Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Wendle dlso indicated that an EAW should be granted on a <br />discretionary basis due to the fact that a wetland, which drains <br />into the area to be dredged, flows through the border of an auto <br />salvage operation. As such, dredging could affect wells of <br />single-family homes if the area is polluted. In effect, <br />Mr. Wendle indicated, dredging would create a pipeline for <br />migration of the hazardous waste. <br />Mr. Paul Haik was recognized by President Spensley as the <br />representative of the Channel Drive Homeowner’s Association. <br />Mr. Haik disputed that the project falls into either of the <br />mandatory EAW categories indicated by Mr. Wendle. He noted that <br />Mr. wendle provided no evidence in support of his assertions. <br />Mr. Haik noted that there is no evidence of hazardous waste being <br />located at the auto salvage yard. He has contacted the Minnesota <br />Pollution Concrol Agency (-MPCA-), and indicated that the MPCA has <br />no evidence of any such pollution. Mr. Haik argued that if the <br />Channel Drive project requires an Environmental Assessment <br />Worksheet, then every dredging project would also require similar <br />review since no evidence had been produced to suggest that any <br />special circumstances exist in regard to this dredging project. <br />Mr. Haik recounted the history of litigation involving this <br />project, noting that the petitioners had also sought judicial <br />relief in this matter. Mr. Haik indicated that these tactics are <br />being pursued in order to delay the project and make it more <br />expensive. <br />Mr. Haik noted that unlike the Carlson project, which was <br />discussed with the Board earlier, this is a very small-scale <br />project. He indicated that this dredging involves a channel which <br />has been in existence since 1914, and is pursuant to previously <br />approved dredging permits from the State of Minnesota. <br />Manager Lindley asked who owns the lots. Mr. Haik responded <br />that there are four parcels involved, and they are owned by <br />individuals residing in Minnetonka, Eden Prairie, Bloomington and <br />Mound. Mr. Haik further responded that rip rap was put in and <br />other modifications mf e in response to requests by the DNR as a <br />part of the applicaticn approval process with the DNR. He <br />indicated that the project involves combined dock rights for the <br />four parcels. <br />Manager Love stated that there appears to be no difference <br />between this proposed dredging project and many other that come <br />before the Board and are routinely approved by the Board. The <br />only difference would be any problems created by the existence of <br />the scrap yaru and no proof has been presented concerning actual <br />pollution at that site. Manager Miller also noted that if the <br />scrap yard is producing any type of heavy metal pollution, the <br />migration of such material could be dangerous to the Lake. A <br />discussion then ensued as to whether Manner Road, which separates <br />the wetland near the salvage yard from the Lake, serves as a <br />barrier to the flow of materials from the wetland into the Lake. <br />Managers suggested that Mr. Quanbeck review this issue further. <br />■aarS Mliwt(-7-