HomeMy WebLinkAboutFile Documents.700 Gillespie St.0129.2018 (37).ACBKPATTILLO ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC.
S T R U C T U R A L C O N S U L T A N T S
1215 grand avenue, post office box 751 glenwood springs, colorado 81602
phone (970) 945-9695 e-mail: info@paengineers.com
January 27, 2019
Harry Teague Architects
129 Emma Road, Ste A
Basalt, CO 81621
Attn: Jeffrey Woodruff, Project Architect
Re:Aspen Center for Physics Pavilion Roof
PAE Project 18023
To Whom It May Concern:
Based on information and recommendations provided by Hepworth-Pawlak
Geotechnical, Inc., in a report dated August 29, 1995, regarding Recommendations for
Foundation Drain and Dry Well Discharge, Proposed Aspen Center for Physics, 600
West Gillespie Street, Aspen, Colorado, (see attached), it is my professional opinion that
the use of a drywell discharge for roof and site drainage is appropriate for the proposed
improvements included with the proposed Pavilion Roof project, under the condition that
the drywell be located a minimum distance of 15 feet from any structural foundation
element. The Typical Dry Well Detail drawing provided with their report (Figure 1)
should be implemented for construction.
During construction, the soils for the drywell excavation should be inspected and
approved by a geotechnical engineer to verify conformance with stated conditions in the
report. If flow and absorption rates require confirmation, a civil engineer should be
consulted.
Sincerely,
Robert M. Pattillo, P.E.
Principal Engineer
RMP
email copy:Jeffrey Woodruff (jeffrey@teaguearchitects.com)
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MZB Road 154
Glcmvo Springs, CO BIWI
/�- rax 970 94541St
Thane 9]0 %4 79N
August 29, 1995
Harry Teague Architects
Attn: Brad Zeigel
412 North Mill Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611 Job No. 195 415
Subject: Recommendations for Foundation Drain and Dry Well Discharge,
Proposed Aspen Center for Physics, 600 West Gillespie Street, _
Aspen, Colorado
Dear Mr. Zeigel:
As requested, we have reviewed the project information provided and discussed with
you the proposed foundation drain and dry well disposal at the subject site. A subsoil
study for foundation design was conducted by Huntingdon Engineering and
Environmental and their findings presented in a report dated January 31, 1995, Job. No.
4 15995.
The proposed building will have a basement area of 4,200 square feet at the northwest
end. The rest of the building will have slab -on -grade Floor level near the existing
ground surface. The boring logs by Huntingdon show the subsurface profiles to be
somewhat erratic, with silty sand below about 13 feet in the proposed basement area.
No free water was found to the maximum boring depth of 21 feet.
The basement area of the building will be protected again temporary seasonal perched
conditions. The remaining building should not need a perimeter subdrain, since there is
no below grade floor level to protect. A dry well is proposed for the basement
foundation drain, since daylight gravity discharge is not practical. -
Based on the proposed construction, the subsoil profiles provided, and our experience in
the area, a dry well should be acceptable for the foundation drain disposal. The
drainage characteristics of the upper gravels is assumed to he relatively good and the, -
underlying silty sands to be moderate. We should evaluate the actual subsoils
encountered in the dry well excavation at the time of construction. .
Harry Teague Architects
August 29, 1995
Page 2
A typical detail of a dry well is shown on Fig. 1 attached. The well should be placed
inside the basement, with a cover for future access and maintenance. If building plans
or dry well use change from those described in this report, we should be contacted for
review and additional comments.
If you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please let us know.
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E.
SLP/kmk
attachment
Inspection/Access Cover
Finished Floor
Compacted Backfill
Filter Fabric
Inlet Pipe —T
Perforated Concrete Pipe
3/4" - 1 112" °po oe a'i 3' Minimum
Screened Rock OQ°oa°o c qI
u1 n °o�aro oe�
3 -
DRY
DRY WELL SCHEMATIC
NOT TO SCALE
195 415 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK Typical Dry Well Detail ri 1
GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. 9'