Project Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Resolution No. Page 3 11. The Freshwater Biological Research Foundation report on dredging in Lafayette Bay, Lake Minnetonka, dated October 30, 1978, states that "clearly, suction dredging for channel maintenance is much less deleterious to the body of water than traditional dredging practices". This is not to sa; that suction dredging is not deleterious or is not adverse to some extent. 12. There has been no evidence submitted to show a beneficial impact upon the lake ur to show a lack of adverse ecological impact upon the lake. A letter from J.M. Wood, Director of the FWBRF, states only that ".....for such a small amount of sediment, there will be minimal disturbance to the ecosystem". 13. The only hardships presented by Dr. Dunlap are ones of esthetics (lack of dock in main lake, lack of eventual marshy lagoon) and convenience (permanent, rather than seasonal dockage closer Lo Dunlap's house). 14. The only stated public interest to the dredging would be improved access by fishermen to the lagoon. There is no evidence to snow that fish and fishermen ( if net fishing boats) can not now enter the lagoon with of water at the mouth. 15. Fish spawning .i the lagoon could be hamper-- e lagoon was opened to larger power boats than now po e. 16. Previous dredging permits approved by the City Council have been for maintenance of riparian rights which is not the case in this application. Suca permits include those for Walters Port Association (May, 1977), Garman's Cove Association (Jurte, 1977), and West Shore Lafayette Bay Assn. (June, 1978) minates of which approvals clearly show the overriding concern of maintaining riparian access to many homes. 17. At least two recent applications for dredging were withdrawn by the applicant when the Council clearly indicated an intention to deny the application (Hannah, 1978 and Birkland, 197:' & 1918).