuildingwithconcretediaphragmat
alllevels.ThestructureisclassifiedasBuildingType9(ConcreteShearWalls)perSection2.2.3of
Chapter6of2010CBSAC.
ThebuildingseismicresponsecoefficientsareobtainedfromChapter6ofCBSAC2010:
ResponseModificationCoefficient: R=4.5
DeformationModificationCoefficient: C
d
=4
TheNatatoriumBuildingisanordinaryconcretemomentframeandshearwallinteractivesystem.
The structure can be classified as Building Type 8 (Concrete moment frame) in combination with
Building Type 9 (Concrete Shear Walls) per Section 2.2.3 of Chapter 6 of 2010 CBSAC. The
Natatorium structure may also be classified as Building Type 12 (Precast Concrete Frame with
ShearWalls),becauseofthepresenceofprecastconcreteroofgirders,precastbeamsandprecast
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|12
shears wall tied together by castinplace concrete construction, which in many ways fits the
description of Building Type 12. For structures with multiple building types, the building type
resultinginthemaximumcollapseprobabilityisutilizedtodeterminetheprobabilityofcollapse.
ThebuildingseismicresponsecoefficientsareobtainedfromChapter6ofCBSAC2010:
ResponseModificationCoefficient: R=2forconcretemomentframe
DeformationModificationCoefficient:Cd=2forconcretemomentframe
The Locker Building is a precast concrete frame with concrete shear wall building with concrete
diaphragm at roof level. The structure is classified as Building Type 12 (Precast Concrete Frames
withConcreteShearWalls)perSection2.2.3ofChapter6of2010CBSAC.
ThebuildingseismicresponsecoefficientsareobtainedfromChapter6ofCBSAC2010:
ResponseModificationCoefficient: R=4.5
DeformationModificationCoefficient: C
d
=4
5. SITEEVALUATION
Site visits were conducted on July 10 and October 16, 2012 to meet with the Belmont Plaza Pool
personnel,obtainsitedata,visuallyobservethesitesphysicalcondition,andcorroboratethetype
and nature of the structures with the drawings. No finishes were removed. No field
measurementsweretaken.Thebuildingsrelatetothedrawingsintheextentindicatedabove,and
appeartobeinfairconditionwithnosignsofmajorstructuraldistress.Thereare,however,alarge
number of cracks observable in the concrete slabs as well as deterioration in the concrete beams
and columns. Flooding is also reported in the basement level due to past water leakage at the
existingpoolwall.
6. PASTBUILDINGPERFORMANCE
There are no reports of significant damage due to past seismic activities in the Belmont Plaza
Buildings. Past performance is discussed with facilities personnel and, to their knowledge, no
major structural or nonstructural damage has occurred at the Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings as a
resultofpastearthquakes.Damagetotheconcretestructureswasobservedduringthesitevisit;
however, no written documentation was available for TTGs review (see Figure 16 to Figure 30 of
AppendixAformoreinformation).Thereareanumberofcracksintheconcreteslabongradein
theNatatoriumBuildingareaaswellasinthePrivateEventBuildingarea.Concretedeteriorations
isobservedinthebasementbeamsandslabs,aswellashairlinecracksandminorconcretespalling
on some exterior columns near the bottom of precast panel in the Natatorium Building. This is
possibly due to stress concentration in the area where the precast panel restrains the columns
becauseofpastearthquakeevents.
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|13
ConcretediscolorationandstreakingareobservedintheroofframingoftheNatatoriumBuilding,
and similar conditions can be seen around the skylights (see Figure 25 of Appendix A). It is not
clearwhetherthisisduetoroofleakageorcondensationofpoolwater.Theinteriorandexterior
environmentssurroundingthebuildingsareveryconducivetothecorrosionofsteelreinforcement
in the concrete, possibly because of the chemicals used in pool water maintenance, and also the
Belmont Plaza Buildings proximity to the ocean. Cracks and stains can be seen on the roof
overhang of the Natatorium Building, indicating possible corrosion of the reinforcement in the
concrete (see Figure 26 of Appendix A). Cracks in the concrete roof slabs overhangs are also
presentintheLockerBuilding(seeFigure27ofAppendixA).Therearealsoconcretecracksinthe
PrivateEventBuildingsbasementarea(seeFigure28to30ofAppendixA).Verylarge,horizontal
cracks and signs of heavy rebar corrosion can be seen in the wall separating the pool from the
basement of the Private Event Building (see Figure 30 of Appendix A). The electrical distribution
boxeshavealsobeendamagedbycorrosion(seeFigure29ofAppendixA).Asseen,thebasement
environment is clearly corrosive to steel. There are signs of heavy water leaks, which are most
likely being caused by faulty pipe connections in the water treatment system. The prolonged
exposure of reinforcing steel to this corrosive water and moisture is of great structural safety
concern.
7. EVALUATIONOFSTRUCTURALDEFICIENCIESANDCOLLAPSEPROBABILITY
The evaluations of the probability of collapse of the subject buildings in an earthquake are based
on the buildings structural Lateral Force Resistance System (LFRS) properties and Significant
Structural Deficiencies (SSD) per Section 1.4.5.1.2.2 Subsection 2.2.2 of Chapter 6, 2010 CAC (all
section numbers referenced from here on refer to Chapter 6 of 2010 California Administration
Code).
In order to determine the existence or absence of torsion irregularity and deformation
incompatibility, etc., the Belmont Plaza Buildings are simulated in a 3D ETABS computer model,
whichisbasedontheexistingstructuraldrawingsofthebuildings(seeAppendixCforgraphicsof
thecomputermodelsanddeformedbuildingshapesunderseismicloads).Allelementsbelievedto
becontributingtoseismicresistanceofthebuildingsaremodeled.Mostofthestructuralmembers
forgravityloadsareincludedinthemodel,as wellasthebasementofthePrivateEventBuilding.
TheBelmontPlazabuildingsweight/massisdistributedinthesimulationasrealisticallyaspossible
(seedetailsofthestructuralcalculationsprovidedinAppendixD).Themaincharacteristicsofthe
seismicanalysisofthesebuildingsarebrieflysummarizedbelow.
TheseismicbaseshearcoefficientforthePrivateEventBuildingandtheLockerBuildingbasedon
CAC 2010 Chapter 6 is 0.061 for a Design Earthquake A, and 0.188 for a Design Earthquake B,
wherethemagnitudeoftheseismicforcefortheDesignEarthquakeBis3timesthatoftheDesign
EarthquakeA.FortheNatatoriumBuilding,theseismicbaseshearcoefficientis0.10foraDesign
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|14
EarthquakeA,and0.352foraDesignEarthquakeB,wherethemagnitudeoftheseismicforcefor
theDesignEarthquakeBis3.5timesthatoftheDesignEarthquakeA.
Building diaphragm displacements and drifts under seismic force corresponding to a Design
EarthquakeAaresummarizedinTable1.
Table1DiaphragmDisplacementandDriftunderSeismicForce(MultipliedbyCdfactor)
Dispt.at
EWForce(XDir.)
Dispt.at
NSForce(YDir.)
Story
Height(ft)
DriftRatioEW
Force(XDir.)
DriftRatioNS
Force(YDir.)
PrivateEvent
Building
Rf:0.103
2ndFlr:0.041
Rf:0.353
2
nd
Flr:0.036
Rf:16
2
nd
Flr:15
Rf:0.0003
2
nd
Flr:0.0002
Rf:0.0017
2
nd
Flr:0.0002
Natatorium
Building
Rf:1.13 Rf:1.56 Rf:49 Rf:0.0019 Rf:0.0027
LockerBuilding Rf:0.008 Rf:0.005 Rf:12.5 Rf:0.00005 Rf:0.00003
TheevaluationoftheSignificantStructuralDeficiencies(SSD)inaccordancewithChapter6of2010
CAC,subsection1.4.5.1.2.2fortheBelmontPlazaBuildingsandtheirresultsaresummarizedbelow
foreachbuilding(moredetailsoftheHAZUScriticalSSDevaluationforthebuildingsareshownin
AppendixD).
PrivateEventBuildingSignificantStructuralDeficiencies
Material Test No material testing information is available. The unconfirmed structural
materialqualityisidentifiedasadeficiency(MaterialTestdeficienciesexist).
WeakStoryTherearesignificantstrengthdiscontinuitiesinmanyoftheverticalelements
composing the Lateral Force Resisting System (the story strength at any story shall not be
less than 80% of the strength of the story above it). The 2nd floor shear walls do not
continue tothe foundation. The story strengthof the 1st floor is not less than 80% of the
storystrengthofthe2ndfloor.ForHAZUScalculations,thisdeficiencyisconsideredtoexist
duetothediscontinuityofshearwalls.
SoftStoryTherearesignificantstiffnessdiscontinuitiesinmanyoftheverticalelementsin
theLateralForceResistingSystem(thelateralstiffnessofastoryshallnotbelessthan70%
of that of the story above or less than 80% of the average stiffness of the three stories
above it). For this building, the 2nd floor shear walls do not continue to foundation. The
storystiffnessofthe1stfloorisnotlessthan70%ofthestorystiffnessofthe2ndfloor.For
HAZUS calculations, this deficiency is considered to exist due to the discontinuity of shear
walls.
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|15
Vertical Discontinuity The shear walls do not continue to foundation, causing vertical
discontinuitydeficiencytoexist.
Concrete Deterioration Cracks in concrete members and corrosion of the reinforcement
areobservedinbeamsandwalls,causingconcretedeteriorationdeficienciestoexist.
Weak Column The concrete columns supporting the discontinuous walls appear to be
weak.Weakcolumndeficienciesexist.
NatatoriumBuildingSignificantStructuralDeficiencies
Material Test No material testing information is available. The unconfirmed structural
materialqualityisidentifiedasadeficiency(MaterialTestdeficienciesexist).
WeakStoryTherearesignificantstrengthdiscontinuitiesinmanyoftheverticalelements
in the Lateral Force Resisting System (the story strength at any story shall not be less than
80%ofthestrengthofthestoryaboveit).Theupperprecastshearwallsdonotcontinueto
thefoundation.Thestrengthofthecolumnsbelowtheshearwallsarelessthan80%ofthe
strengthoftheshearwalls.ForHAZUScalculations,thisdeficiencyisconsideredtoexist.
SoftStoryTherearesignificantstiffnessdiscontinuitiesinmanyoftheverticalelementsin
theLateralForceResistingSystem(thelateralstiffnessofastoryshallnotbelessthan70%
of that of the story above or less than 80% of the average stiffness of the three stories
above it). For this building, the precast shear walls stop 25 feet above the 1st floor. The
stiffness of columns below the shear walls is less than 70% of the stiffness of the shear
walls.ForHAZUScalculations,thisdeficiencyisconsideredtoexist.
Vertical Discontinuity The shear walls do not continue to foundation. Vertical
discontinuitydeficienciesexist.
Deflection Incompatibility Column and beam assemblies that are not part of the Lateral
Force Resisting System (gravity load carrying frames) are not capable of accommodating
imposed building drifts, including amplified drift, caused by diaphragm deflections. All
columns in this building serve both as the only gravity load and lateral load carrying
elements. The capacity of the columns for amplified loads (multiplied by Cd factor) is not
sufficient.Lackofductilityinthecolumnsandthehighexpecteddeformationsrightbelow
theprecastconcretepanelwillcausetheyieldingofthegravity/lateralcolumns.Onceany
onecolumnfails,theVerticalLoadResistingSystemwillnotfullyfunction,andthebuilding
will likely suffer partial or complete collapse. Therefore, deflection incompatibility
deficienciesexist.
Concrete Deterioration Cracks in the concrete members and corrosion of steel
reinforcement are observed in the columns, beams and walls; concrete deterioration
deficienciesexist.
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|16
Weak Column The concrete columns supporting discontinuous wall appear to be weak.
Weakcolumndeficienciesexist.
LockerBuildingSignificantStructuralDeficiencies
Material Test No material testing information is available. The unconfirmed structural
materialqualityisidentifiedasadeficiency(MaterialTestdeficienciesexist).
Deflection Incompatibility Column and beam assemblies that are not part of the Lateral
Force Resisting System (gravity load carrying frames) are not capable of accommodating
imposed building drifts, including amplified drift caused by diaphragm deflections. There
are a large number of shear walls in this building and the building drift will be very small.
DeflectionincompatibilitydeficienciesdonotexistinthisHAZUScalculation.
Concrete Deterioration Cracks in the concrete members and corrosion of steel
reinforcementisobservedinthebeamsandwalls.Deteriorationdeficienciesexist.
TTGcalculatedthecollapseprobabilityoftheBelmontPlazaPoolbuildings
[col]
usingthemethod
adopted in Chapter 6 of 2010 CAC for a Design Earthquake A. The results of the collapse
probability for each building are summarized in Table 2 below (details of the calculations are
providedinAppendixD).
TTGscalculationsofthecollapseprobability
[col]
forthePrivateEventFacilityBuildingandLocker
Buildingarelessthan1.2%,withSSDasidentifiedinTable2below.ItisTTGsopinionthatthese
two buildings can be classified as SPC2 for earthquake events having a 10% probability of being
exceeded in 5 years (these buildings do not significantly jeopardize life, but may not be reparable
orfunctionalfollowingthedesigngroundmotion).Thecollapseprobability
[col]
fortheNatatorium
Buildinginitscurrentasisconditionisgreaterthan1.2%,whichindicatesthebuildingfallsunder
theSPC1category,andposesasignificantriskofcollapseandadangertothepublicintheevent
of a Design Earthquake A (moderate earthquake of magnitude 5~5.9, having a 10% probability of
being exceeded in 5 years). After reviewing the condition of the diving platforms and pool walls
areas,TTGbelievesthecollapseprobabilitiesfortheseareasareverylow,andtheyarenotatrisk
fromearthquakeeventhavinga10%probabilityofbeingexceededin5years.
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|17
Table2(Buildingsinasiscondition)CollapseProbabilityforEarthquakeEventHavinga10%
ProbabilityofbeingExceededin5Years(DesignEarthquakeA)
BuildingName CollapseProbability
[col]
Remark
PrivateEvent
Building
0.68% Deficienciesincludedincalculation:MaterialTest,
WeakStory,SoftStory,VerticalDiscontinuity,
ConcreteDeterioration,WeakColumn.
<1.2%Considerednotatriskofcollapse
Natatorium
Building
1.51% Deficienciesincludedincalculation:MaterialTest,
WeakStory,SoftStory,VerticalDiscontinuity,
DeflectionIncompatibility,ConcreteDeterioration,
WeakColumn
>1.2%Consideredatriskofcollapse
LockerBuilding 0.08% Deficiencies:MaterialTest,ConcreteDeterioration
<1.2%Considerednotatriskofcollapse
8. STRUCTURALUPGRADERECOMMENDATIONSFORNATATORIUMBUILDING
Based on TTGs evaluation of the collapse probability of the Natatorium Building, the existing
structure poses a significant risk of collapse from a Design Earthquake A event, and the collapse
hazardisadangertopublicsafety.Thearchitecturalconfigurationofthedeepconcretespandrels
(25 deep precast concrete panels) spanning between the 48 high concrete columns has an
adverselydominantinfluenceontheearthquakeresistingperformanceoftheNatatoriumBuilding.
Allseismicmovements/energiesoftheveryrigidspandrelsaretransmittedtotheslenderconcrete
columns, allowing overstressed damages to be concentrated in the limited column areas rather
thanbeingdistributedequally.Evidenceofexistingconcretecolumncracksintheseareasfromthe
previous minor earthquakes can be found in Figure 16 through Figure 24 of Appendix A. The last
moderate earthquake, a magnitude 5.4, occurred near the project site in 1933. In the event of a
strongtomajor earthquake, magnitude 6.0 to 7.9, the existing #3 column rebar ties at 18 on
centerwillbewidelysplayed.Afterlosingtheconfinementofcolumnrebarties,theconcretecore
will shatter and vertical rebars will buckle similar to that in the photos of the Imperial County
Service Building in Appendix E. In this example, the Imperial County Service Building did not fully
collapse due to the seismic loads transferred to its interior concrete columns and shear walls,
which prevented its total structural failure. The Natatorium Building does not have this interior
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|18
structure,whichputsitinseriousriskoftotalstructuralcollapseifandwhentheexteriorconcrete
columns fail during a Design Earthquake A. However, it is TTGs opinion that if the concrete
columns of the Natatorium Building are strengthened, the collapse probability of the building can
bereducedtolessthan1.2%,greatlyenhancingthesurvivabilityoftheNatatorium.Thus,thegoal
of collapse prevention for the Design Earthquake A can be achieved. See Table 3 below for the
summary of collapse probability results after the columns have been strengthened (details of the
collapseprobability
[col]
calculationsareshowninAppendixD).
Table3CollapseProbabilityfortheDesignEarthquakeA
[AfterstrengtheningcolumnsoftheNatatoriumBuilding]
BuildingName CollapseProbability
[col]
Remark
NatatoriumBuilding 0.03% Deficienciesincludedincalculation:
MaterialTest,ConcreteDeterioration,
WeakColumn(PleaseseeNote1)
<1.2%Considerednotatriskofcollapse
Note 1: The structural deficiencies of weak story, soft story, and vertical discontinuity are
consideredtoberemediedinaHAZUSevaluationwhenconcretecolumnsarestrengthened.
The proposed strengthening of the columns in the Natatorium Building can be accomplished by
using a fiberwrap strengthening method. Cracks and deterioration of the concrete already
occurringinthecolumnsshallbefilledwithpressurizedepoxyinjection.Thentheexistingconcrete
columns surfaces are wrapped with the carbon reinforcing fabric and bonded with epoxy. The
proposed strengthening will enhance the capacity of columns in the regions of extremely high
stressconcentrations.Oncethecolumnsarestrengthened,thecollapseprobabilityofthebuilding
will be less than 1.2%, which is considered not at risk of complete collapse, but may not be
reparable or functional following a Design Earthquake A. Other major concrete cracks with
potentiallycorroded reinforcing steel mayrequireadditional remediesto maintainthe shortterm
structural integrity of the building. The fiber wrap strengthening will only provide a shortterm
solution;majorstructuralupgradeswillstillberequired.
= TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool DRAFT Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Page|19
9. CONCLUSIONS
TTGs evaluation concludes that all three buildings of the Belmont Plaza fall short of achieving a
collapse prevention performance objective for a Design Earthquake B. There are many major
deficienciesthatrequireseismicriskmitigations.Thecombinationofahighcollapseriskstructure,
noanchoragebetweenconcretepilecapandtimberpiles,insufficientstrengthoftimberpiles,and
geologicalseismichazardswouldmakethecostofacompletefacilityrehabilitationextremelyhigh,
and the costbenefit of the rehabilitation fairly low (approximately $44 million for construction
alone).
TTGs evaluation of the collapse probabilities of the buildings at the Belmont Plaza Pool complex
show that for a Design Earthquake A, the Private Event Building and the Locker Building have a
collapseprobabilityoflessthan1.2%andareconsiderednotatriskofcompletecollapse,butmay
notbereparableorfunctionalfollowingaDesignEarthquakeA.
ThecollapseprobabilityfortheNatatoriumBuildinginitscurrentconditionisgreaterthan1.2%for
aDesignEarthquakeA,andisconsideredtoposeadangertothepublicduetoitssignificantriskof
collapse. The Natatorium Building has many major structural deficiencies, of which, its weak and
nonductileconcretecolumnscontributethemostimportantfactorstoitsriskofcollapse.Unlike
theImperialCountyServiceBuildinginthephotosofAppendixE,theNatatoriumBuildingdoesnot
haveaninteriorlateralforceresistingsystem,whichputstheNatatoriumBuildinginseriousriskof
totalstructuralcollapseiftheitscolumnseversuffersimilardamage.
Limited structural retrofit can achieve only a shortterm collapse prevention objective for the
Natatorium Building. Longterm solutions for the Natatorium Building must be either
comprehensivelyupgradedorremovedfromservicetomitigatetheearthquakerisktothebuilding
andtheoccupants.
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
AppendixAFigures
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix A /1 of 15
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Figure1BelmontPlazaOlympicPoolStructures,ViewfromSouth
[CommunityFacilitytotheWest(left),NatatoriumatCenter,LockerRoomtotheEast(right)]
Figure2CommunityFacilityBuilding,ViewfromSouthwest
[withNatatoriumBuildinginthebackground]
Appendix A / 1 of 15
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix A / 2 of 15
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Figure3CommunityFacilityBuilding,ViewfromWest
[withNatatoriumBuildinginthebackground]
Figure4LockerBuilding,ViewfromNortheast
[withNatatoriumBuildinginthebackground]
Appendix A / 2 of 15
i
-: !
. ' .
}~ - , -
_ _ _ i . /
I
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix A / 3 of 15
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Figure5LockerBuilding,ViewfromSoutheast
[withNatatoriumBuildinginthebackground]
Figure6StairatCommunityBuilding2
nd
FloorSouthEntrance
Appendix A / 3 of 15
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix A / 4 of 15
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Figure7RampatCommunityBuilding2
nd
FloorNorthEntrance
Figure8LockerBuildingtoNatatoriumConnectionCorridor,NorthView
Appendix A / 4 of 15
....; : --
- " ' - . -
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix A / 5 of 15
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Figure9LockerBuildingtoNatatoriumConnectionCorridor,SouthView
Figure10NatatoriumBuilding,InteriorViewfromSoutheast
Appendix A / 5 of 15
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix A / 6 of 15
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Figure11Natatorium,BalconyatWestEnd(nexttoCommunityBuilding2
nd
Floor)
Figure12Natatorium,Balcony/EntranceatEastEnd(nexttoLockerCorridor)
Appendix A / 6 of 15
@
I
< : l
i
6"SLAB
. 1 1
"-----L~'LeeNe: _wAtt: __--------~~~~~~~~L--------
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix A / 7 of 15
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Figure13Natatorium,DivingPlatforms
Figure14CommunityBuildingSectionNorthSouth
Appendix A / 7 of 15
Cj)0
i
I
, ,~-.i - I t " t
i l l i ~~~~~.~~.~~Y ~N ~I~~: ~~F ~~~C ~IL ~IT Y ~~' -~~~~: ~~' ~: : -~' r l = - ~ ~ - ~ - F ~ - g - ~ - ! E ; _ ~ 1 I
lh====f=;\;i;E;&i" .----. ..,..~. ".
0~
~. "' -= ""-' : . -----: : : i L
< ' ; )
!
!
e
I
I
P O O L W A L L
ON SHALLOW
FOOTING
./
I
TM AD TAYLOR & GAINES
: t '
._ ..... : . "..",,"' .... <' , L '
o r ! ~ .
/: ' : -: ,: _~I
<,.,' : '
.... ": .. - . . .
Appendix A / 8 of 15
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Figure15CommunityBuildingSectionEastWest
Figure16NatatoriumBuilding,CracksinColumnatNortheastCorner(GridA/7)
Appendix A / 8 of 15
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix A / 9 of 15
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Figure17NatatoriumBuilding,CracksinColumnatNorthElevation(GridA/11)
Figure18NatatoriumBuilding,CracksinColumnatNortheastCorner(GridA/18)
Appendix A / 9 of 15
II
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix A /10 of 15
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Figure19NatatoriumBuilding,CracksinColumnatEastElevation(GridB/18)
Figure20NatatoriumBuilding,CracksinColumnatEastElevation(GridC/18)
Appendix A / 10 of 15
I
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix A /11 of 15
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Figure21NatatoriumBuilding,CracksinColumnatEastElevation(GridC/18)
Figure22NatatoriumBuilding,CracksinColumnatSoutheastCorner(GridH/18)
Appendix A / 11 of 15
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix A /12 of 15
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Figure23NatatoriumBuilding,CracksinColumnatSouthElevation(GridH/17)
Figure24NatatoriumBuilding,CracksinColumnatSouthwestCorner(GridH/7)
Appendix A / 12 of 15
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix A /13 of 15
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Figure25NatatoriumBuilding,StainsinRoofSlab/BeamatInteriorSouthEnd
Figure26NatatoriumBuilding,CracksinConcreteWall/RoofatNorthElevation
Appendix A / 13 of 15
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix A / 14 of 15
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Figure27LockerBuilding,CracksinConcreteRoofSlabatWestElevation
Figure28CommunityBuilding,CracksinConcreteBeamsinBasement
Appendix A / 14 of 15
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix A /15 of 15
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Figure29CommunityBuilding,CracksinConcreteBeamsinBasement
Figure30CommunityBuilding,CracksinConcreteWallinBasement
Appendix A / 15 of 15
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
AppendixBHAZUSMethodOverview(asAdoptedbyOSHPD)
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix B / 1 of 2
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
HAZUSOverview
ABriefIntroductionoftheHAZUSMethodologyasAdoptedby
OfficeofStatewideHealthPlanningandDevelopment(OSHPD)
WhatisHAZUS?
HAZUS(StandsforHazardsU.S.)isastateofthearttechnologyforriskassessment.
HAZUShasbeendevelopedbyFEMAbeginningintheearly1990s.
HAZUSisamethodologyandtools/software.
ThegoalofHAZUSistocalculatepotentiallossesfromanearthquake,hurricane,orflood.
Lossesintheformofstructuraldamage,deaths,oreconomiclossescanbeevaluated.
HAZUSAdoptedbyOSHPD
California Building Standards Commission approved the implementation of HAZUS on
November 14, 2007 to reexamine the seismic risk Structural Performance Category 1 (SPC1)
hospital buildings. These buildings are considered at risk of collapse in the event of an
earthquakeorothernaturaldisaster.ThisreassessmentallowstheOSHPDtoreprioritizeSPC1
hospitalbuildingsbasedontheirlevelofseismicriskandiftheymeetspecifiedcriteria,move
the buildings to SPC2 category. If reclassified to SPC2, these hospital buildings would move
froma2008/2013seismicdeadlinetoa2030deadline.PerOSHPDestimate,50%to60%ofthe
1100 SPC1 hospital building would qualify for the reclassification under the new HAZUS
methodology. Current version of the OSHPD adopted HAZUS method is in Chapter 6 of 2010
California Administrative Code, Seismic Evaluation Procedures for Hospital Buildings
(AdministrativeRegulationsfortheOSHPD);moreinformationabouttheOSHPDHAZUScanbe
foundinitswebsiteathttp://www.oshpd.ca.gov.
ThegoalofOSHPDsversionofHAZUSistocalculatetheprobabilityofcollapseofanindividual
hospitalbuildinginanearthquake.
Forthisproject,weappliedthemethodologyofOSHPDsHAZUSforevaluationofthecollapse
probabilityofthebuildingsinBelmontPlazaPoolcomplex.
SPC1Building
Buildings posing a significant risk of collapse and a danger to the public. Where OSHPD has
performed a collapse probability assessment, buildings with Probability of Collapse greater
than1.20%shallbeplacedinthiscategory.
SPC2Building
Buildings in compliance with the pre1973 California Building Standards Code or other
applicable standards, but not in compliance with the structural provisions of the Alquist
Hospital Facilities Seismic Safety Act. These buildings do not significantly jeopardize life, but
may not be repairable or functional following strong ground motion. These buildings must be
broughtintocompliancewiththestructuralprovisionsoftheAlquistHospitalFacilitiesSeismic
Appendix B / 1 of 2
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix B / 2 of 2
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Safety Act, its regulations or its retrofit provisions by January 1, 2030, or be removed from
acutecareservice.
Where OSHPD has performed a collapse probability assessment, buildings with Probability of
Collapselessthanorequalto1.20%shallbeplacedinthiscategory.
AlquistHospitalFacilitiesSeismicSafetyAct
Following the 1994 Northridge Earthquake, which resulted in $3 billion damage to hospitals,
theAlfredE.AlquistHospitalFacilitiesSeismicSafetyActwasamendedunderSB1953(Senate
Bill1953,Chapter740,Statutesof1994),SeismicMandate.
The seismic mandate established five structural and five nonstructural classifications of
hospitalbuildingseismicsafetylevels,aswellasdeadlinesforsomeclassificationupgrades.
Themandatehasbeenamendedanumberoftimessinceitsenactment.Toviewalllegislation
that has amended the seismic mandate, go to website of OSHPD Facilities Development
Division(FDD)RecentLegislation(http://www.oshpd.ca.gov).
Appendix B / 2 of 2
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
AppendixC:ComputerModelsandDeformedBuildingShapes
(SelectedSnapshotsofETABSComputerModelViewsfortheBuildings)
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix C / 1 of 12
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
CommunityBuildingViewfromSouthWest
CommunityBuildingViewfromSouthEast
Appendix C / 1 of 12
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix C /2 of 12
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
CommunityBuildingViewfromNorthEast
CommunityBuildingViewfromNorthWest
Appendix C / 2 of 12
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
,,0 0 n
O J
o 0'
o
~J
110 u
~ u
"
II' .
.. IlL ..
II
c
o
o
o o
o o
y--------
Lx
Appendix C / 3 of 12
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
CommunityBuildingRoofPlanView
CommunityBuilding2
nd
FloorPlanView
Appendix C / 3 of 12
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix C /4 of 12
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
CommunityBuildingPoolDeckLevelPlanView
CommunityBuildingDeformedBuildingShapeunderEWDirectionLateralForce
Appendix C / 4 of 12
y
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix C / 5 of 12
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
NatatoriumBuildingViewfromSouthWest
NatatoriumBuildingViewfromSouthEast
Appendix C / 5 of 12
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix C /6 of 12
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
NatatoriumBuildingViewfromNorthEast
NatatoriumBuildingViewfromNorthWest
Appendix C / 6 of 12
I"
l
r
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
r
L,
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix C 17 of 12
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
NatatoriumBuildingRoofPlanView
NatatoriumBuildingBalconyLevelPlanView
Appendix C / 7 of 12
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
f---- ----I t-- 1-----I
a
a
Appendix C / 8 of 12
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
NatatoriumBuildingPoolDeckLevelPlanView
NatatoriumBuildingDeformedBuildingShapeunderNSDirectionLateralForce
Appendix C / 8 of 12
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix C /9 of 12
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
LockerBuildingViewfromSouthWest
LockerBuildingViewfromSouthEast
Appendix C / 9 of 12
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix C / 10 of 12
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
LockerBuildingViewfromNorthEast
LockerBuildingViewfromNorthWest
Appendix C / 10 of 12
o 0
[
[
[
[
~~
~I
~~ [ ] 1
] [
I
~[
I
I I
]
I
] [
I
[
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix C / 11 of 12
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
LockerBuildingRoofPlanView
LockerBuildingHighRoofLevelPlanView
Appendix C / 11 of 12
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix C / 12 of 12
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
LockerBuildingDeformedBuildingShapeunderNSDirectionForce
Appendix C / 12 of 12
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
AppendixDStructuralCalculations
OtherInformationforthebuilding
Code/Year
Built
Building Height
/ (No. of Floors)
SPC Rating Model Building Type
Per Table 1.4.5.1 of Chapter 6, CAC2010
Post-61
(1967)
UBC-1964
Above Grade:
31-0
/ (2)
Below Grade:
9-0 / (1)
C2 Concrete Shear Walls
Note:
(1)SeismicBaseistakenatthe1
st
floorslabongradeelevation.
Appendix D / 78 of 93
=-iTTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix 0 / 79 of 93
Belmont Plaza Olympic Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
SIGNIFICANTSTRUCTURALDEFICIENCIES
Natatorium Building (As-is Condition)
List of HAZUS Related Deficiencies (Per CAC 2010 Chapter 6, Section 1.4.5.1.2.2; Sub Section 2.2)
S/N Description of Deficiencies
Status Remark
a AgeYear of the CBC code used for the original
design.
Post 1961, drawing dated 1967, may be
designed per UBC 1964.
Post-
61
b Materials Tests (Section 2.1.2) Present
materials properties based on test results for
OSHPD approval.
Per Exception in Section 2.1.2: material testing is
not required for reclassification by the collapse
probability assessment option as permitted by
Section 1.4.5.1.2, where non-availability of
materials test is a deficiency per Section
1.4.5.1.2.2.2.2 (b).
False MT is considered as a deficiency.
c Load Path (Section 3.1) Yes,
There is complete load path for seismic force
effect from any horizontal direction.
True
d Mass Irregularity (Section 3.3.4) Significant
mass irregularity does NOT exist.
True
e Vertical Discontinuity (Section 3.3.5) No, it
does not exist.
False
f Short Captive Column (Section 3.6)
No columns with height-to-depth ratios less than
75% of the nominal height-to-depth ratios of the
typical columns at that level.
True The columns all have same section
dimension; so the height-to-depth
ratios are all the same. SCC does
not exist.
g Material Deterioration (Section 3.7)
No visible deterioration of concrete or reinforcing
steel.
False Concrete deterioration was
observed
h Weak Columns (Section 4.2.8 & 4.3.6)
Columns are weak compared to infill wall panels
False Column is considered weak,
compared with deep precast wall
panel.
Appendix D / 79 of 93
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix 0 / 80 of 93
Belmont Plaza Olympic Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
i Wall anchorage (Section 8.2) Exterior concrete
walls are anchored to each of the diaphragm
levels for out-of-plane loads
True Wall reinforcements extend into
floor and roof concrete diaphragms.
j Redundancy (Section 3.2) There is redundancy
present in the lateral system; the structure will
remain laterally stable after the failure of any
single wall element.
True
k Weak story irregularity (Section 3.3.1) There
are significant strength discontinuities in the
vertical elements in the lateral force resisting
system; the strength below infill wall panels is
less than 80% of the strength of the above.
False
l Soft Story irregularity (Section 3.3.2) - There are
significant stiffness discontinuities in the vertical
elements in the lateral force resisting system; the
stiffness of the system below the infill wall panels
is less than 70% of that in the above.
False
m Torsional irregularity (Section 3.3.6) - It appears
that significant torsion does NOT exist; the
distance between the center of rigidity and center
of mass appears to be NOT more than 20% of
the width of the structure in either major plan
dimension.
True See structural calculations for TI
check; TI does NOT exist.
n Deflection incompatibility (Section 3.5) - Gravity
columns and beams need to be checked for
being capable of accommodating imposed
building drifts including amplified drift, without
loss of vertical load-carrying capacity.
False
o Cripple walls (Section 5.6.4) N.A. NA This is not a wood frame building;
code Section 5.6.4 does not apply.
p Openings in diaphragm at shear walls (Section
7.1.4) Does not exist
True
q Topping slab missing (Section 7.3 & 7.4) or the
building type (structural system) is of lift slab
construction N.A.
True
OtherInformationforthebuilding
Code/Year
Built
Building Height
/ (No. of Floors)
SPC
Rating
Model Building Type
Per Table 1.4.5.1 of Chapter 6, CAC2010
Post-61
(1967)
UBC-1964
Above Grade:
50-0
/ (1)
Below Grade:
9-0 / (1)
SPC-1 C1 Concrete moment frame
C2 Concrete Shear Walls
PC2 Precast concrete frames w/ shear wall
The building is of interaction of C1 and C2
system; due to use of precast wall and roof
precast girders and beams; PC2 type is
representative of the most severe type.
Note:
(1)SeismicBaseistakenatthe1
st
floorslabongradeelevation.
Appendix D / 80 of 93
=-iTTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix 0 / 81 of 93
Belmont Plaza Olympic Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
SIGNIFICANTSTRUCTURALDEFICIENCIES
Natatorium Building (After Column Strengthening Condition)
List of HAZUS Related Deficiencies (Per CAC 2010 Chapter 6, Section 1.4.5.1.2.2; Sub Section 2.2)
S/N Description of Deficiencies
Status Remark
a AgeYear of the CBC code used for the original
design.
Post 1961, drawing dated 1967, may be
designed per UBC 1964.
Post-
61
b Materials Tests (Section 2.1.2) Present
materials properties based on test results for
OSHPD approval.
Per Exception in Section 2.1.2: material testing is
not required for reclassification by the collapse
probability assessment option as permitted by
Section 1.4.5.1.2, where non-availability of
materials test is a deficiency per Section
1.4.5.1.2.2.2.2 (b).
False MT is considered as a deficiency.
c Load Path (Section 3.1) Yes,
There is complete load path for seismic force
effect from any horizontal direction.
True
d Mass Irregularity (Section 3.3.4) Significant
mass irregularity does NOT exist.
True
e Vertical Discontinuity (Section 3.3.5) No, it
does not exist.
True Deficiency mitigated by calculation.
f Short Captive Column (Section 3.6)
No columns with height-to-depth ratios less than
75% of the nominal height-to-depth ratios of the
typical columns at that level.
True The columns all have same section
dimension; so the height-to-depth
ratios are all the same. SCC does
not exist.
g Material Deterioration (Section 3.7)
No visible deterioration of concrete or reinforcing
steel.
False Concrete deterioration was
observed
h Weak Columns (Section 4.2.8 & 4.3.6)
Columns are weak compared to infill wall panels
False Column is considered weak,
compared with deep precast wall
panel, even after column
strengthening.
Appendix D / 81 of 93
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix 0 / 82 of 93
Belmont Plaza Olympic Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
i Wall anchorage (Section 8.2) Exterior concrete
walls are anchored to each of the diaphragm
levels for out-of-plane loads
True Wall reinforcements extend into
floor and roof concrete diaphragms.
j Redundancy (Section 3.2) There is redundancy
present in the lateral system; the structure will
remain laterally stable after the failure of any
single element.
True
k Weak story irregularity (Section 3.3.1) There
are NO significant strength discontinuities in a
floor of the vertical elements in the lateral force
resisting system; the story strength below a floor
is not less than 80% of the strength of the story
above.
True Deficiency mitigated by calculation,
after columns are strengthened.
l Soft Story irregularity (Section 3.3.2) - There are
NO significant stiffness discontinuities in a story
of the vertical elements in the lateral force
resisting system; the story stiffness of a story is
NOT less than 70% of that in the story above.
True Deficiency mitigated by calculation,
after columns are strengthened.
m Torsional irregularity (Section 3.3.6) - It appears
that significant torsion does NOT exist; the
distance between the center of rigidity and center
of mass appears to be NOT more than 20% of
the width of the structure in either major plan
dimension.
True See structural calculations for TI
check; TI does NOT exist.
n Deflection incompatibility (Section 3.5) - Gravity
columns and beams need to be checked for
being capable of accommodating imposed
building drifts including amplified drift, without
loss of vertical load-carrying capacity.
True Deficiency mitigated by calculation,
after columns are strengthened.
o Cripple walls (Section 5.6.4) N.A. NA This is not a wood frame building;
code Section 5.6.4 does not apply.
p Openings in diaphragm at shear walls (Section
7.1.4) Does not exist
True
q Topping slab missing (Section 7.3 & 7.4) or the
building type (structural system) is of lift slab
construction N.A.
True
OtherInformationforthebuilding
Code/Year
Built
Building Height
/ (No. of Floors)
SPC
Rating
Model Building Type
Per Table 1.4.5.1 of Chapter 6, CAC2010
Post-61
(1967)
UBC-1964
Above Grade:
50-0
/ (1)
Below Grade:
9-0 / (1)
SPC-1 C1 Concrete moment frame
C2 Concrete Shear Walls
PC2 Precast concrete frames w/ shear wall
The building is of interaction of C1 and C2
system; due to use of precast wall and roof
precast girders and beams; PC2 type is
representative of the most severe type.
Note:
(1)SeismicBaseistakenatthe1
st
floorslabongradeelevation.
Appendix D / 82 of 93
=-iTTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix 0 / 83 of 93
Belmont Plaza Olympic Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
SIGNIFICANTSTRUCTURALDEFICIENCIES
Locker Room Building
List of HAZUS Related Deficiencies (Per CAC 2010 Chapter 6, Section 1.4.5.1.2.2; Sub Section 2.2)
S/N Description of Deficiencies
Status Remark
a AgeYear of the CBC code used for the original
design.
Post 1961, drawing dated 1967, may be
designed per UBC 1964.
Post-
61
b Materials Tests (Section 2.1.2) Present
materials properties based on test results for
OSHPD approval.
Per Exception in Section 2.1.2: material testing is
not required for reclassification by the collapse
probability assessment option as permitted by
Section 1.4.5.1.2, where non-availability of
materials test is a deficiency per Section
1.4.5.1.2.2.2.2 (b).
False MT is considered as a deficiency.
c Load Path (Section 3.1) Yes,
There is complete load path for seismic force
effect from any horizontal direction.
True
d Mass Irregularity (Section 3.3.4) Significant
mass irregularity does NOT exist.
True
e Vertical Discontinuity (Section 3.3.5) All shear
walls and infill walls continue to foundation.
True
f Short Captive Column (Section 3.6)
No columns with height-to-depth ratios less than
75% of the nominal height-to-depth ratios of the
typical columns at that level.
True The columns all have same section
dimension; so the height-to-depth
ratios are all the same. SCC does
not exist.
g Material Deterioration (Section 3.7)
No visible deterioration of concrete or reinforcing
steel.
False There are signs of concrete
deterioration.
h Weak Columns (Section 4.2.8 & 4.3.6) [Section
4.3.6 does not apply; there is no concrete
moment frame in the building system]. This
deficiency does not exist.
True It is concrete shear wall system.
Appendix D / 83 of 93
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix 0 / 84 of 93
Belmont Plaza Olympic Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
i Wall anchorage (Section 8.2) Exterior concrete
walls are anchored to each of the diaphragm
levels for out-of-plane loads
True Wall reinforcements extend into
floor and roof concrete diaphragms.
j Redundancy (Section 3.2) There is redundancy
present in the lateral system; the structure will
remain laterally stable after the failure of any
single wall element.
True
k Weak story irregularity (Section 3.3.1) There
are NO significant strength discontinuities in a
floor of the vertical elements in the lateral force
resisting system; the story strength below a floor
is not less than 80% of the strength of the story
above.
True
l Soft Story irregularity (Section 3.3.2) - There are
NO significant stiffness discontinuities in a story
of the vertical elements in the lateral force
resisting system; the story stiffness of a story is
NOT less than 70% of that in the story above.
True
m Torsional irregularity (Section 3.3.6) - It appears
that significant torsion does NOT exist; the
distance between the center of rigidity and center
of mass appears to be NOT more than 20% of
the width of the structure in either major plan
dimension.
True See structural calculations for TI
check; TI does NOT exist.
n Deflection incompatibility (Section 3.5) - Gravity
columns and beams need to be checked for
being capable of accommodating imposed
building drifts including amplified drift, without
loss of vertical load-carrying capacity.
False DI considered as a deficiency.
o Cripple walls (Section 5.6.4) N.A. NA This is not a wood frame building;
code Section 5.6.4 does not apply.
p Openings in diaphragm at shear walls (Section
7.1.4) Does not exist
True
q Topping slab missing (Section 7.3 & 7.4) or the
building type (structural system) is of lift slab
construction N.A.
True
OtherInformationforthebuilding
Code/Year
Built
Building Height
/ (No. of Floors)
SPC Rating Model Building Type
Per Table 1.4.5.1 of Chapter 6, CAC2010
Post-61
(1967)
UBC-1964
Above Grade:
12-6
/ (1)
PC2 Precast Concrete Frames with Shear
Walls
Note:
(1)SeismicBaseistakenatthe1
st
floorslabongradeelevation.
Appendix D / 84 of 93
(i) Results of Collapse Probability Calculations
Appendix 0 / 85 of 93
BelmontPlazaOlympicPoolCenterCommunityBuildingHAZUS2010ScenarioStudies(10%in5YrEarthquake)
SSD CaseA CaseB CaseC CaseD CaseE CaseF Remark
MaterialTest x x
WeakStory x
SoftStory x
VerticalDiscontinuity x x
ConcreteDeterioration x x
TorsionIrregularity x x
DeflectionIncompatibility x x
P(col)% 0.11% 0.68%
Notes:
1.An"X"inthetablecorrespondingtotherowforagivendeficiencymeansthathedeficiencyispresent.
2.SiteSpecificResponseParametersbasedon10%in5years(47.5yearsreturnperiod)
Appendix D / 85 of 93
(i) Results of Collapse Probability Calculations
Appendix 0 / 86 of 93
BelmontPlazaOlympicPoolCenterNatatoriumBuildingHAZUS2010ScenarioStudies(10%in5YrEarthquake)
MBTPC2(PrecastFramewithConcreteShearWalls)
SSD CaseA CaseB CaseC CaseD CaseE CaseF CaseG Remark
MaterialTest x x x x
WeakStory x x
SoftStory x x
VerticalDiscontinuity (x) (x):notmucheffect
TorsionIrregularity
DeflectionIncompatibility (x)
ConcreteDeterioration x x x x
WeakColumn x x x x
P(col)% 1.51% 0.85% 0.30% 0.03%
Notes:
1.An"X"inthetablecorrespondingtotherowforagivendeficiencymeansthathedeficiencyispresent.
2.SiteSpecificResponseParametersbasedon10%in5years(47.5yearsreturnperiod)
Appendix D / 86 of 93
Appendix 0 / 87 of 93
BelmontPlazaOlympicPoolCenterLockerBuildingHAZUS2010ScenarioStudies(10%in5YrEarthquake)
SSD CaseA CaseB CaseC CaseD CaseE CaseF Remark
MaterialTest x x x
TorsionIrregularity
DeflectionIncompatibility x
ConcreteDeterioration x x
OpeningatShearWall
P(col)% 0.29% 0.08% 0.08%
Notes:
1.An"X"inthetablecorrespondingtotherowforagivendeficiencymeansthathedeficiencyispresent.
2.SiteSpecificResponseParametersbasedon10%in5years(47.5yearsreturnperiod)
Appendix D / 87 of 93
Cl~la
<OZ
~S~
t-t-0I5
0)
I
0)
0)
I
' "
0
en
' " c:i c:i
II II
0
' " 7 il
0::
l-
(/)
::r
0
c,
en < D
e-
~
" " "
' "
< D
c:i
N
II II
Ci ~
-F = -
>-
P
r
0)
0)
0)
Appendix 0/ 88 of 93
H
A
Z
U
S
A
E
B
M
M
o
d
e
l
H
A
Z
U
S
A
N
A
L
Y
S
I
S
W
O
R
K
S
H
E
E
T
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
N
a
m
e
B
e
l
m
o
n
t
P
l
a
z
a
P
o
o
l
,
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
-
H
a
z
u
s
C
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
C
a
s
e
:
C
B
a
s
e
d
o
n
T
a
b
l
e
A
6
-
1
M
B
T
:
C
2
D
e
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
E
x
i
s
t
s
?
D
e
s
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
:
P
o
s
t
-
6
1
Y
e
s
=
1
N
o
.
o
f
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
:
2
N
o
=
0
D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
t
o
f
a
u
l
t
(
k
m
)
:
2
.
5
1
A
g
e
(
P
r
e
-
1
9
3
3
)
?
0
M
a
x
M
a
g
n
i
t
u
d
e
:
7
.
4
2
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
t
e
s
t
i
n
g
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
2
.
1
.
2
)
1
D
e
s
i
g
n
V
i
n
t
a
g
e
:
1
9
4
1
-
1
9
7
5
3
R
e
d
u
n
d
a
n
c
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
2
)
0
G
a
m
m
a
U
S
B
C
s
=
0
.
0
8
6
4
W
e
a
k
S
t
o
r
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
1
)
1
L
a
m
b
d
a
U
S
B
H
R
(
f
t
)
=
3
1
5
S
o
f
t
s
t
o
r
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
2
)
1
k
a
p
p
a
S
B
T
e
(
s
e
c
)
=
0
.
3
9
6
M
a
s
s
i
r
r
e
g
u
l
a
r
i
t
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
4
)
0
c
U
S
B
A
l
p
h
a
1
=
0
.
8
7
V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l
D
i
s
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
i
t
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
5
)
1
A
l
p
h
a
3
U
S
B
A
l
p
h
a
2
=
0
.
7
5
8
T
o
r
s
i
o
n
a
l
i
r
r
e
g
u
l
a
r
i
t
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
6
)
1
c
S
B
G
a
m
m
a
,
=
2
.
2
5
9
D
e
f
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
5
)
1
P
[
C
O
L
|
S
T
R
5
]
U
S
B
L
a
m
b
d
a
,
=
1
.
5
1
0
S
h
o
r
t
C
o
l
u
m
n
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
6
)
0
M
u
,
=
4
.
9
4
1
1
W
o
o
d
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
7
.
1
)
0
E
l
a
s
t
i
c
D
a
m
p
i
n
g
E
%
=
7
1
2
S
t
e
e
l
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
7
.
3
)
0
k
a
p
p
a
,
=
0
.
6
1
3
C
o
n
c
.
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
7
.
4
)
1
c
=
0
.
0
3
1
4
W
e
a
k
c
o
l
u
m
n
-
s
t
e
e
l
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
4
.
2
.
8
)
0
A
l
p
h
a
3
=
2
.
5
1
5
W
e
a
k
c
o
l
u
m
n
-
c
o
n
c
.
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
4
.
3
.
6
)
0
S
A
0
.
3
:
0
.
3
2
c
=
0
.
9
5
1
6
C
r
i
p
p
l
e
w
a
l
l
b
r
a
c
i
n
g
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
5
.
6
.
4
)
0
S
A
1
.
0
:
0
.
1
6
P
[
C
O
L
|
S
T
R
5
]
=
0
.
5
1
7
T
o
p
p
i
n
g
s
l
a
b
m
i
s
s
i
n
g
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
7
.
3
&
7
.
4
)
0
S
o
i
l
T
y
p
e
=
S
D
1
8
I
n
a
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
W
a
l
l
a
n
c
h
o
r
a
g
e
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
8
.
2
)
0
1
9
L
o
a
d
P
a
t
h
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
1
)
0
2
0
O
p
e
n
i
n
g
a
t
S
h
e
a
r
W
a
l
l
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
7
.
1
.
4
)
0
2
D
y
(
i
n
)
=
0
.
3
6
0
5
6
S
d
,
C
(
i
n
)
=
3
.
3
5
3
A
y
(
g
)
=
0
.
2
4
1
9
c
=
0
.
9
5
4
D
u
(
i
n
)
=
2
.
6
7
1
6
P
[
C
O
L
|
S
T
R
5
]
=
0
.
5
0
5
A
u
(
g
)
=
0
.
3
6
2
8
k
a
p
p
a
=
0
.
6
0
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
:
4
0
0
0
E
a
s
t
O
l
y
m
p
i
c
P
l
a
z
a
,
L
o
n
g
B
e
a
c
h
,
C
A
C
o
r
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
i
n
g
L
a
t
i
t
u
d
e
&
L
o
n
g
i
t
u
d
e
L
a
t
i
t
u
d
e
=
3
3
.
7
5
8
1
L
o
n
g
i
t
u
d
e
=
-
1
1
8
.
1
4
5
6
U
B
C
9
7
s
e
i
s
m
i
c
z
o
n
e
=
4
S
e
i
s
m
i
c
D
e
s
i
g
n
L
e
v
e
l
=
M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
-
C
o
d
e
P
[
S
T
R
5
]
=
0
.
0
1
3
6
P
[
C
O
L
]
=
0
.
6
8
%
H
A
Z
U
S
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
O
u
t
c
o
m
e
:
P
a
s
s
(
M
a
y
b
e
r
e
-
c
l
a
s
s
i
f
i
e
d
t
o
S
P
C
-
2
)
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
a
l
F
r
a
g
i
l
i
t
y
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
(
S
o
u
r
c
e
=
M
E
L
I
S
S
A
D
A
T
A
a
t
h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
m
e
l
i
s
s
a
d
a
t
a
.
c
o
m
/
l
o
o
k
u
p
s
/
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
v
e
r
i
f
y
.
a
s
p
)
H
A
Z
U
S
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
I
n
p
u
t
D
a
t
a
N
o
.
o
f
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
I
n
t
e
r
p
o
l
a
t
e
d
a
s
p
e
r
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
H
e
i
g
h
t
:
3
7
G
r
o
u
n
d
M
o
t
i
o
n
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
U
s
e
d
f
o
r
H
A
Z
U
S
T
M
A
D
T
a
y
l
o
r
a
n
d
G
a
i
n
e
s
1
0
/
1
5
/
2
0
1
2
Appendix D / 88 of 93
Cl~la
<OZ
~S~
t-t-0I5
lD
0)
I
0)
0)
I
M 0
en < D
c:i c:i
II II
0
' " 7 il
0::
l-
(/)
::r
0
c,
M M
0en
M < D
' "
en
c:i
,.;
II II
Ci ~
-F = -
>-
P
r
0)
0)
0)
Appendix 0/ 89 of 93
H
A
Z
U
S
A
E
B
M
M
o
d
e
l
H
A
Z
U
S
A
N
A
L
Y
S
I
S
W
O
R
K
S
H
E
E
T
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
N
a
m
e
B
e
l
m
o
n
t
P
l
a
z
a
,
N
a
t
a
t
o
r
i
u
m
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
-
1
0
%
i
n
5
Y
r
E
a
r
t
h
q
u
a
k
e
(
4
7
5
Y
r
R
e
t
u
r
n
P
e
r
i
o
d
)
T
y
p
e
P
C
2
,
C
a
s
e
B
B
a
s
e
d
o
n
T
a
b
l
e
A
6
-
1
M
B
T
:
P
C
2
D
e
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
E
x
i
s
t
s
?
D
e
s
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
:
P
o
s
t
-
6
1
Y
e
s
=
1
N
o
.
o
f
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
:
1
N
o
=
0
D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
t
o
f
a
u
l
t
(
k
m
)
:
2
.
5
1
A
g
e
(
P
r
e
-
1
9
3
3
)
?
0
M
a
x
M
a
g
n
i
t
u
d
e
:
7
.
4
2
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
t
e
s
t
i
n
g
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
2
.
1
.
2
)
1
D
e
s
i
g
n
V
i
n
t
a
g
e
:
1
9
4
1
-
1
9
7
5
3
R
e
d
u
n
d
a
n
c
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
2
)
0
G
a
m
m
a
U
S
B
C
s
=
0
.
0
9
8
4
W
e
a
k
S
t
o
r
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
1
)
1
L
a
m
b
d
a
U
S
B
H
R
(
f
t
)
=
5
0
5
S
o
f
t
s
t
o
r
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
2
)
1
k
a
p
p
a
S
B
T
e
(
s
e
c
)
=
0
.
5
7
6
M
a
s
s
i
r
r
e
g
u
l
a
r
i
t
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
4
)
0
c
S
B
A
l
p
h
a
1
=
0
.
8
7
V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l
D
i
s
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
i
t
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
5
)
1
A
l
p
h
a
3
U
S
B
A
l
p
h
a
2
=
0
.
7
5
8
T
o
r
s
i
o
n
a
l
i
r
r
e
g
u
l
a
r
i
t
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
6
)
0
c
S
B
G
a
m
m
a
,
=
1
.
8
8
9
D
e
f
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
5
)
1
P
[
C
O
L
|
S
T
R
5
]
U
S
B
L
a
m
b
d
a
,
=
1
.
3
3
1
0
S
h
o
r
t
C
o
l
u
m
n
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
6
)
0
M
u
,
=
4
.
0
7
1
1
W
o
o
d
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
7
.
1
)
0
E
l
a
s
t
i
c
D
a
m
p
i
n
g
E
%
=
7
1
2
S
t
e
e
l
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
7
.
3
)
0
k
a
p
p
a
,
=
0
.
6
1
3
C
o
n
c
.
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
7
.
4
)
1
c
=
0
.
0
4
4
1
4
W
e
a
k
c
o
l
u
m
n
-
s
t
e
e
l
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
4
.
2
.
8
)
0
A
l
p
h
a
3
=
3
.
7
2
1
5
W
e
a
k
c
o
l
u
m
n
-
c
o
n
c
.
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
4
.
3
.
6
)
1
S
A
0
.
3
:
0
.
3
2
c
=
0
.
9
3
1
6
C
r
i
p
p
l
e
w
a
l
l
b
r
a
c
i
n
g
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
5
.
6
.
4
)
0
S
A
1
.
0
:
0
.
1
6
P
[
C
O
L
|
S
T
R
5
]
=
0
.
6
1
7
T
o
p
p
i
n
g
s
l
a
b
m
i
s
s
i
n
g
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
7
.
3
&
7
.
4
)
0
S
o
i
l
T
y
p
e
=
S
D
1
8
I
n
a
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
W
a
l
l
a
n
c
h
o
r
a
g
e
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
8
.
2
)
0
1
9
L
o
a
d
P
a
t
h
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
1
)
0
2
0
O
p
e
n
i
n
g
a
t
S
h
e
a
r
W
a
l
l
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
7
.
1
.
4
)
0
2
D
y
(
i
n
)
=
0
.
7
3
3
3
6
S
d
,
C
(
i
n
)
=
5
.
3
2
3
A
y
(
g
)
=
0
.
2
3
0
3
c
=
0
.
9
3
4
D
u
(
i
n
)
=
3
.
9
6
9
3
P
[
C
O
L
|
S
T
R
5
]
=
0
.
6
0
5
A
u
(
g
)
=
0
.
3
0
6
3
k
a
p
p
a
=
0
.
6
0
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
:
4
0
0
0
E
a
s
t
O
l
y
m
p
i
c
P
l
a
z
a
,
L
o
n
g
B
e
a
c
h
,
C
A
C
o
r
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
i
n
g
L
a
t
i
t
u
d
e
&
L
o
n
g
i
t
u
d
e
L
a
t
i
t
u
d
e
=
3
3
.
7
5
8
1
L
o
n
g
i
t
u
d
e
=
-
1
1
8
.
1
4
5
6
U
B
C
9
7
s
e
i
s
m
i
c
z
o
n
e
=
4
S
e
i
s
m
i
c
D
e
s
i
g
n
L
e
v
e
l
=
M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
-
C
o
d
e
P
[
S
T
R
5
]
=
0
.
0
2
5
2
P
[
C
O
L
]
=
1
.
5
1
%
H
A
Z
U
S
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
I
n
p
u
t
D
a
t
a
N
o
.
o
f
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
I
n
t
e
r
p
o
l
a
t
e
d
a
s
p
e
r
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
H
e
i
g
h
t
:
5
7
G
r
o
u
n
d
M
o
t
i
o
n
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
U
s
e
d
f
o
r
H
A
Z
U
S
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
a
l
F
r
a
g
i
l
i
t
y
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
(
S
o
u
r
c
e
=
M
E
L
I
S
S
A
D
A
T
A
a
t
h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
m
e
l
i
s
s
a
d
a
t
a
.
c
o
m
/
l
o
o
k
u
p
s
/
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
v
e
r
i
f
y
.
a
s
p
)
H
A
Z
U
S
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
O
u
t
c
o
m
e
:
F
a
i
l
(
C
a
n
n
o
t
b
e
r
e
-
c
l
a
s
s
i
f
i
e
d
t
o
S
P
C
-
2
)
T
M
A
D
T
a
y
l
o
r
a
n
d
G
a
i
n
e
s
1
0
/
1
5
/
2
0
1
2
Appendix D / 89 of 93
Cl~la
<OZ
~S~
t-t-0I5
w
0)
I
0)
0)
I
M U)
en ~
c:i c:i
II II
0
' " 7 il
0::
l-
(/)
::r
0
c,
M M
0 en
M < D
' "
en
c:i
,.;
II II
Ci ~
-F = -
>-
P
r
0)
0)
0)
Appendix 0/ 90of 93
H
A
Z
U
S
A
E
B
M
M
o
d
e
l
H
A
Z
U
S
A
N
A
L
Y
S
I
S
W
O
R
K
S
H
E
E
T
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
N
a
m
e
B
e
l
m
o
n
t
P
l
a
z
a
,
N
a
t
a
t
o
r
i
u
m
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
-
1
0
%
i
n
5
Y
r
E
a
r
t
h
q
u
a
k
e
(
4
7
.
5
Y
r
R
e
t
u
r
n
P
e
r
i
o
d
)
T
y
p
e
P
C
2
,
C
a
s
e
E
B
a
s
e
d
o
n
T
a
b
l
e
A
6
-
1
M
B
T
:
P
C
2
D
e
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
E
x
i
s
t
s
?
D
e
s
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
:
P
o
s
t
-
6
1
Y
e
s
=
1
N
o
.
o
f
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
:
1
N
o
=
0
D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
t
o
f
a
u
l
t
(
k
m
)
:
2
.
5
1
A
g
e
(
P
r
e
-
1
9
3
3
)
?
0
M
a
x
M
a
g
n
i
t
u
d
e
:
7
.
4
2
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
t
e
s
t
i
n
g
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
2
.
1
.
2
)
1
D
e
s
i
g
n
V
i
n
t
a
g
e
:
1
9
4
1
-
1
9
7
5
3
R
e
d
u
n
d
a
n
c
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
2
)
0
G
a
m
m
a
U
S
B
C
s
=
0
.
0
9
8
4
W
e
a
k
S
t
o
r
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
1
)
0
L
a
m
b
d
a
U
S
B
H
R
(
f
t
)
=
5
0
5
S
o
f
t
s
t
o
r
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
2
)
0
k
a
p
p
a
S
B
T
e
(
s
e
c
)
=
0
.
5
7
6
M
a
s
s
i
r
r
e
g
u
l
a
r
i
t
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
4
)
0
c
S
B
A
l
p
h
a
1
=
0
.
8
7
V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l
D
i
s
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
i
t
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
5
)
0
A
l
p
h
a
3
B
A
l
p
h
a
2
=
0
.
7
5
8
T
o
r
s
i
o
n
a
l
i
r
r
e
g
u
l
a
r
i
t
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
6
)
0
c
S
B
G
a
m
m
a
,
=
1
.
8
8
9
D
e
f
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
5
)
0
P
[
C
O
L
|
S
T
R
5
]
B
L
a
m
b
d
a
,
=
1
.
3
3
1
0
S
h
o
r
t
C
o
l
u
m
n
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
6
)
0
M
u
,
=
4
.
0
7
1
1
W
o
o
d
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
7
.
1
)
0
E
l
a
s
t
i
c
D
a
m
p
i
n
g
E
%
=
7
1
2
S
t
e
e
l
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
7
.
3
)
0
k
a
p
p
a
,
=
0
.
6
1
3
C
o
n
c
.
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
7
.
4
)
1
c
=
0
.
0
4
4
1
4
W
e
a
k
c
o
l
u
m
n
-
s
t
e
e
l
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
4
.
2
.
8
)
0
A
l
p
h
a
3
=
1
.
5
4
1
5
W
e
a
k
c
o
l
u
m
n
-
c
o
n
c
.
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
4
.
3
.
6
)
1
S
A
0
.
3
:
0
.
3
2
c
=
0
.
9
3
1
6
C
r
i
p
p
l
e
w
a
l
l
b
r
a
c
i
n
g
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
5
.
6
.
4
)
0
S
A
1
.
0
:
0
.
1
6
P
[
C
O
L
|
S
T
R
5
]
=
0
.
1
5
1
7
T
o
p
p
i
n
g
s
l
a
b
m
i
s
s
i
n
g
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
7
.
3
&
7
.
4
)
0
S
o
i
l
T
y
p
e
=
S
D
1
8
I
n
a
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
W
a
l
l
a
n
c
h
o
r
a
g
e
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
8
.
2
)
0
1
9
L
o
a
d
P
a
t
h
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
1
)
0
2
0
O
p
e
n
i
n
g
a
t
S
h
e
a
r
W
a
l
l
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
7
.
1
.
4
)
0
2
D
y
(
i
n
)
=
0
.
7
3
3
3
6
S
d
,
C
(
i
n
)
=
1
2
.
8
6
3
A
y
(
g
)
=
0
.
2
3
0
3
c
=
0
.
9
3
4
D
u
(
i
n
)
=
3
.
9
6
9
3
P
[
C
O
L
|
S
T
R
5
]
=
0
.
1
5
5
A
u
(
g
)
=
0
.
3
0
6
3
k
a
p
p
a
=
0
.
6
0
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
:
4
0
0
0
E
a
s
t
O
l
y
m
p
i
c
P
l
a
z
a
,
L
o
n
g
B
e
a
c
h
,
C
A
C
o
r
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
i
n
g
L
a
t
i
t
u
d
e
&
L
o
n
g
i
t
u
d
e
L
a
t
i
t
u
d
e
=
3
3
.
7
5
8
1
L
o
n
g
i
t
u
d
e
=
-
1
1
8
.
1
4
5
6
U
B
C
9
7
s
e
i
s
m
i
c
z
o
n
e
=
4
S
e
i
s
m
i
c
D
e
s
i
g
n
L
e
v
e
l
=
M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
-
C
o
d
e
P
[
S
T
R
5
]
=
0
.
0
0
1
8
P
[
C
O
L
]
=
0
.
0
3
%
H
A
Z
U
S
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
I
n
p
u
t
D
a
t
a
N
o
.
o
f
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
I
n
t
e
r
p
o
l
a
t
e
d
a
s
p
e
r
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
H
e
i
g
h
t
:
5
7
G
r
o
u
n
d
M
o
t
i
o
n
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
U
s
e
d
f
o
r
H
A
Z
U
S
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
a
l
F
r
a
g
i
l
i
t
y
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
(
S
o
u
r
c
e
=
M
E
L
I
S
S
A
D
A
T
A
a
t
h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
m
e
l
i
s
s
a
d
a
t
a
.
c
o
m
/
l
o
o
k
u
p
s
/
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
v
e
r
i
f
y
.
a
s
p
)
H
A
Z
U
S
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
O
u
t
c
o
m
e
:
P
a
s
s
(
M
a
y
b
e
r
e
-
c
l
a
s
s
i
f
i
e
d
t
o
S
P
C
-
2
)
T
M
A
D
T
a
y
l
o
r
a
n
d
G
a
i
n
e
s
1
0
/
1
5
/
2
0
1
2
Appendix D / 90 of 93
Cl~la
<OZ
~S~
t-t-0I5
0)
I
0)
0)
I
' " ' "
en ~
c:i c:i
II II
0
' " 7 il
0::
l-
(/)
::r
0
c,
en N
DO 0
:J
0
M
c:i
..;
II II
Ci ~
-F = -
>-
P
r
0)
0)
0)
Appendix 0/ 91 of 93
H
A
Z
U
S
A
E
B
M
M
o
d
e
l
H
A
Z
U
S
A
N
A
L
Y
S
I
S
W
O
R
K
S
H
E
E
T
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
N
a
m
e
B
e
l
m
o
n
t
P
l
a
z
a
P
o
o
l
,
L
o
c
k
e
r
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
,
1
0
%
i
n
5
0
Y
e
a
r
E
a
r
t
h
q
u
a
k
e
(
4
7
5
Y
r
R
e
t
u
r
n
P
e
r
i
o
d
)
T
y
p
e
P
C
2
B
a
s
e
d
o
n
T
a
b
l
e
A
6
-
1
M
B
T
:
P
C
2
D
e
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
E
x
i
s
t
s
?
D
e
s
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
:
P
o
s
t
-
6
1
Y
e
s
=
1
N
o
.
o
f
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
:
1
N
o
=
0
D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
t
o
f
a
u
l
t
(
k
m
)
:
2
.
5
1
A
g
e
(
P
r
e
-
1
9
3
3
)
?
0
M
a
x
M
a
g
n
i
t
u
d
e
:
7
.
4
2
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
t
e
s
t
i
n
g
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
2
.
1
.
2
)
1
D
e
s
i
g
n
V
i
n
t
a
g
e
:
1
9
4
1
-
1
9
7
5
3
R
e
d
u
n
d
a
n
c
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
2
)
0
G
a
m
m
a
U
S
B
C
s
=
0
.
1
3
3
4
W
e
a
k
S
t
o
r
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
1
)
0
L
a
m
b
d
a
U
S
B
H
R
(
f
t
)
=
1
2
.
5
5
S
o
f
t
s
t
o
r
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
2
)
0
k
a
p
p
a
S
B
T
e
(
s
e
c
)
=
0
.
3
5
6
M
a
s
s
i
r
r
e
g
u
l
a
r
i
t
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
4
)
0
c
B
A
l
p
h
a
1
=
0
.
8
7
V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l
D
i
s
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
i
t
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
5
)
0
A
l
p
h
a
3
B
A
l
p
h
a
2
=
0
.
7
5
8
T
o
r
s
i
o
n
a
l
i
r
r
e
g
u
l
a
r
i
t
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
3
.
6
)
0
c
S
B
G
a
m
m
a
,
=
2
.
7
9
D
e
f
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
5
)
0
P
[
C
O
L
|
S
T
R
5
]
B
L
a
m
b
d
a
,
=
1
.
3
3
1
0
S
h
o
r
t
C
o
l
u
m
n
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
6
)
0
M
u
,
=
6
1
1
W
o
o
d
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
7
.
1
)
0
E
l
a
s
t
i
c
D
a
m
p
i
n
g
E
%
=
7
1
2
S
t
e
e
l
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
7
.
3
)
0
k
a
p
p
a
,
=
0
.
6
1
3
C
o
n
c
.
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
7
.
4
)
1
c
=
0
.
0
5
3
1
4
W
e
a
k
c
o
l
u
m
n
-
s
t
e
e
l
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
4
.
2
.
8
)
0
A
l
p
h
a
3
=
1
1
5
W
e
a
k
c
o
l
u
m
n
-
c
o
n
c
.
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
4
.
3
.
6
)
0
S
A
0
.
3
:
0
.
5
0
.
3
2
c
=
0
.
9
5
1
6
C
r
i
p
p
l
e
w
a
l
l
b
r
a
c
i
n
g
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
5
.
6
.
4
)
0
S
A
1
.
0
:
0
.
1
6
0
.
1
6
P
[
C
O
L
|
S
T
R
5
]
=
0
.
1
5
1
7
T
o
p
p
i
n
g
s
l
a
b
m
i
s
s
i
n
g
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
7
.
3
&
7
.
4
)
0
S
o
i
l
T
y
p
e
=
S
D
1
8
I
n
a
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
W
a
l
l
a
n
c
h
o
r
a
g
e
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
8
.
2
)
0
1
9
L
o
a
d
P
a
t
h
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
1
)
0
2
0
O
p
e
n
i
n
g
a
t
S
h
e
a
r
W
a
l
l
(
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
7
.
1
.
4
)
0
2
D
y
(
i
n
)
=
0
.
5
3
8
9
6
S
d
,
C
(
i
n
)
=
5
.
9
6
3
A
y
(
g
)
=
0
.
4
4
8
9
c
=
0
.
9
5
4
D
u
(
i
n
)
=
4
.
3
0
0
2
P
[
C
O
L
|
S
T
R
5
]
=
0
.
1
5
5
A
u
(
g
)
=
0
.
5
9
7
0
k
a
p
p
a
=
0
.
6
0
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
:
4
0
0
0
E
a
s
t
O
l
y
m
p
i
c
P
l
a
z
a
,
L
o
n
g
B
e
a
c
h
,
C
A
C
o
r
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
i
n
g
L
a
t
i
t
u
d
e
&
L
o
n
g
i
t
u
d
e
L
a
t
i
t
u
d
e
=
3
3
.
7
5
8
1
L
o
n
g
i
t
u
d
e
=
-
1
1
8
.
1
4
5
6
U
B
C
9
7
s
e
i
s
m
i
c
z
o
n
e
=
4
S
e
i
s
m
i
c
D
e
s
i
g
n
L
e
v
e
l
=
M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
-
C
o
d
e
P
[
S
T
R
5
]
=
0
.
0
0
5
5
P
[
C
O
L
]
=
0
.
0
8
%
H
A
Z
U
S
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
O
u
t
c
o
m
e
:
P
a
s
s
(
M
a
y
b
e
r
e
-
c
l
a
s
s
i
f
i
e
d
t
o
S
P
C
-
2
)
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
a
l
F
r
a
g
i
l
i
t
y
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
(
S
o
u
r
c
e
=
M
E
L
I
S
S
A
D
A
T
A
a
t
h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
m
e
l
i
s
s
a
d
a
t
a
.
c
o
m
/
l
o
o
k
u
p
s
/
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
v
e
r
i
f
y
.
a
s
p
)
H
A
Z
U
S
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
I
n
p
u
t
D
a
t
a
N
o
.
o
f
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
I
n
t
e
r
p
o
l
a
t
e
d
a
s
p
e
r
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
H
e
i
g
h
t
:
1
7
G
r
o
u
n
d
M
o
t
i
o
n
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
U
s
e
d
f
o
r
H
A
Z
U
S
T
M
A
D
T
a
y
l
o
r
a
n
d
G
a
i
n
e
s
1
0
/
2
4
/
2
0
1
2
Appendix D / 91 of 93
Appendix 0 / 92 of 93
U ) Diving Platform Overturning Check
(
.' T MAD " " , A " "L'
.' TAY LO R .B~l MotilJ?LA Z O L + 1 - 1 E lLf - = - . O ( ) - = - - _
&GAINES
S T Rue T U R A L M E C HA'N I CAL E LEe T R IC A LAN D C I V I LEN GIN E E R S
Anaheim Ontario Pasadena Phoenix Riverside San Diego San Francisco Thousand Oaks date _
sheet __ of __ ,
by _
job no,J2lj204- r.O 0
(i) F r c - J
"W i ~ (u"svH~)(~)(vv) ~ I rf b I e
, ,
(
S "tIL F ' LL.
@ H~ '(i) 'V' 18 I ,
' (P"'''~~' - , Ii:(.~ ~ 0
W I ~ ,(0- 1~ > iW )(
2
. ( ,1~ 3) t (I,'tX 1- 7,) +( /,5 ~ 0. .7t)( ~ :7J. r ~ +(t. s ) ( 4 - , > f) J ( 2 ) ( / n
:: k6~ k.."( 'H~f1,~q' r . .
. I< .
W
St5IL
- ::. ( O . Jlo) ( ~ \S- ) ( ') ) l( lj J = = qt} (H(6] = = 'i')
C D H - z: [ 8 r - - . . . / 'l.1- S I
W ~ ,; ( 0 - ISil } [ 1 / . - .r) (1- !i"H . J4( f 'L ){Sf ~( 20. >r) ''= ' 4 2. - 1:( ( ,1'\'( . 0 ~ 2i- 2"~) ,
v 0- f 9 "- - : ( 0. 1 ~ ) ( z . . ,- ,' > ( ':11S') ( 2,0) = 5"'1,1< ( I~a) = 37')
~ fL.A- r f 'VR"""
@ H - = ?a, r~' ~. ~b '"
W ,C D = (1l.!~) ((l'() ((,~I) (z..X+(~.~~) (I.~) }~;h.1.1~) e 26k.- ( 11C - '7~ 4- 1' )
( j) , " ,. ( ~
W , '. ( \)-\~ ) ( 2- @') ( r~1 ~ ,. ) ( "Z - c ) ) :: ~ 1~ ( r- t :: 4 f .~ I' )
~ rLm~Yl""
p/"- e- - v =Ik'
~ ~ 1. S1JtIc , C - o e, rrl C . l - r - N'!
S I~I ~
~ ~y<. /+s C,~\1'- 05: Cs = (r<- ;~) - - 3/ 1 "::0, 3 f 7 '> 0 - a . 5
"lA - a L.~ 1 5,4,. '2 C > Q- t
s
I _' 0 . a 1 ( ) . ~ 1 :: o . \'19 . 0 "lc . "
s c r - /- - z - ) - ( 1> II )
Appendix D / 92 of 93
(j) Diving Platform Overturning Check
r t., b
G K21)(".;-o,2xSp~) = 4 - ~ b- V ~ - ' > ~>b~l~-I
'.-TMAD
TAYLOR B~L.Mt)NT p L A - z . A O L Y f . . 1 P J C . p OOL
&GA INES
s h e e t of __
ST Rue T URA L M Ee HA'N I e ALE LEe T R rc A LAN Del v I LEN GIN EE RS
by _
job no. 0 1 1 2 - 0 4 ! i - Q O
Anaheim Ontario Pasadena Phoenix Riverside San Diego San Francisco Thousand Oaks d a t e
- - - -
oV &R Iv ref - . J INC . , Ho fvtCrNl
~ H O T 0 3 t T [ trt()(o') + (151)(1') t (q+~ (~ ' )t(t2t.)('/i)+wb(n)+{lb~){4-7)+(d)(4K:~')]
= e,381 X C'tL- 0 C s f- -') e ~ ;- b " 3 t . . - I
'-
I
~ ~ ~ $' :S""' N;~ " H ' ()M- ~ '/ , ." ! : "i " : ', ';! (, '
l- ' 1~ = (II , ''2.5' )(Icfu i<~ l>' ", ' 14 t + q .. ' 2 . ~ . , 3 / < ..j. 2 - ' 1:+ r3 1<-J
.\ :~ - "f'i q "\:-- I '> ~S-G 3'(:. - /
No " T' if' N ~
Appendix 0 / 93 of 93 Appendix D / 93 of 93
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
AppendixEEarthquakeDamagetoBuildingSimilartoNatatoriumBuilding
(ImperialCountyServiceBuilding,1979EarthquakeDamage)
==-TTG
TMAD TAYLOR & GAINES
Appendix E / 1 of 1
Belmont Plaza Pool Seismic Evaluation
4000 E. Olympic Plaza For Collapse Probability Assessment
Long Beach, California Belmont Plaza Pool Buildings
Photo1ImperialCountyServiceBuilding,1979EarthquakeDamage
Photo2ImperialCountyServiceBuilding,1979EarthquakeDamage
Photo3ImperialCountyServiceBuilding,1979EarthquakeDamage
Photo4ImperialCountyServiceBuilding,1979EarthquakeDamage
Appendix E / 1 of 1
-~--?---
--
o
o
o
o
. . . _ -
/fMACTEC
1857
M 8+
1925
M 6.3
1916
M 6.0
1971
M 6.6
1994
M 6.7
1987
M 5.9
1991
M 5.8
1812
M 6.9
1899
M 7.0
1890
M 7.0
1907
M 6.0
1923
M 6.3
1910
M 6.0
1918
M 6.8
1992
M 6.4
1933
M 6.4
1938
M 5.5
1963
M 5.1
1935
M 5.1
1943
M 5.3
2003
M 5.4
1992
M 5.4
1943
M 5.3
1962
M 5.0
1970
M 5.2
1990
M 5.4
1933
M 5.4
1979
M 5.2
1968
M 5.3
1973
M 5.3
1941
M 5.5
1978
M 5.1
1981
M 5.5
1988
M 5.4
1941
M 5.1
1952
M 7.5
1952
M 5.1
1997
M 5.1
APPROXIMATE EPICENTRAL AREA OF EARTHQUAKE
Year
M8+
Year
M7+
Year
M6+
Year
M5+
Historic Fault
Displacement
Holocene Fault
Displacement
Without Historic
Record
REFERENCES:
Jennings, C.W., 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas with Locations and Ages of
Recent Volcanic Eruptions, California Division of Mines and Geology, GDM-6.
Earthquake Catalogs: Richter, 1812-1905, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
1906-1931; Caltech, 1932-2005.
o
24
20
KM
Miles
12 0
0 10
L
Site
SITE
4953-05-0424
5-31-07
as shown
PER
JOB NO.:
DATE:
SCALE:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
REVISIONS:
Figure 3 - Regional Faults and Seismicity
Belmont Plaza Olympic Pool Revitalization
Long Beach, California
03/30/2009
4953-09-0301
DGW
As shown
MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING, INC.
5628 E. Slauson Ave., Los Angeles, California 90040
(323) 889-5300, fax (323) 889-5398
RM
~.
R
IMDESIGN
~ GROUP
JONES Ir
"'U,OHAYAN
"'111(_11 ,(.Tf,I'l l
1"a;I_"II"1II
EXHIBIT C
'-
, ,
I I
EXISTING GATEWAY -6d-.j,'j>
OUTDOOR POOL
DROP-OFF---- ....
\
f
~
I
I
BLEACHERS, TYP.
'------ POTENTIAL RESTROOM/
OUTDOOR SHOWER
PROPOSED LONG TERM CONCEPT
r1....rI
o 25' 50' 100'
BELMONT PLAZAPOOL REPLACEMENT
CITY OF LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA
THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF R1M DESIGN GROUP,INC.. AND NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE USED. REUSED, OR MODIFIED WITHOUT THE WRllTEN CONSENT OF RIM DESIGN GROUP, INC. C12013 RIM Design Group,lnc. All rights reserved.
EXHI BI T C
CommUnitylnspued Spocu ."1'
R
~I MDESIGN
~ GROUP
JONES iii
MADHAVAN
ARCHITECTUIH
~tlGHIt:tRI~~
i
50 METERS
i
40'-0"
T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
\0
I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
C\
b~
'"*
r;::: <{ I-
~I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Ul Ul Ul
-' <(
Ul :I: Ul
~)-
lL '>I. lL
...J
\0
\0 I-'~ I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
d)
ID
'"
N
....
I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
PROPOSED OUTDOOR POOL
PROPOSED OUTDOOR POOL
CommUMYIn"","" SpocM
R
_IMDESIGN
~ GROUP
IONES &
MADHAVAN
"'RCH1T~CTURE
c It GIN e e R 1 N 'G
C,OMPETITION Y'lATER POLO
SOMx:20Mx8FTDEEP
YV FLOATING GOALS
PRAC,TIC,E Y'lATER POLO
(:2) 15 FT X 45 FT X 8 FT DEEP
YV FIXED GOALS
C,OMPETITION SHORT C,OURSE SIi'IIMMING
(10) :25 YD LANES X 8 FT DEEP
C,OMPETITION LONG C,OURSE SIi'IIMMING
(8) 50 M LANES X 8 FT DEEP
REC,REATION AREA
5,:200 sa FT
o TO 4.5 FT DEEP
PROPOSED OUTDOOR POOL
PROPOSED OUTDOOR POOL
Commijnlryr1lJ1;li~SpaClL!2 .P
R
~IMDESIGN
~ GROUP
JONES &
tolADHAVAN
ARCHITECTUR[
e. II oj: I rI f E f!. I H G
i
50 METERS
r
If)
a~
-'
~)-
I/)
N
~----+--+-Il-----
- - - - I
~
- - - -
_I
- -
_I _I
- - - - - - - - - - I
I I
!
~
-L
L
--.J
- - - - - I
I I
!
~ - - - -
--I-
- -
...I-
---I
- - - - - - - - - - I
r-
I I
!
D
l-
-+- -lul+-
l- I-
~ UJ
- - - -
-I UJ-
- - - - - - - - -
IltJ
UJ
~II
UJ
UJ
u,
1
!
u, u, J:
~
~ In -+- -<l:lH-
----I 1/)-
- - - - - I If! -1
.:;
-II
-.t
In
ia
I
J
~
I
-,
I
- - - - - I
I I I
~----T--I---,-----
- - - - - I
I I I
I
~--------------
- - - - -
I I!
~- - - - +- - +---.J
r
- - - -- - - - - I
'----
PROPOSED INDOOR POOL
90'-0"
5 FEET
YIlARM
YIlATER
9 FEET
PROPOSED INDOOR POOL
Comnumlryrn.Jpill:'d Spac:n .1'
R
~IMDES'GN
~ GROUP JONES .&.
MADHAVAN
ARCHITU:Jl.JIU
~ 1'1Ii I ri II; Ii 1\ I ~ (;
D D
COMPETITION 5HORT COUR5E 5Y'11MMIN6 PRACTICE Y'lATER POLO
(8) 25 YD LANE5 x 8 FT DEEP 15 FT x 45 FT x 8 FT DEEP
Y'I! FIXED 60AL5
D D
RECREATION AREA COMPETITION LON6 COUR5E 5Y'11MMIN6
Cf4 FT x 15 FT x 3.5 TO 4.5 FT DEEP (10) 50 M LANE5 x 3.5 - 13 FT DEEP
30 FT x 60 FT x 3 TO 5 FT DEEP
PROPOSED INDOOR POOL
PRACTICE 5YNCHRONIZED 5Y'11MMIN6
25 YD x 12 M x 2 M DEEP Y'I!
12 M x 12 M x 3 M DEEP 5ECTION Y'lITHIN
RECREATIONAL 5PRIN660ARD DIVIN6
40 FT x 40 FT x 13 FT DEEP
D
D
PROPOSED INDOOR POOL
........
\
/
;
/ /
.. ,.
Existing
Restroom) \"."1-
_-4~*""---!Locker .
Facility
rb.~::~ ...
=:)I~:: .s.
STAIRSo'l>
\ .
/
" _.. " ' ,.c.
..'
1'1>
Existing
Maintenance
Building
".Q
Existing Storage Yard
CON9
~..... J.,.r' "",.,
I'
1"
!
0
1./t-
\ .
-ST IRS
R
~I MDES'GN
~ GROUP
,
,
,
PROPOSEDTEMPORARYCONCEPT
I
100'
BELMONTPLAZAPOOLREPLACEMENT
CITYOFLONGBEACH,CALIFORNIA
I
o
I_I
25' 50'
JONES &
MADHAVAN
A" Co H I r [Co r U 'II[
e p.&' GIN f: t It I,.,. G
THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF RIM DESIGN GROUP, INC., AND NO PART THEREOF SHALL BE USED, REUSED, OR MODIFIED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF RIM DESIGN GROUP, INC. 2013 RIM Design Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
EXHI BI T D