1979-11-01 Letter, Permit for Lakeshore Alteration

Home Browse Search

■io'F , ORONO; k ■'•--.'•'Ml -I CITY of OROXO I’ost Offi*’:i.' Box 66 •Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323•Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka November 1, 1979 CERTIFIED LETTER - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Mr. Kurt Carlson 3247 Casco Circle Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 Dear Mr. Carlson: This letter is written to reaffirm the points cited by John Gerhardson, the Public Works Director, and myself at a site inspection of your lakeshore on October 29, 1979. At that time, we informed you that the methods used to correct the threat of continued erosion of the lakeshore bank were not permissible according to the City's ordinances. I stated that a permit is required for any construction within 75' of the lakeshore. You informed us that this was really the last phase of repair for a project begun in the summer of 1977. At the time of the major slide of the lakeshore bank, a member of the Orono staff visited the site and decided a permit would not be required. I can only assume the decision was based on the degree of emergency and immediate need to repair the bank. I would like to return now to my original comment and review our conversation of October 29, 1979. The method used consists of 6" diameter pipes placed on top of the bank directing the runoff from the upper portions of the lot through approximately 75' to 100' of pipe draining directly into the lake. You agreed to remove the pipe on the right side (facing the lake) of the bank. We decided that the berm at the top of the bank would alleviate the need for the drainage which would be dispersed at that end of the lot. The pipe on the left side was to be removed. The agricultural tiling would be continued from the drainage ditch and placed 2' to 3' deep within the side of the bank and outlet through a diffuser 5' to 10' from the lakeshore. Rip rap would be placed in the path between the lake and the diffuser outlet. Mr. Gerhardson and I agreed that if the project could be completed before the freeze, under our specified conditions, you could proceed without a permit and the lengthy review. After your call informing me that both the DNR and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District found no fault with the above described method, I sensed a change in your original cooperative position at our meeting. Staff has a specified framework of guidelines to work within regarding projects of this nature. If you still wish to hold with your original plan, I will have to require that you file a formal application with the City for a conditional use permit as this type of plan falls well outside of staff's authority or disgression.