Minutes from 1989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

LRRWMO Meeting Minutes June 21, 1989 Page 3 Raatikka stated that this will also have to be put in the individual city plans. Skallman added that identifying the wetlands to be used for water quality before the development occurs will be more economical. It was reported that Bassett Creek is presently going through the study defining their wetlands used for water quality. Mathisen felt there was a lot of flexibility in the Bassett Creek guidelines which could be controversial. The board and Skallman discussed whether projects should be considered on a case by case basis or whether consistency would be a better alternative, considering the potential for controversy. Weaver queried whether this draft should be reviewed by each city's Planning Department as the professionals respon- sible for approving permits and adopting the developers' plans. This board should convey to the cities our concern with water quality. Skallman confirmed that just that action is the intended next step. Weaver continued stating that if municipalities incorporate some of our water quality concerns in their standards, it would eliminate the need for this WMO to have outside professionals do it. He didn't feel this board was financially equiped to do it. Skallman pointed out that he has submitted two possible permitting processes: the city directed permitting procedure and that used by Bassett Creek. Schrantz felt that there is an advantage of having another body look at the various developments. Mathisen queried how this board will know if the cities are correctly doing their job? Schrantz stated that through a city directed procedure, this board wouldn't know. Skallman stated that Bassett Creek has a very loose process for reviewing permits, going on to discuss the procedure. Skallman compared that with Coon Creek's process whereby every plat is sent to the watershed for review. Mathisen felt this board must be careful with what we feel the intent of the 509 was meant to do. He didn't feel it was necessary that these development projects be looked at twice, first by the city and then by this watershed. Mathisen suggested that it be worked out with the cities making it their responsibility to determine whether there is an impact on the water quality and then send it to the watershed if such should be the case. He agreed with Weaver that the individual city planners and staff will have to be educated to the extent of incorporating the water quality concerns and standards into the cities' plans.