ARTICLE IN PRESS

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 324– 332

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/soildyn

Low-velocity zone and topography as a source of site amplification effect on

Tarzana hill, California
Vladimir Graizer 
Seismic Hazard Assessment Program, California Geological Survey, 801 K Street, MS 12-32, Sacramento, CA 95814-3531, USA

a r t i c l e in f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Tarzana station is located in the foothills of the Santa Monica Mountains in California near the crest of a
Received 13 November 2007 low (o20 m) natural hill with gentle slopes. The hill is about 500 m in length by 130 m in width and is
Accepted 14 March 2008 formed of extremely weathered shale at the surface to fresh at depth. Average S-wave is about 250 m/s
in the top 17–18 m, and S- and P-wave velocities significantly increase below this depth. According to
Keywords: the NEHRP classification based on VS30300 m/s it is a site class D. Strong-motion instrumentation at
Tarzana hill Tarzana consisted of an accelerograph at the top of the hill, a downhole instrument at 60 m depth, and
Site amplification an accelerograph at the base of the hill. More than 20 earthquakes were recorded by at least three
Low-velocity zone
instruments at Tarzana from 1998 till 2003. Comparisons of recordings and Fourier spectra indicate
Soft rock
strong directional resonance in a direction perpendicular to the strike of the hill. The dominant peaks in
Predominant frequency
ground motion amplification on the top of the hill relative to the base are at frequencies 3.6 and
8–9 Hz for the horizontal components. Our hypothesis is that the hill acts like a wave trap. This results
in an amplification at predominant frequencies f ¼ V/4 h (h is layer’s thickness) at f3.6 Hz for S-waves
(using average VS17 ¼ 246 m/s and h ¼ 17 m) and f7.9 Hz for P-waves (using average VP17 ¼ 535 m/s
and h ¼ 17 m). As was shown by Bouchon and Barker [Seismic response of a hill: the example of Tarzana,
California. Bull Seism Soc Am 1996;86(1A):66–72], topography of this hill amplifies and polarizes
ground motion in the frequency range of 3–5 Hz. Hill acts as a magnifying polarizing glass: It polarizes
ground motion in the direction perpendicular to the strike of the hill and also amplifies ground motions
that had been also amplified by a low-velocity layer.
Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1. Introduction engineers [1,5–12]. Explanations of the strong-site amplification

Tarzana hill is located in the northern foothills of the Santa
Monica Mountains on the south side of the San Fernando Valley in
Southern California. Tarzana hill strong-motion stations were
installed near the crest of a low (o20 m) natural hill with gentle
slopes. The hill is about 500 m in length by 130 m in width.
Significantly amplified ground accelerations at the Tarzana Hill
station were recorded during the 1987 Mw 5.9 Whittier Narrows
and the 1994 Mw 6.7 Northridge earthquakes. Peak horizontal
ground acceleration at the Tarzana station during the Northridge
earthquake reached 1.93 g and is considered to be one of the
largest ever recorded acceleration [2–5]. During the Northridge
and the 1999 Mw 7.1 Hector Mine earthquakes Tarzana hill
records were approximately twice or more larger than the
accelerations recorded at nearby stations. Unusual site effect at
this strong-motion station attracted attention of scientists and
 Corresponding author. Present address: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
MS T-7E18, Washington, DC 20555-0001, USA. Tel.: +1 301 415 0675.
E-mail address: vxg1@nrc.gov
effect vary significantly from directional topographic effect [8]
and unusual Poisson’s ratio [9] to the resonant sliding block [10].
Despite all these efforts none of the above-mentioned studies
came up with completely conclusive explanation of the source of
the site amplification that produces unusually large motions at
Tarzana. All researchers investigating this case agreed that it is
necessary to continue studying Tarzana hill by increasing
seismological instrumentation and geological and geotechnical
characterization (drilling) of the site. Such a high level of
amplification observed at a relatively low hill (only 20 m high)
presents a potential problem for construction, since there are
many hills like Tarzana in California. The question remains: What
created such effect?
Tarzana—Cedar Hill Nursery strong-motion station was first
installed in 1974 near the crest of the hill. In 1996 the site was
drilled to a depth of 100 m. Drilling at Tarzana was co-funded by
the California Strong Motion Instrumentation Program (CSMIP)
and by the National Science Foundation (NSF) through the
Resolution of Site Response Issues from the Northridge Earth-
quake Project (ROSRINE [13]). A low shear-wave velocity of about
200 m/s near the surface increasing to about 750 m/s at 100 m

0267-7261/$ - see front matter Published by Elsevier Ltd.

doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2008.03.005
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

V. Graizer / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 324–332 325

Table 1
CSMIP strong-motion instrumentation at Tarzana as of beginning of 2005

Station no. Station name Coordinates Instrumentation Date of

Lat. Long. Installation Removal

24086 Tarzana—Cedar Hill Nursery 34.161 118.533 SMA-1 3/14/74 4/23/82

24436 Tarzana—Cedar Hill Nursery A 34.160 118.534 SMA-1 4/23/82 10/99
SSA-1 1/19/94 10/99
24764 Tarzana—Cedar Hill B 34.160 118.534 K2-surface & 6/5/97 exists
60 m downhole 10/29/97 exists
24103 Tarzana—Clubhouse 34.160 118.532 SSA-1 1/25/94 exists
24105 Tarzana—Post Office 34.172 118.540 SSA-1 1/25/94 7/11/95

Table 2
Earthquakes recorded at Tarzana array in 1998– 2003

Quake no. Date Time (UTC) ML Lat. Long. Depth, km Epi. Dist., km Azimuth PGA, g

1 1/4/1998 09:11:45.1 3.3 34.20 118.64 3.5 10.7 114 0.009

2 1/5/1998 18:14:06.5 4.3 33.95 117.71 11.5 79.6 287 0.004
3 1/12/1998 06:36:24.9 3.4 34.19 118.47 11.3 6.8 241 0.03
4 1/15/1998 22:54:08.1 3.0 34.26 118.43 10.6 14.7 221 0.006
5 3/11/1998 12:18:51.8 4.5 34.02 117.23 14.9 121.3 278 0.006
6 5/1/1998 21:02:37.8 3.8 34.35 118.67 14.2 24.5 149 0.015
7 6/3/1998 05:22:50.6 3.0 34.12 118.48 7.7 6.7 312 0.026
8 6/17/1998 18:51:32.2 3.9 34.276 118.577 8.1 13.5 163 0.049
9 9/24/1998 11:41:42.7 2.6 34.110 118.59 6.0 7.6 43 0.007
10 11/11/1998 05:40:28.9 2.5 34.16 118.50 11.3 3.1 270 0.011
11 4/11/1999 09:09:19 3.6 34.35 118.58 2.3 21.5 169 0.007
12 10/16/1999 09:47:44.1 4.1 34.594 116.271 6.0 213.6 258 0.055
13 1/14/2001 02:26:14.0 4.3 34.284 118.404 8.8 18.2 221 0.026
14 1/14/2001 02:50:53.6 4.0 34.289 118.403 8.4 18.7 220 0.022
15 9/9/2001 23:59:18.0 4.2 34.059 118.38 7.9 17.5 310 0.028
16 1/29/2002 05:53:28.9 4.2 34.361 118.657 14.2 25.0 153 0.019
17 1/29/2002 06:00:39.8 3.9 34.37 118.668 14.2 26.4 152 0.042
18 1/29/2002 06:08:01.9 3.8 34.365 118.664 14.4 25.7 152 0.021
19 1/30/2002 18:47:57.4 3.5 34.366 118.661 12.8 25.7 153 0.015
20 2/22/2003 12:19:10.6 5.4 34.31 116.848 1.2 156.2 264 0.01
21 3/28/2003 05:44:13.3 2.9 34.131 118.504 4.8 4.2 319 0.037
22 8/1/2003 18:35:18 2.3 34.109 118.561 10.2 6.2 24 0.011
23 8/27/2003 06:02:22 3.9 34.404 118.647 18.4 29.8 158 0.009

depth was measured. The 20 m high hill was found to be well
drained with a water table near the depth of 17 m. Modelo
formation (shale, extremely weathered at the surface to fresh at
depth) underlies the hill. The subsurface geology and velocities
obtained allow classification of this location as a soft-rock site
with an average shear-wave velocity of 300 m/s in the upper
30 m, corresponding to the NEHRP site class D [5,11].
After the Northridge earthquake CSMIP significantly increased
instrumentation at Tarzana to study the unusual site amplification
effect. From 1999 to 2005 instrumentation at Tarzana included an
accelerograph at the top of Tarzana hill (Tarzana—Cedar Hill-B), a
downhole instrument at 60 m depth, and an accelerograph at the
foot of the hill (Tarzana—Clubhouse), 180 m from the Cedar Hill-B
station. The original station, Tarzana—Cedar Hill Nursery A, was
lost in 1999 due to construction (Table 1). More than 20 events,
including the Hector Mine earthquake, were recorded by at least
three instruments at Tarzana array (Table 2).
Comparison of recordings and spectra demonstrates
strong directional resonance on the top of the hill in a direction
perpendicular to the strike of the hill in the frequency range
from 1.2 to 20 Hz. Amplification from the bottom to the top of the
hill for the component parallel to the strike of the hill is much
lower than that of the perpendicular direction. In contrast to
acceleration (high-frequency part of seismic signal) recorded
during the Hector Mine earthquake, displacement (relatively low-
frequency part of seismic signal) demonstrates almost no site
amplification from the bottom of the hole to the surface at periods
greater than 1.5 s, in either direction. New data recorded at
Tarzana in recent years clearly show that the Tarzana effect is a
localized relatively high-frequency effect observed only near the
top of the hill.
2. Site characterization
The Tarzana—Cedar Hill Nursery station is located in the San
Fernando Valley near the crest of a low (15–20 m) natural hill with
gentle slopes (Fig. 1). The ridge that underlies the station may
represent an uplifted valley floor that formed adjacent to the
Santa Monica Mountains. Hoots [14] and Jennings and Strand [15]
show a buried fault locally trending north-east to south-west
along the southeast flank of the hill that may have uplifted the
ridge.
The hill is about 500 m in length by 130 m in width with a
strike near N781E (Fig. 2). The ground surface is near horizontal on
the crest of the hill, which has been graded (Ralph Herman,
personal communication). On the south side of Cedar Hill, the hill
slopes gently about 6–81 to a golf course, about 14 m below the
top of the hill. On the north side the slopes descend at about
18–201 to the Tarzana alluvial plain, about 25 m below the
hillcrest. The gentle hilltop is apparently well drained in four
directions. The ground water table is near the base of the hill
where Caballero Creek drains northward in a concrete drainage
culvert (Fig. 2) (Robert Sydnor, written communication).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
326 V. Graizer / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 324–332
Fig. 1. View of Tarzana Hill in Southern California.
Fig. 2. Topography, surface geology and strong motion stations at Tarzana (modified from Spudich et al. [8]).
Previously, Geosoils [16] performed an extensive geological
mapping of the Tarzana Nursery area (Fig. 2). According to the
Geosoils, the strong-motion site is underlain by a variable
thickness of colluvial soil (silty clay) estimated to be about
0.5–1.5 m in thickness. The soil is derived by in-place weathering
of a soft claystone and siltstone of the upper member of the
Modelo Formation, which underlies the soil. The Modelo forma-
tion (Tm in Fig. 2) is exposed on the flanks of the hill, while the
base is covered by 1–2 m of Quaternary slope wash (Qsw in Fig. 2)
[16,17]. Directly underlying the Modelo formation is the white
siliceous shale of the Monterey Formation, with a thickness on the
order of hundreds of meters (R. Sydnor, written communication).
Drilling to 100 m depth was completed by the CSMIP
subcontractor (Agbabian Assoc., Inc.) in December 1996 as a part
of the project funded by the NSF through the ROSRINE project
(ROSRINE website [13]). The borehole is located on the crest of the
hill less than 50 m to the west–south–west of the instrument’s T-
hut. The geology of the hole was logged during drilling and
velocity surveys were performed (Fig. 3). The complete report on
the drilling, geotechnical logging and velocity measurements at
Tarzana is shown by Darragh et al. [5].
The drill site is underlain by 4 m of silty clay and diatomac-
eous silt (colluvial soil) derived by in-place weathering of the soft
claystone, siltstone and shale of the Modelo formation. The
grayish-brown silty clay is dry and friable with a low dry strength.
The average shear-wave velocity in the silty soil is about 200 m/s.
Decomposed and deeply weathered shale of the Modelo
formation underlies the soil from 4–5 to 12 m. The rock is thinly
laminated and tan to reddish-brown in color. Gypsum crystals are
first observed in the shale at 6 m. From 12 to 100 m the lithology in
the borehole consists of highly to slightly weathered shale with
several very hard layers. White hard rock chips were observed
during the drilling in this depth range. The shale is described as
finely bedded, fractured with some layers of clay (perhaps
indicating several zones of intense weathering). The water table
inferred from a large increase in P-wave velocity, color change and
loss of gypsum minerals to solution was near the base of the hill at a
depth of 17–18 m. Average S-wave velocity increases at the same
depth from about 280 m/s for the depth interval of 5–17–18 m to
about 430 m/s for the 18–60 m interval. Average P-wave velocity for
the same intervals are 640 (5–17 m) and 1610 m/s (18–60 m),
correspondingly. Average velocities for the depth interval of
60–87 m are: 660 m/s (S-wave) and 1920 m/s (P-wave).
These results are consistent with the measurements performed
by the US Geological Survey [18]. The USGS borehole is located
about 140 m north of the Tarzana—Cedar Hill Nursery A strong-
motion instrument, and is shown in Fig. 2. This borehole extended
only to a depth of 30 m. The top 6 m of this hole consists of
Quaternary slope wash, colluvial soil (an olive colored and very
stiff silty clay loam with slight plasticity) above deeply weathered
Modelo shale with visible parting. The average downhole S-wave
velocity was about 380 m/s in the upper 6 m. Soft to firm black,
fresh shale was found from 6 to 30 m (total depth). The shale had
very close horizontal parting on bedding planes and close to very
close fracture spacing. Average downhole S-wave and P-wave
velocities of about 390 and 1660 m/s were measured [18]. A
relatively high Poisson’s ratio of 0.47 is a characteristic of a soft
bedrock formation. At greater depths, the Modelo formation has a
P-wave and S-wave velocities estimated to be 3350 and 1800 m/s,
respectively [19].
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
V. Graizer / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 324–332
Fig. 3. P- and S-wave velocities and generalized soil profile at Tarzana hill.
Also, Catchings and Lee [9] measured seismic velocities from
five explosive sources at a north–south (200 m in length) and
east–west (500 m in length) array of seismographs. The seismic
refraction data indicate S-wave velocity between 200 and 600 m/s
in the upper 70 m. The corresponding P-wave velocity is estimated
to be from 900 to 1650 m/s. According to this study [9], low-
velocity zone underlies the original strong-motion site in the
depth range of 25–60 m, which differs from our data. In average,
these velocity measurements are consistent with the velocities
presented in our study and by Fumal et al. [18]. The subsurface
geology and velocities obtained allow classification of this
location as a soft-rock site with average velocity of 300 m/s in
the upper 30 m, corresponding to the NEHRP site class D
[5,11,20–22].
3. Strong-motion instrumentation at Tarzana
The strong-motion instrumentation (film accelerograph SMA-
1) at the Tarzana—Cedar Hill Nursery was first installed in 1974 by
the Strong Motion Instrumentation Program (SMIP) of the
California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), currently called
California Geological Survey (CGS). The instrumentation was
moved in January of 1987 to the new location on the Nursery
grounds (Fig. 2). The ground-response station was housed in a
small lightweight equipment shelter (T-hut). Five mainshocks,
with peak accelerations ranging from 0.04 to 1.9 g, have been
327
recorded by the analog instrumentation (SMA-1). These are the
1987 Whittier Narrows (and aftershock on October 4, 1987),
1991 Sierra Madre, 1992 Landers and Big Bear and 1994 North-
ridge (and aftershocks on January 17 and March 20, 1994).
On January 19, 1994, a digital instrument was collocated
with the analog instrument in the T-hut to record Northridge
aftershocks. Since this time several earthquakes have been
recorded by the digital and analog instrumentation. The largest
record is from the March 20, 1994 Northridge aftershock with a
peak horizontal acceleration of 0.37 g. Table 1 summarizes
existing and removed strong-motion instrumentation installed
by the California Strong Motion Instrumentation Program in the
area of Tarzana.
In January 1994 (1 week after the Northridge earthquake)
CSMIP installed an additional accelerograph (Tarzana—Club-
house) at the foot of Tarzana hill at a distance of about 150 m
from the Tarzana—Cedar Hill station (Table 1). Strong-motion
data from more than 30 earthquakes with magnitudes
2.4oMo5.2 were recorded and have been processed. Peak
acceleration, velocity and displacement were often, but not
always amplified by factors near 2 on the top of the hill during
Northridge aftershocks. Also, response spectra were in average
amplified by a factor of 4.5 near 0.3 s (3.2 Hz) [5,11].
Another strong-motion station (Tarzana—Post Office) was
installed in January 1994. This temporary station was installed
inside the one story relatively large building located at a distance
of about 1.5 km in the north–north–west direction from the old
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
328 V. Graizer / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 324–332
site. The records at this station demonstrate similarities to those
at Clubhouse. This temporary station was in operation till July
1995, and was later abandoned because it does not satisfy
requirements for a free field or a reference station (Post Office
building is relatively large and heavy).
In June 1997 CSMIP installed a third accelerograph on the top
of Tarzana hill at the distance of about 50 m from the existing
station as a transitional step to abandoning the original site
because of planned construction. Comparison of strong-motion
data shows significant variability between the records from these
two close stations [5,11,21,22].
Most recent instrumentation at Tarzana consisted of an
accelerograph at the top of Tarzana hill (Tarzana—Cedar Hill-B),
a downhole instrument at 60 m depth, and an accelerograph at
the foot of the hill (Tarzana—Clubhouse), 180 m from the Cedar
Hill-B station. The original station, Tarzana—Cedar Hill Nursery A,
was lost in 1999 due to construction. More than 20 events,
including the Hector Mine earthquake, were recorded by at least
three instruments at Tarzana (Table 1). Unfortunately, Tarzana—-
Cedar Hill-B and downhole instruments are not operational since
the end of 2004, because of the property change of ownership (the
new owner cut power from the instruments and does not allow
accessing the instrumentation by CSMIP technicians).
4. Strong-motion data analysis
Ground-motion amplification has been observed at Tarzana
hill in many earthquakes and for both strong and weak motions.
Both the Whittier Narrows and Northridge mainshocks produced
larger than expected motions at Tarzana. The peak horizontal
acceleration recorded during the Whittier Narrows mainshock
was amplified by a factor from 5 to 10 compared to sites at a
similar distance. Analysis of recordings from the Northridge
earthquake performed by Darragh et al. [5,11] demonstrated that
displacement waveforms were quite similar in shape and
amplitude at Tarzana and several of the nearby stations. It shows
that the low-frequency motions practically were not affected by
the Tarzana-site effect. In contrast to low frequencies, the high
frequencies were significantly amplified at Tarzana—Nursery,
with peak ground acceleration been 2.1–3.5 times higher
compared to the nearby stations. These waveforms document
significant differences in shaking at stations in the San Fernando
Valley and on the Tarzana hill over distances from 1 to 7 km,
especially at frequencies higher than 3 Hz.
Fig. 4. Accelerations, velocities and displacements at Tarzana during the Mw 3.4 earthquake of 1/12/1998.
Fig. 4 shows an example of the ground motion at Tarzana
stations during the low magnitude Mw 3.4 earthquake of
January 12, 1998 (Table 2). The ground motions were processed
in the 0.5–45 Hz frequency band, and rotated along the compo-
nents parallel (751) and perpendicular (1651) to the strike
of the hill (those orientations were first suggested by Spudich
et al. [8]). For the component parallel to the strike of the hill
peak accelerations, velocities and displacements at the old
site (Nursery) are amplified about 25% relative to the foot
of the hill (Clubhouse), and actually deamplified at the new site
on the top of the hill (Hill-B) compared to the foothill. For the
parallel component velocities and displacements at both hill top
sites are 15–60% amplified relative to the foothill. Ground motions
at the Nursery site are consistently higher than that of the Hill-B
site.
Fig. 5 shows the ground motion at Tarzana stations during the
large magnitude Mw 7.1 Hector Mine earthquake. The ground
motions were also rotated along the components parallel (751)
and perpendicular (1651) to the strike of the hill. Peak accelera-
tions on the top of the hill compared to the foothill along
the parallel component are amplified 1.14 times, and is not
amplified for the vertical component. But for the component
perpendicular to the strike of the hill the amplification is 1.56
times. Peak velocities demonstrate amplification of 1.36 times
(lower than peak accelerations) only along the perpendicular
component. In contrast to accelerations (high-frequency part of
seismic signal), displacements (relatively low-frequency part of
seismic signal) don’t demonstrate any site amplification from the
bottom of the hole to the surface at periods greater than 1.5 s, in
either direction.
5. Interpretation of spectral ratios
Comparisons were made of the Fourier-spectral ratios of
ground motions at the top of Tarzana hill (Hill-B and Nursery)
with that at the base (Clubhouse) and at the 60 m depth (Fig. 6,
thick lines). Spectral ratios 71s (one standard deviation) are also
shown with thin lines. Comparisons of the crest-to-base motions
are shown in Fig. 6 and demonstrate the following features:
 Motion near the base of Tarzana Hill (Clubhouse) is slightly
polarized: Level of ground motion is slightly higher along the
tangential (T, 1651) relative to longitudinal (L, 751) direction
(Fig. 6a, bottom).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

V. Graizer / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 324–332 329

Fig 5. Accelerations, velocities and displacements at Tarzana during the Mw 7.1 Hector Mine earthquake.

Fig. 6. Comparison of the longitudinal and transverse ground motion at the crest (Hill-B and Nursery) and at the base (Clubhouse) of Tarzana hill: (a) tangential-to-
longitudinal components ratios at the top of the hill and at the foothill, (b) crest-to-base (Nursery-to-Clubhouse) ratios, (c) crest-to-base (Hill-B to Clubhouse) ratios.

 Motion at the crest of Tarzana Hill (Hill-B) is highly polarized with
main peaks at around 4.1 Hz and around 8.2–12 Hz (Fig. 6a, top).
 Spectral-site amplification on the top of the hill relative to the
base reaches in average 4–6 times at 3.5–3.7 and 8–9 Hz along
the component perpendicular to the strike of the hill (Fig. 6b, c).
Comparisons of the site amplification at the base (Clubhouse)
and at the crest (Hill-B) relative to the downhole (60 m depth)
motion are shown, respectively, in Fig. 7a, b, and demonstrate the
following features:
 Peaks in spectral amplifications are well synchronized at 2,
4.6 and 7 Hz at the base and crest. Spectral amplification
reaches its maximum at 4.6 Hz.
 Spectral amplitudes at the crest of the hill are 1.5–2 times
higher than those at the base.
 Spectral amplifications are significantly higher along the 1651
components perpendicular to the strike of the hill.
Those comparisons reflect geology of the 18–60 m layer, and the
motion of the hill.
Comparison of all spectral ratios shows that the most stable
area of resonance at Tarzana hill is in the frequency range of
3.5–4.6 Hz. This resonance shows on crest/base, crest/60 m and on
T/L ratios. This resonant frequency is highly polarized in the
direction perpendicular to the strike of the hill (1651).
Bouchon and Barker [1] have modeled topographic effect
specifically for the case of Tarzana hill. Their modeling was based
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
330 V. Graizer / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 324–332
Fig. 7. Comparison of the longitudinal and transverse ground motion at the crest (Hill-B) and at the base of the hill (Clubhouse) with the motion at the 60 m depth
(downhole): (a) base-to-60 m depth (Clubhouse-to-downhole) ratios, (b) crest-to-60 m depth (Hill-B–to–downhole) ratios.
on P- and S-wave velocity measurements (744 and 369 m/s in the
upper 30 m) performed not directly at the instrument’s site [18].
Numerical simulations performed by Bouchon and Barker [1]
indicated the following effects of Tarzana topography on ground
motions:
 Consistent amplification of accelerations by 30–40% at and
near the top of the hill.
 The directional seismic response of the hill that results in a
strong amplification of the ground motion transverse to the
direction of the elongation of the hill.
 The existence of a fundamental transverse oscillatory reso-
nance mode of the hill at 3–5 Hz.
Numerical modeling shows that the topographic effect at
Tarzana hill results in polarization along the component perpen-
dicular to the strike of the hill and moderate amplification of
ground motion in the frequency range of 3–5 Hz.
Drilling and logging of the instrumented site have occurred
after the publication of Bouchon and Barker [1] and results were
released in the report [5] and at the ROSRINE website [13]. The
new data show a relatively strong velocity interface at about
17–18 m below the surface (Fig. 3) that correlates with hard layer
and not weathered shale at a depth of 15–19 m and water table
near 17 m. Simple estimation of the resonance frequency of the
17 m thick layer with average Vs ¼ 246 m/s results in f3.6 Hz
(f ¼ V/4 h). This frequency matches very well main peak in crest-
to-base site amplification (Fig. 6b, c).
A number of runs were done of the computer program
SHAKE91 [23], which allows performing one-dimensional, equiva-
lent linear ground-response analysis [24]. The method used in this
program is based on the assumption of horizontally layered
deposits and vertically propagating shear waves. This method can
only be used as a very rough approximation of Tarzana case.
Comparison of the average and calculated using SHAKE crest-to-
base Fourier-spectral ratios is shown in Fig. 8a. Both curves are
similar in shape with the two main maxima slightly shifted
relative to each other, and amplitudes of prediction approximately
twice lower. For the crest-to-60 m depth ratios (Fig. 8b) again both
curves are similar in shapes having four maxima also been slightly
shifted, but with amplitudes of prediction 3–4 times lower. With
the simplifying assumptions used in SHAKE program (flat
topography, horizontal infinite layers and only shear-waves
propagating vertically) it is unlikely to expect better agreement
for the Tarzana hill.
Based on the comparisons, it is possible to speculate that the
main source of the site amplification effect at Tarzana is created
by a classical phenomenon: Low-velocity zone (LVZ) with average
Vs ¼ 246 m/s in the range of 0–17–18 m, underlain by a relatively
high-velocity zone with average Vs ¼ 433 m/s in the range of
18–61 m (Fig. 9). In general, Tarzana hill represents a very special
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

V. Graizer / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 324–332 331

Comparison of average transfer functions with calculated using case for the hill to be characterized by LVZ. Both resonances due to
equivalent linear program SHAKE for Tarzana. topography and due to LVZ occur at close frequencies around
Crest-to-Base Transfer Functions 3–5 Hz. The idea of LVZ underlying the strong-motion recording
5 site at the depth between 25 and 60 m below ground surface was
4.5 suggested by Catchings and Lee [9], but those depths do not
4 match the velocity profile shown in Fig. 3.
Summarizing our finding it seems reasonable to conclude that the
Fourier Spectral Ratio

3.5 topography of the hill multiplies the LVZ effect. Tarzana effect (named
3 directional topographic effect by Spudich et al. [8]) is a combination
2.5 of LVZ and topography: LVZ generates amplification, and topography
polarizes and amplifies it. Relatively strong interface at the depth of
2 17–18 m creates a wave trap in the low-velocity material
1.5 (weathered shale) of the upper part of the hill. A combination of
1 the wave scattering and topography results in unusually high-site
amplification at Tarzana. Tarzana hill acts as a polarizer and an
0.5 amplifier of the LVZ effect (polarized magnifying glass).
0 A very important lesson can be learned from the Tarzana case:
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Geological investigation by itself not supported by measurements
Frequency, Hz
of geophysical parameters (S-wave velocity) is not enough to
Crest-to-60 m depth Transfer Functions estimate seismic response. Based on drilling and geological
14 description of the units at Tarzana hill, the site can be classified
as a soft rock which is usually associated with higher S-wave
12 velocity. For example, according to Wills and Clahan [25] similar
units of Modelo formation (Tsh) are characterized by the average
Fourier Spectral Ratio

10 shear-wave velocity of 3907112 m/s (one standard deviation) in

the upper 30 m. Assuming VS30 ¼ 390 m/s one should expect only
8
light (30–40%) amplification of seismic motions at Tarzana hill as
a result of topography. Average VS30 measured at Tarzana also may
6
not be enough for the site characterization because it does not
give any indications about the existing layering (relatively strong-
4
reflection interface at 17–18 m depth).
2 We present qualitative interpretation of the Tarzana-hill
phenomenon. One of the not resolved issues is the 3-D velocity
0 profile of the hill. It is clearly not enough to have only one
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 borehole drilled at the Hill-B site. In our interpretation of the data
Frequency, Hz we were assuming horizontal layering most likely representing
Fig. 8. Comparison of the average transfer functions from recorded data with the
significant simplification of the reality. Strong-motion data
calculated ones using equivalent linear program SHAKE for Tarzana. recorded simultaneously at the two-hilltop sites demonstrate,

Fig. 9. Schematic cross section of Tarzana Hill.

 ARTICLE IN PRESS
332 V. Graizer / Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (2009) 324–332
sometimes, significant differences. This is most likely a sign of
anisotropy of the hill structure since waves propagating in
different azimuths are amplified differently.
6. Results and conclusions
Since 1987 Whittier Narrows earthquake strong-motion re-
cords at Tarzana hill continue attracting attention of seismolo-
gists. High-frequency parts of ground motions at this gentle hill
site are significantly amplified relatively to those obtained at the
nearby stations. They are also polarized in the direction
perpendicular to the strike of the hill. Uncorrected record of the
1994 Northridge earthquake reached one of the highest accelera-
tion ever recorded—1.93 g.
Ground motion at Tarzana hill is characterized by directional
site amplification effect. None of the previous studies of strong-
motion data were conclusive enough to point to the source of such
an unusual site effect. Since the publication of most of papers on
Tarzana in 1996, instrumentation was significantly improved and
detailed site characterization was performed. Site characterization
revealed important feature that makes this hill unusual: It has low
shear-wave velocity in the upper part of the hill. It was especially
surprising because geologically it consists of shale or weathered
shale considered to be a soft rock.
Numerical modeling performed by Bouchon and Barker [1]
shows that the topographic effect at Tarzana hill results in
polarization along the component perpendicular to the strike of
the hill and moderate amplification (30–40%) at and near the top
of the hill of ground motion in the frequency range of 3–5 Hz.
LVZ at the top of Tarzana hill (with average Vs ¼ 246 m/s in the
range of 0–17 m) underlain by relatively high-velocity material
(with average Vs ¼ 433 m/s in the range of 17–61 m) acts as a wave
trap and produces resonance at a frequency f3.6 Hz. Both
resonances due to topography and due to LVZ occur at close
frequencies around 3–5 Hz. Combination of LVZ in the upper part
of the hill with topography is most likely responsible for the
observed-site amplification.
Tarzana phenomenon underscores necessity of complex geo-
physical and geological studies. It became clear that only
geological investigation not supported by measurements of
geophysical parameters (S-wave velocity) is not enough to
estimate seismic response. Drilling and geological description at
this site would result in classification of the site as a soft rock,
which is usually associated with higher S-wave velocity (about
390 m/s for the Modelo formation). Based on that one should
expect only moderate (30–40%) amplification of seismic motions
due to the topographic effect. Average VS30 measured at Tarzana
also may not be enough for the site characterization because it
does not give any indications about the existing layering
(reflection interfaces).
Based on available information we present a qualitative approach
in solving Tarzana-hill phenomenon. To provide a quantitative
solution of the problem it is desirable to perform numerical
modeling similar to that performed by Bouchon and Barker [1]
based on a 3-D topography and geophysical model of the hill.
Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank Carl Petersen, Robert Darragh
and Robert Sydnor for their help in collecting strong-motion data
and information about Tarzana hill. Special thanks go to Tony
Shakal for his support and cooperation in studying Tarzana effect,
and to Mike Reichle for his comments. I appreciate support of
Tarzana site investigations by the National Science Foundation and
other organizations that contributed to the ROSRINE project. Any
opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed
in this material are those of the author solely and do not necessarily
reflect the views of the California Geological Survey.
References
[1] Bouchon M, Barker JS. Seismic Response of a hill: the example of Tarzana,
California. Bull Seism Soc Am 1996;86(1A):66–72.
[2] Shakal A, Huang M, Darragh R, Cao T, Sherburne R, Malhotra P, Cramer C,
Sydnor R, Graizer V, Maldonado G, Peterson C, Wampole J. CSMIP strong-
motion records from the Northridge, California earthquake of January 17, 1994.
Report no. OSMS 94-07, California Department of Conservation, Division of
Mines and Geology, Office of Strong Motion Studies, February 18, 1994, p. 308.
[3] Shakal AF, Huang MJ, Darragh RB. Interpretation of significant ground-
response and structure strong motions recorded during the 1994 Northridge
earthquake. Bull Seism Soc Am 1996;86(1B):S231–46.
[4] Darragh R, Cao T, Huang M, Shakal A. Preliminary processed data for Tarzana-
Cedar Hill Nursery A from the Northridge earthquake of 17 January 1994.
Report no. OSMS 94-12B, California Department of Conservation, Division of
Mines and Geology, Office of Strong Motion Studies, September 9, 1994. 11pp.
[5] Darragh R, Graizer V, Shakal A. Site characterization and site response effects
at CSMIP stations: Tarzana and La Cienega near the Santa Monica Freeway (I-
10). Report no. OSMS 96-07, California Department of Conservation, Division
of Mines and Geology, Office of Strong Motion Studies, January 15, 1997
262pp.
[6] Shakal A, Huang M, Cao T. The Whittier Narrows, California earthquake of
October 1, 1987—CSMIP strong motion data. Earthquake Spectra 1988;4:
75–100.
[7] Vidale JE, Bonamassa O, Houston H. Directional site resonances observed from
the 1 October 1987 Whittier Narrows, California, earthquake and the 4
October aftershock. Earthquake Spectra 1991;7:107–25.
[8] Spudich P, Hellweg M, Lee WHK. Directional topographic site response at
Tarzana observed in aftershocks of the 1994 Northridge, California, earth-
quake: implications for mainshock motions. Bull Seism Soc Am 1996;
86(1B):S193–208.
[9] Catchings RD, Lee WHK. Shallow velocity structure and Poisson’s ratio at the
Tarzana, California, strong-motion accelerograph site. Bull Seism Soc Am
1996;86(6):1704–13.
[10] Rial JA. The anomalous seismic response at the Tarzana hill site during the
Northridge 1994 Southern California earthquake: a resonant sliding block.
Bull Seism Soc Am 1996;86(6):1714–23.
[11] Darragh R, Graizer V, Shakal A. Tarzana, California: Site Response and
Characterization. In: Proceedings of the NEHRP conference and workshop on
research on the Northridge, California Earthquake of January 17, 1994, vol. II.
Earth Science. p. 323–30.
[12] Vahdani S, Wikstrom S. Response of the Tarzana strong motion site during the
1994 Northridge earthquake. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 2002;22:837–48.
[13] ROSRINE website: /http://geoinfo.usc.edu/rosrine/S, 2000.
[14] Hoots HW. Geology of the eastern part of the Santa Monica Mountains, Los
Angeles County, California (scale 1:24,000). US Geol Surv Prof Pap 1931;
165-C:83–134.
[15] Jennings CW, Strand RG. Geologic atlas of California: Los Angeles (scale
1:250,000). Calif Dep Conserv, Div Mines and Geol 1969.
[16] Geosoils INC. Preliminary geotechnical investigation for Herman properties,
Work Order 3128-VN, 1992.
[17] Dibblee TW, Jr. Geologic map of the Topanga and Canoga Park (south half) 712-
minute Quadrangles, Los Angeles County, California (scale 1:24,000), Dibblee
Geological Foundation Map #DF-35. 1992.
[18] Fumal TE, Gibbs JF, Roth E. F. In-situ measurements of seismic velocity at 19
locations in the Los Angeles, California, region, US Geological Survey, Open-
file report, 81-399 1981, 121pp.
[19] Drake LA, Mal AK. Love and Rayleigh waves in the San Fernando Valley. Bull
Seism Soc Am 1972;62(6):1673–90.
[20] Graizer V, Cao T, Shakal A, Hipley P. Data from downhole arrays instrumented
by the California strong motion instrumentation program in studies of site
amplification effects. In: Proceedings of the sixth international conference on
seismic zonation. California: Palm Springs; 2000.
[21] Graizer V, Shakal A. Velocity-influenced topographic effect as a model for the
Tarzana site amplification (abstract). Seismol Res Lett 2004;75(2):248.
[22] Graizer V, Shakal A. Analysis of some of CSMIP strong-motion geotechnical
array recordings.In: Proceedings of the International for workshop for site
selection, installation and operation of geotechnical strong-motion arrays.
COSMOS. Richmond, California. 2004; CP-2004/01 p. 145–58.
[23] Idriss IM, Sun JI. SHAKE91: a computer program for conducting equivalent
linear seismic response analyses of horizontally layered soil deposits. User’s
guide, University of California, Davis, California 1992:13.
[24] Schnabel, PB, Lysmer J, Seed HB. SHAKE: a computer program for earthquake
response analysis of horizontally layered sites. Report no. UCB/EERC 72–12.
Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley,
CA, 1972, 102pp.
[25] Wills CJ, Clahan KB. Developing a map of geologically defined site-condition
categories for California. Bull Seism Soc Am 2006;96(4A):1483–501.