Laserfiche WebLink
There are three basic options for addressing the problem with many variations <br />of each option. The first would be to leave the walls in place and camouflage <br />them with bushes and shrubs as proposed by Janes Robin. The second would be. <br />to modify the walls leaving sections in place to stabilize the bank. The area <br />would then be graded and ground cover established to restore the bank. The <br />third would be to remove the walls entirely and restore e a to its <br />original condition. <br />Option one is not consistent with previous city approvals. The proposal is <br />structurally sound but does not provide the lake shore continuity desired by <br />the City. <br />Option two would leave the lower lake shore wall exposed and the upper two <br />walls would be buried. The wall sections would continue to provide stability <br />for the bank but wall exposure would be reduced by 60 percent. We have indi- <br />cated the amount of wall to be removed on the attached drawing. <br />• Page 1. <br />24 <br />Page 6 of 8 <br />2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 <br />Otto G. Bonestroo. P.E. Keith A. Gordon, P.E. Thomas W. Peterson, P.E. Charles A. Erickson ' <br />Bonestroo <br />Robert W. Rosene. P.E. Richard W. Foster, P.E. Michael C. Lynch, P.E. Leo M. Pawelsky <br />Joseph C. Anderlik, P.E. Donald C. Burgardt, P.E. James R. Maland, P.E. Harlan M. Olson <br />Rosene <br />Bradford A. Lemberg, P.E. Jerry A. Bourdon, P.E. Kenneth P. Anderson, P.E. Susan M. Eberlin <br />Richard E. Turner, RE Mark A. Hanson, P.E. Keith A. Bachmann, P.E. Mark A. Selp <br />• <br />Anderlik & <br />James C. Olson, P.E. led K P.E Mark R.P.E. Glenn R. Cook, P.E. Michaell T. 7. Rautmann, P.E. Robert C.. RusRus sek, A.I.A. <br />Thomas E. Noyes. P.E. Robert R. Pfefferle, P.E. Thomas E. Angus, P.E. <br />• Associates <br />Robert G. Schunicht, P.E. David O. Loskota, P.E. Howard A. Sanford. P.E. <br />Marvin L Sorvala, P.E. <br />Engineers & Architects <br />RESOLUTION #2538 <br />September 27, 1988 <br />City of Orono <br />'�.i� ,� •� �' <br />�Cj�a <br />Box 66 <br />i� R <br />Crystal Bay, MN 55323 <br />is <br />Attn: Ms. Jeanne Mabusth <br />- <br />i <br />Re: File No. 139-1339 <br />David Lee <br />Dear Jeanne, <br />We inspected the David Lee <br />property at 2695 Casco Point Road. The lake shore . <br />has been altered by the construction <br />of several retaining walls. <br />We do not know what condition <br />the lake shore bank was in prior to construc- <br />• <br />tion. We did review the <br />site several years ago with the previous owner and <br />the lake shore bank appeared <br />stable. <br />The retaining wall construction will stabilize the bank and minimize the po- <br />tential for future slope failure. The construction, however, is not consist- <br />ent with City approvals on other applications. <br />There are three basic options for addressing the problem with many variations <br />of each option. The first would be to leave the walls in place and camouflage <br />them with bushes and shrubs as proposed by Janes Robin. The second would be. <br />to modify the walls leaving sections in place to stabilize the bank. The area <br />would then be graded and ground cover established to restore the bank. The <br />third would be to remove the walls entirely and restore e a to its <br />original condition. <br />Option one is not consistent with previous city approvals. The proposal is <br />structurally sound but does not provide the lake shore continuity desired by <br />the City. <br />Option two would leave the lower lake shore wall exposed and the upper two <br />walls would be buried. The wall sections would continue to provide stability <br />for the bank but wall exposure would be reduced by 60 percent. We have indi- <br />cated the amount of wall to be removed on the attached drawing. <br />• Page 1. <br />24 <br />Page 6 of 8 <br />2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 <br />