Laserfiche WebLink
....F46 ........ <br />. <br />......... <br />.... .............0........ <br />............. <br />.............. <br />... 35 <br />....... <br />....... 1.304 <br />......... <br />_...... <br />• F4c <br />......... <br />......... .... 0 <br />.... <br />............. <br />.. <br />...... ... 30 <br />....... <br />.... 1.076 <br />..... <br /> F4a <br />............................ <br />.... 0 <br />. <br />. <br />.............................. <br />... ( <br />29 <br />... <br />................... ... <br />.........1.033 <br />............................. <br /> ......._F4a ......... .... ..........100........... ... ......3 5....... ........1.:514........ <br /> ......._F4e .......... .... ........._100........... ... ...... 3~........ ........1.:246..... <br /> <br />F4f <br />..... <br />..... <br />_ <br /> <br />.... <br />100 <br />...... <br />........... <br /> <br />... <br />26 <br />....... <br />...... ... <br />1.047 <br />........ <br /> BA4 <br />F <br />..... <br />..... <br />~ <br />.... 200 <br />.......... <br />........... <br />... 0 <br />....... <br />...... 0.752 <br />....... <br />......... <br /> BAS <br />F 200 20 1.3 36 <br /> .._F_BA6.._ .. .... ........_200........... ... .......15........ ......._1.:03 8........ <br />Golder performed back analysis calculations for stability cross sections that included landslides <br />that were cut by the proposed access road and substation. Initially very little information was <br />available other than slope geometry and laboratory test data from other locations on the West Efk <br />property. Subsurface distribution of materials and groundwater conditions were not known at the <br />time. The following table and attached figures present the results from that back analysis. <br />x:x: ,, ~;:~,: <br />::: ~ ..:.>: ~ :......:., r. .....:.... <br />?3`: <br />,..<:, <br />,:. <br />::.,:~r <br />..,. <br />M.~'~:..::'! <br />,...,.. <br />A BA2 200 22.5 1.052 <br />D BA2 200 20 1.042 <br />F BA6 200 15 1.038 <br />Using these strength parameters the Post-Construction stability analyses was estimated as shown ui <br />• the following table and the attached figures. <br />~/ 'yi'p c°t`'y v:g°,; %'.yu'^:.r.., ,`,1,,; •Ff~f"~.+. y...~.,.;;., <br />.i~~e!.~,~pc <br />.` <br />S f 3t) ~ <br />I`S <br />i <br />JC <br />~ <br />n <br />:.: <br />::: SO,y:...,c <br />` <br />A BA RD 200 <br />i <br />..._:......... <br />......... <br />~ 22.5 1.030 <br />..... <br />............ <br />D <br />BA RD <br />200 Z. <br />~ <br />~.:041_ <br />._F~BASUB......i............200 ........._~. - <br />......15......i. 0.618 <br />Subsequent geotechnical investigations (not yet complete) have provided further information on <br />groundwater conditions, subsurface material distribution and some site specific strength data. The <br />following table and figures present the results of the back analysis using site specific material <br />distribution and groundwater data to estimate a minimum shear strength. <br />_ ~_a:; <br />i:t:' <br />:::,< <br />:';:r':3 :<ti2: <br />.. 6:;.0` :: 94::3;' <br />r.n6: <br />::::: _:~ ~'::ra' <br />aa~&3 ~9R91V o...a_.nox.;5.3:::;ret'mmuw:r.ua,::.... ., <br />A_GEO1 0 25 1.052 <br />.. D~GEO 1 .. ~ ............0 ....... 20 1.005 <br />..._F_GE01.......~. 0 ~ 1.8 ...............1.005.......... <br /> <br />