St. Croix River city faces decision on old mine site

  • Article by: KEVIN GILES , Star Tribune
  • Updated: November 30, 2012 - 11:23 PM

Tiller Corp. said it will reclaim the Scandia mine area and make it profitable, but opponents fear it will mean noise, dust, heavy truck traffic -- and a falloff in tourism.

  • 7
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 7 of 7
mimalmoNov. 30, 1210:07 PM

No. I drive from Osceola to 35W daily on 95 and 97. Those trucks are almost always speeding (sometimes over 70 mph), they destroy the road, the use noisy exhaust brakes and often they don't have their loads covered so they leave sand and gravel all over the road.

6
5
mn_windchillDec. 1, 12 6:20 AM

This company is not a good neighbor. I am aware of the damage caused to the st croix near grantsburg. No one believes they can restore the river to its normal condition after that episode. I dont think it is wise to allow this company a chance to screw up again.

6
1
davehougDec. 1, 12 9:43 AM

If the public doesn't want a gravel mine, BUY the mine for what it would have been worth as an operating profitable mine. Don't just say 'GEE it would be nice if the owner left his property alone'.

3
4
bigbadbb83Dec. 1, 1210:41 AM

I like DaveHoug's comment about buying the mine. What is that piece of property worth? It is 64 acres right on a National Scenic River. Park Service, Scandia and/or the state could purchase it. It is a beautiful piece of land, just used for a crappy purpose. Maybe trade this piece of land for a less environmentally sensitive one somewhere else. Miners probably don't care about how pretty the view is; they just want a profitable operation and that is understandable. Gotta believe there are plenty of places to mine sand that aren't on a National Scenic River.

2
2
mn_windchillDec. 2, 12 6:53 AM

@davehoug - This isnt an operating gravel pit, its one which has limited use since the 70s. Its permit has expired so its cash value is not as an operating mine. This company wants to increase its operations significantly (compared to the last 40 years). Its ultimate goal (regardless of what it claims in the article) is to get to the fracking sands below. I have no love of scandia, and find the general attitude pompous and elitist. But this is a poor place to run this operation. Let them find sands/gravel elsewhere, futher from the river.

1
0
davehougDec. 2, 12 7:26 PM

mn_windchill So you would deny the company the right to operate because you think they'd dig deep??? I LIKE the idea of a land swap agreeable to both the state & company. At any rate are you saying the state has the authority to deny operations because NOW we feel the neighbors / view would be ruined??????

0
0
mn_windchillDec. 7, 12 5:05 PM

@DaveHoug - Yes dave I would deny them a permit. CUPs/SUPs expire on their own via a holders non-use which has happened in this case. Use it or lose it. I live with 2 working gravel pits within 1.5 miles of me (and within 10 miles of this current proposal). I havent an issue with these two while being impacted each day with the truck traffic. Tiller Corp has a history of irrelvance for laws, and the locals are correct about the impact on the river and traffic. Its a poor spot for this kind of operation.

0
0
  • 1 - 7 of 7

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT