November 10, 2025 Planning Board Special Meeting - WEHI Transcript

01/05/2026 03:19:18 PM Page 45 to 48 of 112 12 of 28 sheets 45 That could lead to liquefaction. When you reduce1 A. the effective stress in the, in the soil. In other2 words, the sand grains are put together there's enough3 pressure in there you subtract the actual pressure and4 you subtract the hydrostatic pressure from that and if5 the hydrostatic pressure exceeds the pressure confining6 the soil then it liquefies. It becomes quicksand.7 And this would be on the slope immediately below8 Q. Building D?9 That's a condition that could occur. I can't10 A. guarantee that it would occur.11 Well, you said --12 Q. No, just something that you would caution -- you13 A. could caution to protect against in the construction.14 Now, this process is a permanent process,15 Q. depending on the existence of joints, is that correct?16 Permanent to the extent that the joints don't get17 A. clogged with something over time, that could occur.18 Right. In other words, this is not just at19 Q. factor of the construction process, it's a factor of the20 natural status of the slope and the rock?21 Right. There are existing joint patterns and22 A. then the concerns in construction is that the23 construction disturbance would create additional cracks24 or enlarge the cracks that already exist.25 46 Now, this process I think it was Mr. -- I forget,1 Q. one of the board members did ask, is there any natural2 existing condition already that could cause soil3 impacts. This condition exists already, correct?4 I'm sorry. Whether there are joints that would5 A. transport water, we don't know, it's not indicated.6 There's only, the only rock you could see is what's the7 limited amount of outcrops that are on the slope. It's8 something to be guarded against. It's a condition that9 could exist and you would want to guard against it in10 your planning for construction.11 How do you guard against it if the condition12 Q. naturally exists already?13 Well, you wouldn't want to introduce water into14 A. that location and you would grout it. If you could15 identify it and see it, say in the excavation you come16 across a joint that's wide then you would try to fill it17 with grout and plug it up.18 This is an 800 foot long building, is that19 Q. correct?20 That's correct.21 A. So in other words, this potential exists along22 Q. the entire 800 foot length of the building on that23 ridge, isn't that

is is an 800 foot long building, is that19 Q. correct?20 That's correct.21 A. So in other words, this potential exists along22 Q. the entire 800 foot length of the building on that23 ridge, isn't that right?24 Yes. I mean, there are joints underneath, in the25 A. 47 rock underneath the 800 foot length of building and1 beyond on each side.2 So how does one actually protect against this3 Q. enormous length to know that these fractures are not4 either there now or opening up? I mean, seems to be an5 enormous area to protect against. How do you6 practically do this?7 Well, we, we don't know that it does exist and8 A. you would -- and if you don't know and you then -- the9 answer is that that you -- well, this is a condition10 that may exist but we're not sure that it does exist. I11 think that's the best answer I could give.12 Well, you devoted almost a full page to13 Q. discussing it at Page 15 to 16. So you were concerned14 about it to the point where you actually gave a15 professional analysis. So why were you this concerned16 about it if it's something that may not exist?17 Because it's a potential that it might exist.18 A. Is it wise to build on a ridge or next to the top19 Q. of the ridge where this condition may exist that can20 cause the slope to collapse?21 Well, if you don't introduce groundwater into it,22 A. it may not be a problem at all.23 Have you looked at the engineering plans of this24 Q. building?25 48 I looked at -- the structural drawings are not1 A. available, but I did look at the architects plans for2 the building.3 Well, the architects plans don't deal with the4 Q. issue of slope and the voidance of groundwater5 infiltration, do they?6 Sorry.7 A. Do the architects plans deal with this issue of8 Q. --9 No, they don't.10 A. So we don't know that there is anything in these11 Q. plans, as far as you know, that's already in the plans12 to protect against this groundwater infiltration?13 I would expect that they've been involved in14 A. similar projects that they wouldn't advance those plans15 until they got approval.16 Well, didn't you often say in here that these17 Q. plans were only preliminary, these building plans?18 Correct.19 A. So we don't know if they actually built into the20 Q. plans at this point the protection to avoid the problems21 you referred, do we?22 No, we don't.23 A. Okay.24 Q. What is it that Langan has or says they

don't know if they actually built into the20 Q. plans at this point the protection to avoid the problems21 you referred, do we?22 No, we don't.23 A. Okay.24 Q. What is it that Langan has or says they have,25