Project Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4 _ 2_ protected. If this channel area is allowed to close by siltation, this lagoon would be lost to the lake and become marshland. This would not only deprive various fish species of a breeding area, but would also deny access to fishermen. There would be no adverse ecological impact on the lake if this area were dredged vy the methods described. A recent study completed at the. Freshwater Biologic Institute would support this. 9. Hardship to the land by denial of this dredg,ny would be an ultimate loss of this area to Lake Minnetonka. In addition, loss of the boat .lagoon to me would have a considerable influence on the value of my property, for which I feel I should be reimburse,l.if the council chooses to deny my appli-Ition. 5. Public interest to be served by this dredging would be the c(Itinued use of this area by fishermen, and avoidance of an unusually long dock extending into Lake Minnetonka. 6. Orono village ordnances do not specifically disallow dredging b?cause other riparian access is present. In addition, previous dredging permits issued by the City Council have NOT always been for maintenance of riparian rights. A permit issued or; October 26, 1971, at 2660 Casco Point Road allowed channel dredging through shallo,r lak, bottom, so that a more convenient, permanent dock could be placed at tho shore rather than use an unusually long dock. In addition, on May 29, 1973, a dredging permit was issued by the City Council at 1298 Wildhurst Trail to dredge an inlet for boat dockage even though ample other shore existed in a very convenience location. The Orono City Council allowed dredging of a 20 foot channel almost a quarter of a mile in length through marshland, August 12, 1968, at 360 Norch Arm Lane to produce lake access where none had existed before. 7. I do not feel that there has been a situation comparable to mine presented tL• the City Council where a dredging permit has been denied. T was unable to find, in the council minutes, any example of denial of maintenance eredging, and it would seem that a denial would be an unprecented action. In summary, there is absolutely no ecological or logical reason to disallow maintenance dredginy in this area, and in fact, it would be beneficial to the lake, Tn addition, there is no precedent for this denial and for these reasons the permit should be granted. very truly yours, -'DAVI D J. DLIN[ P, M. D. D.ID/mjc enc: