My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-24-2023 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2023
>
07-24-2023 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/25/2023 2:19:49 PM
Creation date
7/25/2023 2:17:19 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
194
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
From:Peter Demshar <br />To:Melanie Curtis <br />Cc:Margaret Martin <br />Subject:Resolution No. 7315 - Comment Submittal <br />Date:Tuesday, April 11, 2023 4:02:04 PM <br />Attachments:image.png <br />image.png <br />image.png <br />Hello Melanie, <br />I am submitting these comments as a licensed Professional Engineer in the state of <br />Minnesota and not as a representative of my employer. Barr Engineering Co. Has no <br />involvement in this project or these comments. <br />The following comments are in response to the resolution titled, 2815 Casco Point Road, <br />Valdes o/b/o Lisa Thostensen, Emergency Slope Repair – Resolution No. 7315 <br />Wall documentation submittal comments include: <br />Drainage weep holes do not appear to be constructed 30’ OC as described. <br />There is no documentation provided that the behind-wall drainage system was <br />constructed as planned. <br />Deadman spacing is identified as every 8’ OC and every 3 courses and the plans <br />show deadman on the 3rd course up and photos show 5 rows of timbers with no <br />deadman (page 36 and page 30). <br /> <br />On page 9 of Exhibit K, the design limitations state that the design software used does not <br />review global stability and that this should be performed by a geotechnical engineer. This <br />documentation has not been included in the application and should be provided prior to <br />approval. <br /> <br />Also on Page 9 of Exhibit K, Criterium requested additional geotechnical information which <br />was not provided. <br />Page 2 of Exhibit J states that this is a test of the ordinance however, if approved this will <br />set a precedence that after the fact variances will be accepted without providing plans to <br />properly restore the site.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.