HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-01547 (zoning- stairway to lk) � �' i�
CITY OF ORONO PERMIT NO.: 2011-01547
2750 KELLEY PARKWAY
ORONO, MN 55356- �ATE IssuED: 12/14/2011
952 249-4600 FAX: 952 249-4616
ADDRESS : 3251 CASCO CIR
PIN : 20-117-23-43-0007
LEGAL DESC : SPRING PARK
: LOT O11 BLOCK 000
PERMIT TYPE : ZONING PERMIT
PROPERTY TYPE : RESIDENTIAL
CONSTRUCTION TYPE : -STAIRWAY TO LAKE
NOTE: MCWD PERMITS MAY[3E REQUIRED-CONTACT MCWD DIRECTLY,PROVIDE COPY OF PERMIT(S)TO CITY�(INIT)
/
CITY ENGINEER TO INSPGCT AND APPROVE THE FINAL SLOPE PRIOR TO ESCROW RELEASE. (INIT)
PLANT[NGS TO BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO ESCROW RELEASEI��(INIT)
DARRGN TO INSPECT SLOPE-WILLIE TO INSPECT FOOTING AND FINAL ON STAIRS.
APPLICANT STAIRWAY TO LAKE 50.00
KOCH, WILLIAM&LAURA MAJOR LAND ALTERATION 30.00
3251 CASCO CIR TOTAL 80.00
WAYZATA, MN 55391-
OWIVER
KOCH, WILLIAM& LAURA
3251 CASCO CIR
WAYZATA, MN 55391-
AGREEMENT AND SWORN STATEMENT
The work for which this permit is issued shall be performed according to
the approved plans and specifications,applicable City approvals,and the
State Building Code. This permi[is for only the work described and does
not grant permission for additional or related work which requires separate
permits. All provisions of laws and ordinances governing this type of work
shall be compied with whe[her or not specified herein.This permit will
expire and become null and void if construction authorized is not
commenced within l80 days of the date of issuance,or if construction is
suspended for a period of 180 days at any time after work has commenced.
The applicant is responsible for assuring all required inspections are
requested in conformance with the State Building Cocle.This permit may be
re ed any tim or d se. ��/i��i�
� Z � '� � 11
ai / i
A licant Permitee ignature Date Iss e y Signature Date
SEPARATE PERMITS REQUIRED FOR WORK OTHER THAN DESCRIBED ABOVE.
� `
City of Orono
Zoning Permit Application
_-� MailingAdd�ess: Permitnumber: `/—b/J``t '
.GL,Q 11� PO Box 66 Date received: /�- � � ��
Qy �`V Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066
��\�,�, Q Escrow#and � Z�� V� ��
�''� '� , Street Address: amount:
� `� �;�':���� � 2750 Kelley Parkway Permit Fee: � '"
c� ' �, p� Orono, MN 55356
L�kESILOg'� Approved by:
— Fax: 952-249-4616 Notes:
Main: 952-249-4600 `�`�'✓`N.ci.orono.mn.us
This application form must be completed in full and all required information must be submitted. (Please print.)
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Job Site Address;...__ 5 z��� c_,i 5� �, ��,t�c,..c
CONTRACTOR/ PPLICANT INFORMATION:
Name: V�� �-����,�. N i�4�c_c-� .T �_ ,� ��,t.<<- n. �c,�,c �-1
Phone: � :i 2 7�{ � �S 2 � o Fax: G.- �2 - -�`-ic�- -�� '3i c��
Address: 52��� �s��� c_, ;�c:�- City: �,�,2j:�-,tiz:> ZIP: ��5�`=, 1
Contact Person: '�,�_� ContacYs phone number G�i 2 - 3� �zj c (�. G-i L- 3�a -2�s'�
Email �y1in�,�;,{,�; <<; ;,,,�s; _��...� Applicant is: Contractor meowner �ci«ie o�e� ��^�'�
_ _f
PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION:
Name: ���-M�
Phone (day):
Mailing Address: IP:
Email and/or Fax
Overall Project Description: ;L.:�-��,��_,,�:��-��;��,��,...� ��,,�� -�„ L_�.�`.
�h a.�1Y�vc::, c'Kt�>T��� ST�+�S /v�rt-t�� �e�- 7[S�_:;.sS���: �-� L_t�_
Check TYPE OF PERMIT
Box COST*
Dock, Residential- Permanent dock on any lake or initial seasonal dock not on $30 + engineering review costs
Lake Minnetonka ermanent dock re uires CUP
Dock, Commercial $50+engineering review costs
Escrow for erosion control and engineerin review costs $2,000
Driveway Permit(New or Replacement) No charge
Also re uired is a Minor or Ma'or Land Alteration Permit
Land Alteration, Major(grading, filling, or excavating) more 500 cubic yards or $30
� more than 10 cubic yards in lakeshore setback (also requires CUP)
Escrow for erosion control and en ineerin review costs As determined b CUP
Land Alteration, Minor (grading, filling or excavating) -500 or less cubic yards $50+ engineering review costs
outside of lakeshore setback or less than 10 yards in lakeshore setback
Escrow for erosion control and engineerin review costs $2,000
Retaining Wall measuring under four feet require a zoning permit. $50+ engineering review costs
Retaining walls measuring more than four feet (from bottom of footings to top of
wall) require a building permit. (Tiered retaining walls are considered one wall
unless the walls are separated by twice the height of the lower wall.)
Escrow for erosion control and engineerin review costs $2,500
Stairway to Lake (New or Replacement) $50+ engineering review costs
Escrow for erosion control and engineering review costs $2,000
Structure Permit for other structures not requiring a building permit but $50+ engineering review costs
regulated by the zoning code (including, but not limited to accessory building of
less than 120 square feet, detached deck or platform and sport court)
Escrow for erosion control and en ineerin review costs $2,500
Tree Removal or intensive ve etation removal in 0 to 75 foot zone No char e.
(over)
*Permit fee will be collected at
the time the permit is issued.
Y �
APPLICANT/OWNER ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
• Applicant agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department;
• Owner agrees to pay the City of Orono for engineering consultant review costs where applicable;
• Applicant certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant
recognizes that they are solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to
do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete;
• Applicant acknowledges the attached Escrow Agreement is completed and signed by Owner;
• Some or all of the information that you are asked to provide on this application is classified by State law as either
private or confidential. Private data is information which generally cannot be given to the public but can be given to
the subject of the data. Confidential data is information which generally cannot be given to either the public or the
subject of the data. Our purpose and intended use of this information is to annually update our records and records
of other governmental agencies required,by law. If you refuse to supply the information, the application may not be
issued. �'
The undersigned certify that the inf mation supplied is true and correct to the b f their knowledge.
Applicant's Signature: Date: ����� �� �;, �
Property Owner's Signature: Date:
� C.� � zT 'Z�t I
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Except for tree removal permits, all permits
TYPE OF PERMIT: require a completed application form, escrow agreement (signed by the property
owner) and escrow check from owner, two copies of all plans, and three copies
of all grading plans or surveys/site plans
Dock, Residential Seasonal Dock—survey showing proposed dock
Permanent Dock- plans as approved by CUP and copy of LMCD permit
Dock, Commercial 1. Structural plans for the dock
2. Survey showing the proposed location of the dock
3. Copy of LMCD permit
Driveway Permit 1. All Minor or Major Land Alteration Permit requirements
2. Hardcover calculations, existing and proposed
3. Driveway plans
Land Alteration, Major 1. Plans as approved by Conditional Use Permit
2. Erosion control plan or copy of MCWD Erosion Control Permit
Land Alteration, Minor 1. Grading plan including existing and proposed contours
(Less than 10 cu.yds.within 75' of 2. Amount of fill to be imported and/or exported and haul route
lake or less than 501 cu.yds 3. Amount of earth to be moved around on site
elsewhere.) 4. Erosion control plan or copy of MCWD Erosion Control Permit
Retaining Wall 1. Plans for wall(s)
2. Unless repair or exact replacement of existing wall, submit an updated survey with
grading plan including existing and proposed contours
3. Hardcover calculation worksheets if in shoreland district
4. Erosion control lan or co of MCWD Erosion Control Permit
Stairway to Lake 1. Construction lans for stairwa
p y, including footings
2. Topographical survey of property with proposed stairs shown
3. Erosion control plan or copy of MCWD Erosion Control Permit
Structure Permit 1. Plans for structure.
2. Survey of property with proposed structure shown and with setbacks to property
lines, other structures on property and the septic system indicated. The general
location of any sewer and water services should be shown if applicable.
3. Grading plan if grading is required
4. Hardcover calculation worksheets if in shoreland district
5. Erosion control lan or co of MCWD Erosion Control Permit
Tree Removal Call: 952-249-4600 to schedule inspection.
Last Updated: April,2011
' f
Plan Review Checklist for Zoning Permit Applications
Address: �2�� �S� �r I� +
Description of work: �pilN �'r�.IC �lC�� ���' � 8�/10�L�-Z S"�fl��lit,C�+��
Type of permit: _ � �(l/l,G� a.( ���fl w► � �7,C��� � L!�-��
Zoning review by: //v l�/t����l� Date Approved: � Z✓ � �� �
Grading review by: ����� �� 1 ������ate Approved: �Z —�_`- � � x
Other Review, Reviewed by: � Date Approved: � Z�� � �� �
Zonin :
Zoning File#: l (����� Resolution #: �O-l� Resolution Date:� � L�_ `� ;
�
Lot Area: SF/AC Width: Depth:
Survey Submitted? es 0 No Date of Survey:
Existin Setbacks:
Front(Lake) Rear(Street) ( N S E W ) ( N S E W ) Other Buildings Wettand
Side Side
Proposed Setbacks:
Front(Lake) Rear(Street) ( N S E W ) ( N S E W ) Other Buildings Wetland
Side Side
Shoreland District MCWD r ' Received Average Lakeshore Setback Met? Bluff
0 Yes No 0 N/A 0 Yes 0 No
Yes � No 0 Yes ❑ No 0 N/A
Permit Nu ber: Setback:
Hardcover Zones Existin Pro osed Variance Required C Re uired
0-75' � Yes 0 No es 0 No
75-250' Type(s): Type(s):
250-500' Zoning File#: Zoning File#:
500-1000' Resolution#: Resolution #:
Created: March 29,2011
z:\forms\plan review checklist for zoning permit applications.docx
� 1
a ni e�� o'�Z�n'ff�g e�i��s
Page�o.ff�
Cubic Yards
In Out Total
Haul Route? ? � Yes 0 No
Explain haul route in detail:
Fees to be Charged Amount Orono Inspections Required
Permit Amount �
�� � 0 Site
Escrow Amount�� M�'c � Hardcover Removal
� UV�( �� 2�� / Footing
Signed escrow received? Poured Wall
s-Built Survey
es 0 No Planting Plan
� Wetland
Escrow amount received? Final • j��(V✓�t�l �D � ��� '�l Ql�� .
Yes � No 0 Other(specify) �I�IJIo(G� ,�V�S �"U ��'�
`� � VlGl.l (3V1
Engineering review needed?
�� s17�irS
� r
Yes 0 No
REMARKS (in-house): �11tiV I G� b� ����� �U��'� �
Other Review: Reviewed by: Date Approved:
REMARKS (TO BE NOTED ON PERMIT AND INITIALLED BY PERSON PULLING PERMIT)
� I� � ✓' �t l V�G� — L,�YI�7,1 Gf M GIM� �,!�r�'l (�
) �
� ��Pt/' �U !MS ��' �'�l�iGC,P � � yl U�' Gf�I1v�J �l��/��
✓b JPi
��1 ����lr�l�t� ( �� fl ►��ov 1� ���c�v� ►�1��
Created: March 29, 2011
z:\forms\plan review checklist for zoning permit applications.docx
�
t �
ZONING PERMIT & LAND USE APPLICATION ESCROW AGREEMENT
Permit#s 2011- v,5�{� , 2011-00205, 11-3518
AGREEMENT made this �Z''} day of i7�=����..�R- , 20 �i , by and between the CITY OF ORONO,
a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City") and William and Laura Koch ("Owners").
Recitals
1. Applications for zoning permits and a land use application for hardcover variances and a CUP
have been filed for a for a property located at 3251 Casco Circle, the ("Subject Property"), legally described as Lot
11, also that part of vacated Lake Shore Avenue, and of the tract of land lying between said vacated Avenue and
the shore of Lake Minnetonka, which lies between the Easterly extension of the Northeriy and Southerly lines of
said Lot 11, Spring Park Hennepin County Minnesota.
2. Owners request the City to review the applications.
3. The City wiil commence its review of the applications and incur costs associated with said review
only if the Owners establish an escrow to ensure reimbursement to the City of its costs.
NOW THEREFORE,THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. DEPOSIT OF ESCROW FUNDS. Contemporaneously with the execution of this Escrow
Agreement, the Owners shall deposit $2,000 with the City. All accrued interest, if any, shall be paid to the City to
reimburse the City for its cost in administering the escrow account.
2. PURPOSE OF ESCROW. The purpose of the escrow is to guarantee reimbursement to the City
for all out-of-pocket costs the City has incurred (including pianning, engineering or legal consultant review) or will
incur in reviewing the plan. Eligible expenses shall be consistent with expenses the Owners would be responsible
for under a zoning permit application. The escrow will also guarantee reimbursement to the City for all out-of-
pocket costs the City has incurred to assure that the work is completed in accordance with the Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan and the provisions of Orono City Code Chapter 79. The financial security may also be
used by the City to eliminate any hazardous conditions associated with the work and to repair any damage to
public property or infrastructure that is caused by the work (including planning, engineering, or legal consultant
review) associated with permit# 2011-��54� , 2011-00205 & 11-3518 if compliance with the approved zoning
permits is not accomplished.
3. MONTHLY BILLING. As the City receives consultant bills for incurred costs, the City will in turn
send a bill to the Owners. Owners shall be responsible for payment to the City within 30 days of the Owners'
receipt of bill.
4. DISBURSEMENT FROM ESCROW ACCOUNT. In the event that the Owners do not make payment
to the City within the timeframe outlined in #3 above, shall issue a Stop Work Order until the Owners pay all expenses
invoiced pursuant to #3. The City may draw from the escrow account without further approval of the Owners to
reimburse the City for eligible expenses the City has incurred.
5. CLOSING ESCROW. The Balance on deposit in the escrow, if any, shall be returned to the
Owners when the review has been completed and written notification is received from the Owners requesting the
funds.
6. CERTIFY UNPAID CHARGES. If the project is abandoned by Owners, or if the eligible expenses
incurred by the City exceed the amount in escrow, the City shall have the right.�p certify the unpaid balance to the
subject property pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§415.01 and 366.012. ,1
�
CITY: Y OF ORONO OW R:
By: �
._-- `�\ �, \ °1
Its: �'i rV CtiA.1 � „�� i ��c�c�� j�;��J�,,,,.-� � �,;7"�
. _.A„ ; ,..... , :
�nternal_Us�Q[�I,ya _ A�°�� GI_�.�'i9ipa���Q.�'1a!?L1in9.QePar�e�1=`'��' '?4.:�'c4PY��.4.��.r.���
1 r _
Melanie Curtis
� �I ����
From: The Kochs [mnkochs@mchsi.com]
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 10:31 AM
To: Melanie Curtis
Subject: Re: Global Stability Study
Melanie:
We expect we will install the stairs and leave much of the existing wall(s) in place --except where there might need to be
a cut out to permit a footing for the stairs. We will then plan on burying the wall(s). The planting plan was originally
submitted to and approved by the City, so that is what we expect to plant in the Spring.
Given that we are not removing the wall and doing all the excavation work, am I correct we do not need an independent
engineer to review the work of installing the steps?
We would like to get Jim Smith and his folks moving as soon as possible on the steps.
Thanks.
Bill
P.S. I will fax in the documents to you today, and will drop of the hard copies in the next day or two if that works to get
things approved promptly--today, hopefully. Thanks.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Melanie Curtis" <MCurtis(a�ci.orono.mn.us>
To: "Bill Koch (mnkochsCc�mchsi.com)" <mnkochs(a�mchsi.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 8, 2011 4:29:49 PM GMT-06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: FW: Global Stability Study
Bill
Attached are comments from our engineer.
Please complete and submit the attached application (major land alteration and lake access stair) and revised escrow
agreement. Only the $50 permit fee is required to be submitted as the existing escrow will cover all applications— only
the new escrow agreement is necessary. If the lake access stair design has not changed please let me know and Lyle
Oman (our building official) will review the plans from the file for permit. If revisions were made please submit revised
plans for review. Please submit a slope planting plan for review with the permit application as well. We encourage use of
native plantings and incorporation of trees if/where appropriate. I believe the MCWD has cost-sharing options for
lakeshore slope vegetation projects. Please contact Catherine Bach ((952) 641-4504) if you are interested in more
information.
Also, from my reading it appears new subterranean walls are no longer necessary and the existing walls could be buried.
This seems to be potentially cost saving information. Please detail on your permit application which method you will be
following for our records and when you intend to begin. We will inspect the slope repair upon completion and in the
spring the area should be stabilized and replanted before the escrow will be released.
Thanks - Melanie
Melanie Curtis
Planning & Zoning Coordinator
City of Orono
2750 Kelley Parkway
Orono, MN 55356
Direct Dial: 952.249.4627
Fax: 952.249.4616
1
1 �
. � � CIVILDESIGN
��o�o copY
November 12, 2011 ry.-�,�`�d �,��
JI�
William Koch � S�u,�N� �LC(���
3251 Casco Circle �v + �� _J
Orono, MN 55391 �(,(,l.Vl �i✓t������
�t� n .�-�,��L����
Re: Slope Stability Analysis
3251 Casco Circle ��
Orono, MN
Dear Mr. Koch
As requested, Civil Design Professionals (CDP) has conducted a professional slope stability analysis
of proposed modified slope at 3251 Casco Circle, in Orono, MN. The purpose of the investigation
was to determine the long-term stability of both the proposed slope with the new retaining wall
system and fill cover and the proposed slope with fill burying the existing retaining wall system. In
addition, CDP was asked to evaluate the Slope Stability Analysis Report previously conducted on
the slope by Gray Engineering, LLC for accuracy.
CDP was provided the following information for use in our analysis (attached):
• William Koch Documents submitted the City of Orono
1. Existing Lot Survey by Advanced Surveying and Engineering Co. dated July 1, 2011
2. Hennepin County Property Tax Map—Tax Year 2011
3. Sub-Terrainian Wall System Section—Concept Landscaping
4. Stair System Plan—Concept Landscaping
5. Stair System Elevation and Typical Section—Concept Landscaping
6. Planting Plan—Concept Landscaping
7. Sub-Terrainian Walls Buried (Replace Rotten Timber Walls) —Concept Landscaping
• Grading Plan—Otto and Associates, dated 9/7/11
• Gray Engineering, LLC Slope Stability Analysis Report, dated August 4, 2011
� Gray Engineering, LLC Slope Stability Output
CDP performed a site visit on Monday October 24, 2011, to meet with Independent Testing
Technologies to identify soil boring locations. Soil borings were subsequently drilled on Tuesday
October 25, 2011. The borings were required to determine the actual soil strata at the slope as well
as to retain in-situ soil samples, which were later tested for peak shear and cohesive strength.
Global stability analysis is highly sensitive to assumed soil strength values, therefore obtaining soil
strength data is critical on steep slope applications such as the slope on your property. The borings
were drilled on either side of the lot near the top of the slope to provide the best representation of
the existing slope strata using only two borings.
Please find attached the following information which was obtained from the soil borings and used to
assess the long-term stability of the proposed slope:
Civil Design Professionals • 8609 Lyndale Ave. S., Suite 200 Bloomington, MN 55420 • Office 952-303-5312 • www.cdp-us.com
1
, ,
• Grading Plan w/Soil Boring Locations (1 and 2)—Otto and Associates, dated 9/7/11
• Independent Testing Technologies, Inc Soil Boring B-1 (10/25/11
• Independent Testing Technologies, Inc Soil Boring B-2 (10/25/11)
• Direct Shear Test (Sample A) — Date Reported 10/31/2011
• Direct Shear Test (Sample C) —Date Reported 10/31/2011
Site Observations:
The existing slope is approximately --50' in overall length and drops in elevation � 35', resulting in
a slope angle of approximately 35°. There is an existing stairway made of timber which winds
down the slope, extending from the top of the slope to the bank near the lake. There are three
existing timber walls. There is one wall near the top of the slope, one near the mid slope and a
small wall near the base of slope. The walls were previously cut and installed into the bank to
accommodate the installation of the timber stairway. The existing timber stairway and retaining
walls are relatively stable but are experiencing deterioration. To my knowledge the existing
retaining wall was installed over 20 years prior. It is also my understanding that there have been no
slope failures in the vicinity of the Koch Residence, as per William Koch.
Project History:
It is my understating that a new staircase is to be constructed above grade on posts with concrete
footings, extending down the existing slope as shown on the Stair System Plan created by Concept
Landscaping. Concept Landscaping has proposed removing the existing timber wall and creating a
new timber wall structure and burying the retaining wall structure with fill so it is no longer visible.
The slope is then to be vegetated as shown on the Planting Plan created by Concept Landscaping.
The City of Orono required the slope be analyzed and approved for global stability after the
proposed new retaining wall was constructed and buried with fill to the finished grade shown on the
Grading Plan prepared by Otto and Associates. Gray Engineering, LLC (Gray) was subsequently
contracted to analyze the slope. To obtain the necessary information for the analysis, they self
performed 3 bucket auger borings at undisclosed locations near the top of the slope. They extended
two borings to a 10' depth, and 1 boring to a 6' depth. The material was predominantly classified as
sandy lean clay by Gray.
Gray then performed a global analysis for the project using GSLOPE Limit Equilibrium Slope
Stability Analysis software, recognized and approved software within the geotechnical engineering
community. Gray assumed the strength of the native site material to be cp = 28° and C = 50 psf.
After inserting this and other strength of material parameters into the global stability analysis
software, it yielded a safety factor of 1.03. Gray therefore concluded that this safety factor did not
meet the required minimum and suggested that additional engineering of the retaining wall system
would be required. The minimum safety factor far a global stability analysis is typically required to
be a minimum of 1.3 throughout the retaining wall engineering and geotechnical engineering
community
Civil Design Professiona/s • 8609 Lyndale Ave. S.,Suite 200 B/oomington,MN 55420 • Office 952-303-5312 • www.cdp-us.com
2
r ,
Civil Design Professionals (CDP) was contracted to evaluate the global stability analysis prepared
by Gray Engineering to verify if their procedures and conclusions were accurate.
Discussion:
As previously discussed, the issue of slope stability is highly sensitive to the strength of the
materials that make up a given slope. Just a slight modification in the assumed strength of the soil
within the slope can radically change its resultant safety factor. Therefore determining the soil strata
and having material testing data on the site soils is critical in determining the most realistic safety
factor of a slope.
Upon review of Gray's slope stability analysis, two items stood out that could have a large impact
on the accuracy of their resultant safety factor and corresponding conclusions:
1. The boring depths are too shallow. It is critical to have borings extend close to the bottom of
the slope if possible to determine the actual soil of the slope. Soil and its associated strength
can vary radically from top to bottom of a slope. Therefore potential failure planes can
extend deep into the slope along weaker layers of soil strata if they exist. The borings used
in Gray's analysis fail to extend to even 1/3 of the overall slope height In Grays's defense,
they failed to approve the slope, but had they assumed a higher shear strength of the material
in the top 10', they likely would have approved the slope for they assumed the same soil
strata from top to bottom of the slope as shown in their stability analysis.
2. Gray made a conservative assumption of the strength of the soil in the slope from the simple
hand auger borings. Hand augers are useful in certain conditions to determine soil strata.
However, hand augers are not only limited in how far they may extend, but they do not
provide blow counts, a very useful parameter in assessing soil strength. A blow count
reading provides an estimate of the density or compaction of the soil. The denser the soil,
the higher the correlating strength values. There are publications available that can be used
to estimate soil strength from associated blow counts. However, it is virtually impossible to
make an educated assumption of a soil strength from a simple classification only. Therefore
Gray was forced to make a very conservative assumption of the strength, resulting in an
obvious failure in their slope stability analysis. It would be impossible to have any degree of
safety on a 35° slope comprised of soil having only a strength of cp = 28° and C = 50 psf.
The existing slope, timber stairway, and timber walls have remained in a relatively stable condition
for over 20 years, yielding no evidence of external or rotational movement throughout the area.
There is no evidence of previous slope failures, and from my understanding there were also no
known slope failures in the vicinity. There are very large mature trees at the top of the slope, and
trees on the slope that provide additional stability to the slope with their root systems. The global
stability results of 1.03 from Gray's repart appear extremely low given all these conditions. Gray's
conservative assumption for the strengths of the soil were however reasonable given their lack of
available information. CDP therefore arranged to have soil borings and in-situ soil samples taken to
better approximate both the soil strata and the strength of the site material.
Civil Design Professionals • 8609 Lyndale Ave. 5.,Suite 200 Bloomington, MN 55420 • Office 952-303-5312 • www.cdp-us.com
3
, ,
Testing Results
There were two borings taken on the site ( , , � , , _
��� ) near the top of the slope. The borings confirm that the slope is
made up of predominantly Sandy Lean Clay (CL), in agreement with Gray. There is a 6' pocket of
Poorly Graded Sand w/Silt (SP-SM) found in boring 2. CDP assumes this to be localized pocket,
for none of Gray's hand augers exposed Poorly Graded Sand and there was no Poorly Graded Sand
found in boring 1. Therefore Poorly Graded Sand was not used in the analysis.
As soil borings 1 and 2 indicate, there were three (3) thinwall samples secured by Independent
Testing Technologies, Inc. (ITT). One sample (Sample C) was taken from Boring 1@ 20' and was
classified as Sandy Lean Clay (CL) by ITT. Two samples (Samples A and B) taken from Boring 2
@ 15' and 20' respectively, both were also classified as Sandy Lean Clay (CL) by ITT.
Direct Shear Tests were run on samples A and C by Soil Engineering Testing, Inc. (SET). SET
classified samples A and B as Sandy Lean Clay (CL) and sample C as a Clayey Sand (SC). Two
direct shear tests were authorized for the project, so CDP instructed SET to run Direct Shear tests on
samples A and C to obtain representative strengths of each material. The direct shear tests yielded
the following results:
• Sample A: Sandy L.ean Clay with little Gravel (CL):
cp = 32.7°
C = 226 psf.
• Sample C: Clayey Sand with little Gravel (SC):
cp = 31.7°
C = 316psf.
Slope Stability Analysis
CDP ran a serious of four (4) global stability analysis (see attached) using the same GSLOPE Limit
Equilibrium Slope Stability Analysis software used by Gray. The two different shear test results
obtained from SET were modeled both with and without the timber retaining wall in the slope.
Following is the summary of the results:
Slope Stability Analysis (Cont)
• Sample A: Sandy Lean Clay with little Gravel (CL):
With retaining wall: SF= 1.63
Without any retaining wall: SF= 1.61
• Sample C: Clayey Sand with little Gravel (SC):
With retaining wall: SF= 1.76
Without retaining wall: SF= 1.76
Civil Design Professionals • 8609 Lyndale Ave. S.,Suite 200 Bloomington, MN 55420 • Office 952-303-5312 • www.cdp-us.com
4
► ,
Conclusions:
Based on the results from the GSLOPE i_imit Equilibrium Slope Stability, the proposed design
prepared by Concept Landscaping includin�; burying a newly constructed retaining wall slope yields
a minimum safety factor of 1.63, which exceeds the minimum industry safety factor requirement of
1.3. In addition, burying the existi�g retaining wall with fill to reach the proposed finish grade
yields a minimum safety factor of 1.61, which also exceeds the minimum industry safety factor of
1.3.
Therefore it is my professional opinion that the design plans originally submitted to the City of
Orono are structurally sound and can safely resist any future deep seated global stability failure. It is
also my opinion that the constructing a new retaining wall is not necessary to saiisfy global safety
requirements. Simply burying the existing retaining wall with fill to finished grade also safely
resists any future �ieep seated blobal stability failure because the slope is stable under its o�vn
strength without the retaining wall as shown in the GSLOPE results. In addition, there are tree roots
and vegetation that further he(p stabilize thc existing slope. However, the slope in the fill area must
be bench cut, and all organics and unstable surface material removed. The fill material must then be
strong enough to resist a surface failure.
Surface s{ope stability is beyond the scope of this report. The method of stabilizinb the surface slope
was not addressed in the original plans submitted by Concept Landscaping.
Gray's analysis revealed a much lesser safety factor due to their use af a very conservative assumed
soil strength due to their lack of information. When inputting soil parameters that are reflective of
the actual strength of the soil, an increased safety factor of global stability results, whieh exceeds
minimum industry standards.
The conclusions retained are based o<i my professional opinion. These opinions are arrived in
accordance with accepted engineeri��g practices in this time and location. Na other warranty is
implied or intended. Should additional inf'armation become available, this report may be modificd
based on the new data. If you have any auestions, please feel free to give me a call.
Since cly
Michael R. Johnson, PE
1 hereby certify that this plan, specification, or mport was prepared by me or under my direct
supervision an that I a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the state of
Minnesota.
1� � �2 �11
Datc:
_._____-------- ___.._� _
Michael R. Johnson, P. . License #25493
Gvd Des�gn Professiona�s • 8009 tynda/e Ave. 5.,Su�te�QO BloomMgton, MN 55420 • Office 952-303-5311 • www.cdp-us.com
5
�'��� =
o�,:M
y�'i S y?y4��b=-. �ea�+' r' �
.93R��"ta�R � �4•,3.��`'��� ;� �
/si �X"�'" _�",-i` tl`;`, '_ �i•t5 `' R I G
+�-� ��y� ��y --- —�/ � i � 3
�� �� �,. ^ �� �, v Q
� �� �--�:r � ,s �; t `�g,.,~� � �^ ; � _ .,
�t� ;,� - x « '•;�;•, : �
.f. ��.�jch•• _ - �
�y j � r
s � f /.� f•"/'��� S�
ti
� � s ' ��
U f ' � t �
� �x �i�,
- �:, x� Va�°�a,e "�_ � �
a �. �,
�ue �s,.�: , `__
� . TM • . �� � �
��� �� Y
i = }x � �Y �' �` o, �
�.` i °�'.-
�� i
_ _ i• " � '3,�. '
/` _�•Yi,� ,F` �� f _� a.. b iv:;,L ...
o� ��& •�N�f� = 4 ,Qy \
*,. -
_�
� �= ' "' '� � - s d �� ;9Fc'E� _
� `z � �' ,
a �
� _ �
� _ `�
a � �x �� � „ j,,�•
�_-' �'=` ��\ 0 �i � =C i\
"� -i � ���:1
`�-, 7, z.
i ,! ,k.- :'�,� , �, `�
� �9 � \'' ,1
` � F
s �'� -.'��- - �S ;� �
, �_ . � - ` \�
Y o
\ �� �� �'"
i X �_.��� �� ���� � ���:'� .s;�.�; .
V 8 s.� x,'�� �� r�i; � <. ,.,bp.2'����W ` ,
� 't � i '3�3e � •p7 .
L'7 � - 5�p a � F� � [�� ��=E r '��r '� x N � a a .
N ->K% �r L 3 �•3� 3 Y . � � „-'�r W H.T�.awha.v
� � y �5 �?� p��.3 J � A ` EdO� .
,�5 �i..g �� x
�- � �`s -��s= �'-�=-��r � A T y x e x
Z� �i ;�� z�`y r�«�:�� ' r � _ ��r cl
�a ,� 6� =<�¢ ��YS€3-0.�_ _ _� _ �as�a
�` Y ��� �=�a �_��_ ._= - �_ �
�� *'V �._�� _�'�� �YJ= _ } _ ; r
� ` � S L�'z�$s Y ? '�_ C
�Y 63� '�!�}� �Y3�_��-'r�.�',� -� S�� � "=
� 1�r "� � u � r
�� [+j � �� `c s. � 'Y::,�?y,�� - ` _
� r � �£_ e'�Y y-C�ZTi L 'rl'�. '�' "
.� O �j ac a$L Z! . _
� �11 J v;.�'Y 5 a..n . `a,�5�.�x•"S.:� il:+ � ^�
[il� '�1 t��.l � ' �C�a �y��•'J.z . :.Y'� t'F ;=j .
.� � �X e��II .�3.'�J �C L.3�Ti� .z.f +.. 2 Y
= j�'n i� �o}}}+++� ;..j 5� =r x�-�. ��g S, �� k�� �� s
v � s `i a ��.� %I�?�3 ���-����II�y $� ��5�� �'�Qr
.e = r" �; ? �_ �i3_�,;; ka�'�'� �3� = � = (�,� > �� '
r�L;`� � > ��� ' z'°g������.�.�s� '�. �� � �s�l� =333
- v= � CS�� � f yc � ? �" ^ y� c Y G. <Fz=
' x I��m r � ii�i9t -vdk� p3.2 C r ] _
. �; I �� � �� 7.y a�.."z��'�.r��i3 i�q ��� ,P L''�,! ,� ���x
y '� c�, .a au'��'s a„� .., x c � �
� � I �: � _ � Y-- '��?.�p .3_ ��j �.� £ �� _j -
Y � C F
- �� f � _ � 33 �q�_ <:. s z,� � r-:� ._; .__
nl . _I-,z __ . ;e.�`r.c9=- � - '- ''�(„ rt�
, ,
Hennepin.Cuunty Yro�erty Mia.p 1'ruit Pagz 1 uf' i.
Hennepin Cou�ty Property Map - Tax Ye�r: 2011
"a oaca:sr.a:n�o��„s aaqe��:�>nve�'ro^.a:n^:;:��anon c`cmrds anC�aos ana may conrs��4�sc�npacuc�:na:a^cr,ry oe a�sc�oseC N an accu�a:z su:'�e^r Oe+"Po�m�bv a�,cnnsec
�..an0 Su:veyo:.'he P�:*�'fe:-an6 uea t'SGua:e Iootagz a�x7 aC+�.)a�'�2 d�xir.�Lt an:aYY Gor,p,n 6:.�5ctrp2:xie5-"e utlbcaUUOn On RUS�k�t0ultl OB uR@0 M1i rNN9rsa!7tpOtQS on1Y.
H8i1fi2G���iOUf�W CO�+'i:tOt Q�tB�"ltil'Y@ CS!!dQ1CHLY J/.:d[E�'�d�'SCRN�(Ifdin4Y1 i1U�5 RGL!�O(IW3l!�It My R11Slt'9@ Q'�O(ChLS tlllCiRM4Ci1 OC 13 a@fIV7ISMmL.
� 1'�" � � ;�,,�.r....--- ,���}a ,���� .;,, ,� � �
� � �� � ,'����; �
,
� �31�.�=�:�_ �'� � _:: �
_,
Qr` _i,��,,��-' �-_ - ('� �� �
.. . . -x�4`i }( �.. Y .t i
V
l �
t
� �.-r"'~ . � -
�-J� � —�
� � ._� :
- ��
_ _ �� �0 � .• �
r � ���.�. / -
.�1 �� { �� � �. rl
ti� � ,
�' ,»� �
. �^
wae� � I � .. �,I
� !�, � ` �
.....__1 .1 �� ' .
1
��
'f ,�� �0 �''��„�/'/
� f=�-'.� ` ' .�
� �
` r J�x� �,`,
� ���.�� . ^_
� i
r �
r��n j --a £�.
�y � � ;
�� ,
� � ��} _.�"`:._'> _"_--_�_;,
�y ,� ,•' 3:�47
/� � �r�,py
,i�i `'O �' I 4 �• '" ���~ .
`'tr� .'`fJ~ Q ' ��,.,.�r
��y�..., .. ,. � _ . �'. „a?LYc7 ..
1:, .
,. .� �:,. .... E 1,
�AA... . . � �.. � ..
� � ..-"�r �__ 3��1 LL
Seiected Parcel Data Date Ptinted:7/9/2011 5:59:46 AM
ParcetI�: 2p-117-23-43-0007 CurrenLParcelDate:7/8/2011
Ourner Name: WILLIAM H KOCH ET Al
Parcef Add�ess:3251 CASCO CIR,ORONO,MN 55391
Property type:RE5IOENTIAL LAK Saie Price:f1,375,000.00
Homestead:MOMESTEAO Sate Date: 13J2008
Area(sqftj; 15901 ��g��t;
Area (acres);0.37
A-T-B:TORRENS
Market Tota1: $i,i88,000.00
Tax ToWi:�12,765.96
http:,;��is.co.herulepin.mn.us�HC Propert���Iap Locato�?aspx ?%9%�O l 1
K(X'H�
��TERRAINIA�! WALL 5Y5TEM
5EC1"ION �.�
KOCH
F�-300� �,�r:�ic�cc�vrKr�_
9�,5 f n,��<<
��1.5
-- �;i_i,:K h��c:�:
' r��n!N �;���
943,5
i"1Mf3LK 1!i_C3faCk_ 4�(,�fJ.; N"f I K
---__ 4'C3iJK�_D fINA3E'R WAL�
_" �� VfRTICLF�TIM�f-:R ANCH'X� 4�CX
933 5
931.5 ____— - -- 40� -- --------------
—_.�;.=_—_
929.4 � �;E�r��r�����c
�' �,: / 952-472-4118
� � �� �,��-;` RECElVED
�- -�.--�
� 1 �.
JUL 19 ����
C�OF ORONO
s
STAIR SY�TEM PLArJ K�xN2 _
KOCN
9F�5.1
9�3.2�
�-GUAKDIZA�I.
��3.34
40'
943.42
�37.0
7"Rf�-�; �I2r�TKF�! CGY�C�PT�LANL�'x^.AF'�1G
933.5 ��, �2-472--4118
�LA1" LAUVN RECEIVED
� � ,� � � , � .�� �:��y i -�� � � -� � �Y �' � {, � .� ,� ;� � � � : l -- JUL 1 9 ?f111
' �. ��� �� � �-�. . �� -�` ����� � ��*a } �. � . ��� ���.,- } �:; ���; _,�. 929,4
� .. . . � � __ � ..� .� ,ry� .�" �'.":7 :�:��' . -� .. ���-� � �,�:- - . f� - . - -
� . , ��� .. . . � � � .� , . .Y � � j� � -� -�.
� �
, � � � � � ,,, , � �� �� � ,,. �;�., :; ciN oF oR
_ _ . � . . � ONO
9
�;n�
Koc� K�"�
TYPICAL
�G
4X4 TIZfA"f�CI�F'0�'�T � , � , '
C��AR Pl.OWCD GUARDKAK. ,,, _�i � ( '' ���
� wl 2x2��rxE 4 oc � �,�I� s� ; '
TRFX DF:C � �'�lf: �� ,��"1����!
K�JC 8c . P_
S 1RL-A�Ef> '� .
,JOf�TS �'�
' � ' .�J
;,i_.. _�,��:
3 2x12 r�a,����ACK�, �T�Y�.���� '-������'�;�,�� �
�I�D COtdCi�"(f��F00"t aJ(y �,�� �j� `� �
42"To 48" ��� � ��
i
� „ B«z�p ���i i��;i��;���; ���1.5 �
;' ij�� :;k,
, " ,�jr fi'.
�w't)�1 �'
�` ��`j,
���,t s ' �43.5
,,� ;F:�j::
:
��� s I 4 I .7;, �;
��s���t�� ��;, :; i
a �
� a �
;};'�
�1,� ¢� `t;• ;
1� �'j r : �i
. a-i i' , ;�-.
933,5 ��, -
931.5 ,
�2�.� �-�, COrk�PT LAt���.�CF�PING
�� �;t,`: � 952-472�-4118
�'� ' �������� RECEIVED
JUL 1 g ?��+�
�o CITY OF ORONO
KOiCN PI.ANTS —
PLANTING f�LAN � �A��w
KOCH �-�T L�A��
952-472-4118 ..�.� :�^�,�Wp�aR
.,�x:
'='�._.—
R �:�� `
1�, y$�t ��.5,�� � ��
� `t . '��s�.<„"•►.! 5.��?.�.{�'. '� `4 .a�i.'� � ��+`R1MdtR
.t4 ti s. '+�'t -� .
� '*t`�.� .
.ti . is '�+ �,,.+'� ._.._._. �'�`1Y��y;�t,>
"rF� � .'.jM1 .�'" . f . �i��.{b%'•�".-i. C�xnt.��V�vv
d°i . � �µ:�,^� 4._ "�Z '.,.
A+ � :I. .. .`___'_ �� . , ,
' � 4! w ..
h'
�^'..5� �'�� ""i'�.. �,
� ', �,�y + ,M VR7.IMM ONAlF�XXQ9PY
.. 4}M' �.�`��� 1 ��� .
. � !<.. � - ...
.* ��1`��"�."!�"F �.. .`��bw� ':� -.��.._.. . �? . .,F. . .
♦�� ilF '"i x: .� �j�`�. � . ,,t�:4F n ti.,�' ^~t '4 � *:. �, .
i� �Y
'��::� °`',,,• :. ,,� . ..,i� �,�. }..t 4�rl���;. � :,:� '�,-s,oc. „,,:` .,�" � g ,, ;i�
.I,� ��. .. .�}'�4 r� . '-'�3 .�� i,a ,�'. '� C1z,wc�a;6r�n
•
.. �. .. � • � �4
,,�f•, ��."�'�^� ~ ��,,� ,� +s�^��"..^ y,.S� k �;'z ,�.�:� �-+ �-
`�d..; -.'� .��.�:,"' . -�3�.
,�`.,"F �� ,��;�"^ � `,� e��y,d��+.i; � 4
� . ��::+ . :.,� , ' ,r, .'�:fi ` r.'
, .,. � �
J ��'� . w.t" �1.�,�'.E �� �.� �A �~r� f '' C�� .. ,� �.�i�;�.,.i,
� � .�r� '�'�',�. � �x ',�..�..�, t., �4��}�r.
}� '.:�y`� �xn£ 'Jh^�Y.f. .r� � y ..h � '�.
. ' •�•
�
. i + �wm•
� .'�� ��,.• + r �'t/k� ' � ,
•y�'A��f�� i�'k,�.,,#•�h ._. � � .� :�-.
��" �>t `""x}� t .�J ..s � ♦ ..� , ' . .. � I�.a�,O.v�.f:Y.�wt.w
� " ' � �•-: �. �y
�+i., ,... ,. . a �{r'�
�`�„� . • * ..'�� ,)
� �
.�5r' �.�:'Y��, r � � � �.
� ' , Y
�t�,�_�`''`�-r,• � �f� J► }--- I .� ;�'� ,.,�,
� �'Y r'1%y„r:.� �� r .t •t�.���_- .���� s ,_'�'�#'''
�'t I r��
':,'f,F'�. +� �A�'� � �� `. .... _ ..... �.Ik:.�k4?v.��v)�
/E '� ,a ,i•. -�y'w.�a`
, �r �'' � �
-:�. '�'�a`'<:N � �
.��+,-.,.�� *,• "�.
� �n�
'' RECEIVED
> s : �+
y � ♦ - f�z;rr�E3k.D��?:-�
G?k?s.;'.
V:�yC�
, ,
.
,.��` / �:,>`-� JUL 1 9 7Q11
-� � --.
. ' �/���j � T- �:� �� `�y 1��yw�..� �!` Y_� ' �� � -- �{t.cl � _ r rt �FDF. _�1 ' -`� �
,
; �.:. � � - �-,>,,����,,;n cmroFORorvo
'� . ' ��i� ..^ T.._�,-'.1-.,J. `��ry�-h) ..�f�� - _ -
. . �. " . �h. �a.. ,�w..� � ��� •.� "
" -... �� -.... ._ ... , . ._, ._ .�..._" �. .�.., .. �_... � .x^-�.: .:�'�i' �_..� .� ._.�' �� !.,_. � � �i :�^� .
- . -.: �._ e...i +� `.-J J �.._ � _ _. l�._.. ._.. _ �
`�..1 ti_ `.W-->
��TEI�RAINIAN WALLS �IED "°`�" -
I�EPLACE C�OTTEN TIMBEf2 Wl�LLS
T OF HILL �5.1
KOCH
�,,
16' `�49.3 40'
8'
__ �.
''4'
�
BOTT OF �ILL
.933.5 c�;���r�anrnc;a�
10' �2-472-4118
RECEIVELl
' �� - ` -�'_ .� � ;�i .} 1 d ,� � x
�, �- _ :-' �_� � �- �,�- �� � '� S ° '£- .� � JUL 1 9 �n>>
: -� �� � =� � ..� ���;���� ��� �'. ����� -
: : _. �
� . ; .�.. . _ ;. __ �29.4
.... _ . . . . .- .� . ' . .. ( 1 � '.�- T�.-1 1 • /�
'� w. ;:
! r i i
.. . , ._. ? � �: :: /
,
12 .. . _ . _ . _ _ � :. � : ; � ,:� ,� cin oF oRONo
c n�
� ,
�� �g � � V ^� �
Y � G�
}� 0
� �� ��� `g� = a� .'-
.��
� � �� � ��o ��� : �� � � ` � o �
4 � -
:F �� �. � � m
� � �� �; � � � � � o �
��� �
���� �c� �������� � �� � � �, � �� �
�
�� � ����g�� � � � � � �2^�
, , e � � �- � �v�,
8�a � Y �'<��'��'�g '��, � B m��r`0•...
�@$ aZz ���s;��� � " U � 3��`
7 / '� �ip O�m ��S#�g �jF � � � aN�Ct�i
V g i �iS��� �� `
;, ; ,—; ���s �N� �_������� � 1 � p W �
�� �— � �9�s o�z� ��g3. �<��' � � ab \ �Q �.
¢;b! i���� � / p�� �7�� a�� t��'�a'�01#�' u �" �f�� �Nm.z� `�� � O v�
It `�,;�� p� �Sg �� N c
q=�a ��a�� �q� b 'nm� ;I a ff i��:4Q� � a� �
g � R � F 'zl � °e
h
8��$ �°��� �;� �
7Q��� ��� &g W
�$ Ec o
Ka �� TT� °
n � za� t �
O ~a oJr
et N� as=m� �
Mt�� Water O1 0 -a u i �
o L
Ke MN�NR ,Ed9e�, `Y£ t �Tt«
� A��to i" o�� �;°3 °m \
L VI�9294 a�Q ��Eo-o °�
u
� d{ o�� ``og� s
a`oa° �
. ... Y�$ o�mo , ..
C
� . .�.N d --O.�.IA N a° S
5����— V W�
_ 5f y �3 .�~�
� ,SF/� O ��� O
i z �_ m
/sF 9s* ? g a a � LLi
/� g =�� � a
�fn � c� �N^I �
� 9� �
� '- o V o
•� c O n
� ` � _ =
� �
�
� �; �
_ �
��/ �
� /� _ �� �
U
� `� C`
.e
�o (� 2
V N d
� -- '°� � _ =e •� _ ,J
�, - �. m
o �
� � �� o
Q �
= a � av
� Q V� �
~e �i 2
/ �o
- vai a
o V c �
W �o ..
� '`o m �
\
a �o u \
�
¢ o°
�
C� �
2 0
= a � U
�% ` � o � � o
� YN '� � p
,- v'�0 .� C y
;"� `� . m� � ^ � C
� � 4E o � x �
� o �
d e<' C9 C `1
�,a o �
� Y a� Q
rE � �� �
d $o
c QF
r m V %' O d
� U �
3� j e� N
� O !�� >.� � o�� L
� oo =m .
0
M � � p� �
Z � �� � lSl �o q O! C ��.,
� I �' 2�� j N� Oi C
� OO `V � N N C O
� O O
� QO � � � a N
ao �o
`� 6 �
\ ��c 6• ° �Y y a
V �� . a� y E y v
(�; , c�� . o 0 0 0
m y� m a�i
� � ao va
• O �0
� ,
Gray Engineering, LLC
A u u i 4. �0 I I P r�j c c 1 t I I - 9
M r. illi och
:51 C co C ircle
O r o n o, M N 5 5 9 I -9 7 1 7 f b y e- i I o n I y)
�. lo � t bility � or�, te nd ct �n�n II I rov� �ni . ^_s � C co Circic,
O r o n , M i n n� o�
U z r M r. o c h:
A y o u u i h n r i i e d, � y E n i n��r i n , L L C f [ y E n i n c e r i n ) h c r 1 o r e d h n d u e r
A o r i n n d c a n d u c�e d I o e t b i I i t y n I y i (o r �h e t c n d r e t i n i n I I � r n v e e n t �
t h e r c C c r�n�c d i 1 c.
c k r o u n d 1 n f o r t i o n
i I I i o c h r o v i d e d r y r n i n�e r�n 6 � o f t �r y I e P I n r e r e d b y C o n�� i
L n d c in . I � u d ied A u u t : , 201 I . A I o re�� id ed the cy ue t (or F u rth er
In(or tio n. d �ed July 27, �01 1. Ir�� ih� C iiy o f O ron�.
H n d A u c r u r�n
O n A u a t . 2 0 I I , r , E n i n e�r i n ��f o r e d h n d b u c c t u e r h o e i n I o n t h e I o � 0 1
�o o ed ne can truction t ihe ite.
11 A I
96 -964 "f o a il, AI c i�h or n ic
9 6 2-H 6 C , C 1 y e y n d, d r h r o n
9 5 4-9 6 C L , n d y L c n C I y, h e o n, o i t, i i h I y e r o t P- M , P o n r I y r d e d n d i t h
i 1�. E n d o( o r i n .
H A _
9 5 0.5-9 5 1 T o o i I, b I � i�h o r n�c
9 4 1 -9 5 0.5 C L , n d y L c � C I y, b r o n, o i 1, i t h I y c� o C P- M , P o o r I y r d�d n d i I h
ilt. Hnd of ar�n .
H A
929-9 .5 'C o oil, I�i e h, d r bro n h I c iih or n ic.
9:7.5-9 2 9 C L , n d y L e n C I y, r o , o� t. o r i n t e r i n i e d u c i o o b i�u c i i o n.
14
A u u t J, 2 Il I I
E 1 1 - 9
2 5 I C c o C i t c 1 c
lo p c t b ilit A n 1 i
U �n LOI' t Li i� tquilitrriu li� � i bility An I� � �It r... r y tn �neic�n blc
to �rfor lo � n ly � Cro thc �nfor tion oht ined f�o ihc h nd u er Ao�in nd thc
I n r o v i d e d b y C a n c� i L n d c i n - � u I t o f t h e 1 o c t h i I i i y f r o i h e r o o c d n c
con tcuction h d f ctnr o[ fety ol 1 .0 4. "Py ic Ily lo � requi�c ( c�oc oC fety of I . .
o n c I u i o n
ed on ou c n ly i of thc lo � � hili�y, ihc ( c�o r n f I��y dii� noi �c1 the req u�red
i n� u n d d d i t i o n I e n i n�e r i n o f t h c �c t i n i n I I y t c f I I b e r c q u i r e d.
c n c r I
E n �n�e r i n c r v i c c r o v i d c d b y r , E n �n��r�n f n r t h I r o j c c i h A c�n c o n d u c t c d i t h t h t
1 e v c 1 o C c r e n d i 1 I o c d i n �i I y e c r�i c d b y e b c c o( i h c r o 1 e i a n c u c r�n t I y r c i i c i n �n
M �n n� a i u n d�r i i I r �i � r� ir in i . N o rr n ty, � re e d a r � li�d � d c. '1� h n y n u
f o r u i n t h e e r�i c c r o v i d a d b y r y E n �n�e n n . I( y o u h � � n y q u� t i o n r� e d i n t h i
Icttcc, le c c II M cty r y t 612-616- 601 .
V�
M rty A . r y, PE
L i c e n c N u b e r: 4 1 2 6
A u u t 4 , 2 0 I I
I hcrcby ccrtily th t thi I n , cciCic tion or re ort
r e r e d b y e o r u n d e r y d i r c c t u e r v i i o n
A n d i h t 1 d u I y L i c e n c d P r o f e f o n I E n i n e e r
U n d e r th c I o( [h e t te o f M in n c o t .
A t t c h c n t .
orin Loc tian c[ch
lo e t b ility A n ly i D i r
15
Gamma C Phi Piezo �/ : Gray Engineering LLC-Minnetonka,MN
pcf psf deg Surf. /� : : ' : GE 11-339
Water 62.4 0 0 1 • F=1.0 3251 Casco Circle
__—__— _____ _ _ _ . .
Vertical Timbers _ 90 1000 45 _1 : � 8-4-11
To soil 120 0 22 1 Slope Stability
Cla 120 50 28 1
950 — 950
940 — — 940
930 — -- 930
I I I I I I I I I I I
0 50 100
8/4/2011 11:3823 AM 1:�2011 Gslope\GE 11-339 William Kock 3257 Casco Circle.gsl Gray Engineering LLC-Minneronka,MM 6 F=1.034
I , g � � �
�� `�i� a �� o
m
s '� �� ��� g� � a� i
��� � p €�o ��� : �t� � ` � 0 1
€'� �� �e ��� a�� �� � �� � � � '
s g � ��
� �� � � � � � �
��g� q`� �a�� e N � N
�'43 ��� ��`�a�g�� � � � � a Q � ',��2`�m
i � > �
, g�= _ �������"g � � B os��
a�a °zz� ��z.� ��fp � U � 3��k
T ,i; ��� oo m �g��g�'�� � C � �m:.�
�
, �5> y������-g � °_
;, ; ��� �y��i o�� ���:����� � � O y �
�R i k��R OZ¢ �L"[ ��<�& � ` �Q
g � � � 'p i: �—� 'R ' � $: �� �
��es ��e�i / / ~gp ���� az� ������`g�? m 3" �� .NIW.ZI � �` O v,
�.�_ �� � �B: °5� � ry n� �„ga� � _� �� � �
' a ��� gE7 Nm o€i��3 4�� � t ''
Kg�� R3s�� iG� _ � h
�i�� ���g� �Y� R'
nQ��� ��� w
�$ E� �
a �� Taags s
q tL
0
nnet°n W�te� q� -��u; �
M� f h o _ �
K� MN�NR ,Ed9e� ;�•� t�v�t
L a 4 A��to ; $m� �r��.v ,
'g29 e�a $u'E°��
di� \ g�� `.o� s ,
� a�s �°<-T� ; ..
° a goo-;a
�'��y} _n Sin7"n a°8
� �/� � y W FS
_ r��� . � -�~�
� �/�y 2 oUV O
� � U_ m W
/� '� 2 `a a v
� � z;z � a
� / �� / �..... �5 a n �
� .-- i
U �
0
�
■� � o n
� � � o :
� �
9� � �
� ��
/ V y �
U
� C y
00 / �� � �
N`
a 0 �
� � N... � O . .
v .� sa 1 O _ T x o � m J
o � C
S, z� .� G
: d � �" � o
� e �` �
� �' s E
a
_ J VI P
O. ` V ^p .. �
� �U m �
Q O � �T
U �/,
K O
�
� C
? O
� _ � V
` a
s, O (n .0 O
R ` ��6
N � y o
-- "O o, ^ � ai
; i �� c y C
• `° � c a � O Z C
\;c � � 4 E O J �
� � m� �� � O �
�� � o �� Q
� m a
E �
$ d o0
ma
t n� p
O U %/, O a C � g 4J
� � o �J ;� � � °
dg ; Q� � k.o =
0
0. ryl ✓ �U C ., N
Z _ �� oo� �
� ,� u`l �"oW � N3
� � l� 2�Z{ � L C O
1 V � N ul
.,� �O � � Qy �O
O �
�
\ �c `\ 6,6 � �Y ° a
,� � ;E � �
M� � � c c
� v °'� v a
a o
• O 00
� -� ,
tNnF,PF'�l)ENT �I'E�:4'i'1NC TECHNC?LUGIt:ti, 1NC'. LOG C)I�� ti(.)Ct. f3C)fZ1:�C�
PROIEG"T.• 1i-361 CIVIL DESIGN PROFESSIONALS C]ATE.� 1Q/25/11 BURING.�: B=1
3251 CASCO CIRCLE 5TART TIME.� 1U:15 �ND IIME.� 11:15
ORONO, MINNESOTA
MfTHOC�: 3 1/4" I.D. Hollow Stem Auc...�er
CREW.• RB RK
LOG4TION: South Boring Location ELEI/ATION: Page 1 of 1
f�„ _ � -�?+, ?�'?�G?t' a
rtr�t,� S,•r,��;;ar C�escr,,�hia,;r i;', M 1/�/c.�r Tatate lvotrs
rown to a T _
SC-S SILTY CLAYEY SAND,fine 9rained,brown,mottled.
is.i 1 9
�
5,p i3.s = 14
1�$ 3 15
� is.� 4 15
10.0
73.9
15.0 SM SILTY SAND,fine qrained,w/a trace of GIUYEL,brown,
mottled,wet.
1 . ._. _.,.
l SANDY LEAN CLAY,with fine arained SAnD,brown.
mottled.
16.3 � 19 Thinwall samole at 20 feet.
ZQ.�
Z Z. _
� CL SANDY LEAN CLAY,with fine grained SAND,dark qrey.
1 ��� T 16
Boring complete to 25.0 feet.
No water encountered dunng d�llinq.
j No water measured to cave-in at 15.0 feet immediately
� aRer completion.
�
1
i � '' �
� ItiDEYEtii)eNT TEtiT[;�G T�;CHti(�LC)CIE�, [�C. Lt)CT (-)r SUIL BOKII�Cf
PR�JEC_`+r� i1-361 CIVIL DESIGN PROFESSIONALS OATE� 10/25/11 BCIRING�: �
3251 CASCO CIRCIE 5TART 7TME: �1:� END 77ME: 12:23
ORONO, MINNESOTA
h1ETJ�fOf�.� � 114" I.D. Hollow Stem Au�er
CRE6'!/.� �,1 RK
IOCATIDN.' North Bonng Locallon ELEVATION.• Page 1 Of 1
p�� t�n �t��rc' :d r•�
(feetJ Syr.�hcV fk��rreGar� !;� - dalt:r� T:jt?rr� ,M1'C;��
SA D ar �own to adc
CL SANDY LEAN CLAY,with tine grained SANO,brown, �
moCtled.
i�.� : 8
SM SILTY SAND,flne grained,brow�,mottled.
5.0 s.� � 5
t r.x 3 4
8A
SP-SM POORLY�RADED SAND w(SILT,fine prained,lipht
qreyish brawn.
s.a q� 4
10.0
CL SANDY LEAN CIAY,with fine grained SAND,brc z�-z 5 �
15.0 mottied. Thinwall samole at 15 feet
�
i
�
�e.s 5 7
Zo.o
, CL SANDY LEAN CLAY,wvitl�tine grafned SAND,dark grey.
le.� 7 14 Thi�wall sample at 20 feet.
Borinq compiete to 25.0 feet.
No water encountered during dnlling.
No water measured to cave-in at 1S.0 teet immedlately
atter comptetion.
� I
19
, •� �
Direct Shear Test Job No.: 8167
A T M
� ; � Koch Residence
��� N � N A �h T � � 10/27/2011
� �� � � T Y Bag � ,� 10/31/2011
�� T Y Sandy Lean Clay with a little gravel (CL)
o.00� , �,
rk �. i n tri . iv n iz . In u n . I� r iyin n r I I . n li . n
M1 r ; �� n i I n. . n . n, r t • . L i n � / i n u.
Li
y In
1'I = u i i r i it�i vl�y (�1�. 2.6U
2 _—____-_._... . .__
I Max Stress A
� 1 - O X
. — I . — .—.�—. �. r 1 I n I . G L L
I (In �
= I � f l 2 . L . L
C � ! . ^( 2 2 2 4'
N I
� i e�o,
C e
Y � r n n� � 2
�
�. —� -- — i � � 2 2
�
c � � � n 2 , 4 2 2222
d ,
rn
A - 2 — - -- ---- 2
L oaa�a�ao�_- ' �
U --�e6666� n � 2 a
� T�e e t e f i e ,o r �n/o r ��o n �p u i p o e o n I y n 0 u l e r e v I e w e� y
2 �, II q u li{ie 0 0�a�e io n I e n in e e r lo v e iily �h I lh e le f p r e te r �o w n re
p p r o p i r f e l o i n y p r t i c u I r O e i n "
A: f
F, � � A� � � 32.7 deg. F�� .� � A� � � 33.0 deg.
2 A ` °� 0.113 TSF A ` ° 0.041 TSF
2 n � � �
- I T_ ----___ . .___._ I
I ---- ----,
,
� � �
2< _��,u�e�°°e� I '
, �
, ;
2 _ _r_ �
� � 2
II
i LL �
LL 2 � � , I
N N I
F � y I
N �
d . --- —� --- . j y n i II �
L i L -.-� � �i,
� I � II � I i
t - — —._...__._.----- - j i I
fn � , I , �, �II ..
I i j j
< — i - - — — — I
_ ,I� I� � �
i i 3
i I i
, i
2 2 2
Shear Displacement(inch) Normal Stress(TSF)
OIL
2401 W 66th Street N Ci 1 N��I�'I N<.i Richfleltl.Mmnesota 55423•2031
ESTING, INC.
� � ,
Direct Shear Test .lob No.: $1 fi7
ASTM: D3080
Project: Koch Residence
Boring No.: Sample No. C Depth: Test Date: 10/27/2011
Location: Sample Type: Bag Date Re orted: 10/31/2011
Soil Type: Clayey Sand with a little gravel (SC) Shear Rate
0.001 (in/min)
Remarks: Specimens trimmed to given sizes; Inundated after applying normal load. Conso�idated and
sheared to given displacements at constant rate of 0.001 inches/minute. Liquid Limit:
Plastic Limit:
Plasticit Index:
(`)=Assumed Specific Gravity Specific Gravit ('): 2.68
0 ----.-__ ._.. _ .
Failure Criterion:
-0.002 _ _ Max Stress A B C D
- - /nitial � Q X
-0.004 -- ---- ~� - Diameter(In.) 2.51 2.51 2.51
Thickness(In.) 0.97 0.97 0.97
�-0.006 -- -- Water Content(%) 17.8 18.4 17.6
.�-� Or Densit c 110.0 110.4 110.0
u�i-0.008 -- - - Before Shear
Y � � Thickness(In.) 0.95 0.94 0.92
�
F -0.01 - Water Content(%) 18.1 17.7 16.6
c I Dr Densit c 112.6 113.5 115J
'�-0.012 i - ,
c
v-0.014 _ Normal Stress 0.50 1.00 2.00
Shear Stress 0.40 0.89 1.36
-0.016 � _ "These tests are for informational purposes only and must be reviewed 6y a
� qualifred professional engineer to verify that the test parameters shown a�e
appropriate for any particular design.„
-0.018 - -
Peak Conditions At Given Shear Disp.Of: 0.3
-0.02 Friction Angle: �= 31.7 deg. Friction Angle: � 32.1 deg.
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Apparent 0.158 TSF Apparent 0.137 TSF
� 6 Cohesion Cohesion
I ! p _ _ _ --------�
� I i
1.4 - -- - - - I i ,
� �
aae�°°°eee�� � I
1.2 - I i � ,
i , 1.5
� � I I
i -- __ -� G �
N f I II �
ri I N I
N i �
`0.8 y -- - --- - -� v> I ',
1 N � -�- -r- - - -
� ! t 3�
d N
N O.6 - - .__ �
I , ' � �
I ;
0.4 -�--- - 0.5 - - _._ - �
� ,�
0.2 - ._i- I i
II I
0 � I �
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Shear Displacement(inch) Normal Stress(TSF)
OIT. 2
2401 W 66th Street NGINE�RING Richtield.Mmnesota 55423-2031
ESTING, INC.
Gamma C Phi Piezo Civil Design Professionals-Bloomington,MN
cf sf de Surf. 71-163
Water 62.4 0 0 1 �� � 3251CascoCircle
Vertical Timbers 90 7000 45 1 �1�1�/11
To soil 120 0 22 �� 1 Slope Stability One(1)
_.—.—
Sandy Lean Clay_ .. _120 226 32.7 1 Sandy Lean Clay(CL)Soil w/Wall
� . . . . Y'\ . . . �.
. . . . . . . . . F=1.632
980 — — 980
970 — — 970
960 — — 960
950 — — 950
940 — — 940
930 — — 930
920 — —�------ - -- - -- - — 920
I � I I � I I � � � I I � � � I � �� � I I
-50 0 50 100 150
22
.
Gamma C Phi Piezo Civil Design Professionals-Bloomington,MN
cf sf de Surf. 11-163
Water � � � 62.4 0 0 1 3257 Casco Circle
fTopsoil 120 0 22 1 11/11/11
San��ean Clay ___ 120__226 � 32J �1 Slope Stability Two(2)
� Sandy Lean Clay(CL)Soil No Wall
�. ./�\ . . . . : �.
. . . . . . . F=1;6'12
980 -- — 980
970 -- -- 970
960 --� ---- 960
950 �—- --- 950
940 --- -- 940
930 --- —. 930
920 -- -------------- --------------�----. . ._.. --. .. ----------- -- ---- -----— — ---------- — 920
I � I � � I � I � I I � � I � I � � � � I
-W 0 50 100 150
23
,�
.
Gamma C Phi Piezo Civil Design Pwfessionals-Bloomington,MN
cf sf de Surf. 11-763
Water 62.4 0 0 1 3251 Casco Circle
VeAical Timbers 90 1000 45 1 11/11/11
__—_.—_—..
�T�soil. 120 0 22 1 Slope Stability Three(3)
Clayey Sand_ 120 316 31.7 1 _ Clayey Sand(SC)Soil w/Wall
. . . . ./.\. . . . .
F=1762
980 — . . . . . . . . — 980
970 — — 970
960 — — 960
950 — — 950
940 — — g40
930 — .. — — 930
920 — ----_. _.—_—..----- — ----------------��-- ---- — —� � --�-------------- — 920
i � I I I I � � � � I � I � � I � � � � I
-50 0 50 100 150
24
w
1
s
Gamma C Phi Piezo Civil Design Professionals-Bloomington,MN
cf st de Surf. 11-163
Water 62.4 0 0 1 3251 Casco Circle
�roPsai izo o z2 i i�i�v>>
LSan�Lean CI�___ _ __720__316_. 37 J 1 Slope Stabiliry Four(4)
Clayey Sand(SC)Soil No Wall
X
: : : : : . . . � F-1J58
980 - --- -- 980
970 -- -- 970
960 — — .-- 960
950 --- — 950
940 -- 940
930 - � — - 930
920 _ _._. _---_—..—_ _ .. __— _____.—. __—_.__—..—. . _—._— ..______— . 920
I I � � I I I � � � I � � � � I � � � � I
-50 0 50 100 150
25