ENFORCE22014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

} • i ,'y`.,M "~ i~~ III IIIIIIIII IIII III ry-(-~-r~ Y ~ '~, e • .;, -~ February 28, 2001 ,~; Davis Graham 8: Stubbs LLP '1550 Seventeenth Street Suite 500 r~ ' . Denver, Colorado 80202 '~~ Attention: Mr. Scot Anderson 5ubjeet: Consultation Tatum Residence Las Animas County, Colorado Job No. 32,485 t .; ;~' Dear Mr. Anderson: ~y ,~ At your request, I reviewed data from the February 2001 report by Pioneer ..y ? Engineering. In the data files attached to the report Point #21 is the analysis point "' nearest to the Tatum residence. The total movement of this point in the 2001 analysis `~ ' is 0.002 feet with a change of 0.001 feet since the 1996 analysis. This converts to ' ~ _ . approximately 1!8 inch. These analyses involve many assumptions which I understand will be addressed by John Rold. There are many publications regarding tolerance of structures to settlement. Most of these tolerance limits are presented as total and differential settlement or as angular ratios. It is standard practice in geotechnical engineering to select allowable ±`'}i footing design pressures that assume up to 1 inch total settlement and 3/4 inch y71 : differential settlement for residential structures. Very stiff masonry walls can ::: normally experience 0.5 inches differential movement prior to the on-set of cracking. An adobe mud brick structure constructetl with traditional methods should be more flexible and more movement tolerant than a stiff brick wall. .~ ,~ c The Pioneer Engineering report has the statements which we believe to be inaccurate. The first on Page 6 "why the house would suddenly fail........." This is inconsistent with statements made by Mr. E. Trujillo who guided our visit in 1994. Mr. Trujillo indicated an elderly woman hatl applied mud plaster to the structure every other year prior to the application of the hard stucco finish. This is maintenance required because of normal cracking. The second statement occurs on Page 10. "A rigid structure made of adobe could not sustain even very small movements, without ~.;~ damage." Movements of up to 1 inch an: well within normal expected movement. A movement of 118 inch or 114 inch would not be expected to produce significant j ~~ j damage. j j~+ = 4, "t + n.{ " ~' ~~ CTL/THOMPSON, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS ' 1971 WEST 12TH AVENUE ~ DENVER. COLORADO 80264 • (303) 825-0777 ' w _. 3. r' ~ ~~ ~ I ZO'd OS~bT t0, i DPW 8S5~998£O~~Xp~