Laserfiche WebLink
LRRWMO Meeting Minutes <br />June 19, 1991 <br />Page 5 <br />LRRWMO members noted a May 16, 1991, letter from Tom Hovey, <br />Area Hydrologist, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, <br />addressing LRRWMO notification concerns. <br />A June 4, 1991, memorandum from Ron Harnack, Executive <br />Director, Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources, <br />addressing a legislature enacted Metropolitan Public Ditch <br />Inventory was discussed. Mikkonen reported this memorandum <br />and attached form to be filled out was sent to Skallman. <br />Schultz indicated this is merely informational for this board <br />in that the memorandum was sent to Anoka County for its <br />action. Schrantz indicated the LRRWMO should contact <br />§e &1 x fy. for Wea�ver € m M t this d diRSH inv t ma e t ei <br />be very expensive, and recommended Skallman not do anything <br />with. this form until, the LRRWMO authorizes him to do so. <br />Weaver suggested perhaps some other jurisdiction should take <br />care of it which is more knowledgeable in this area than this <br />board. Members concurred they would await Skallman's <br />comment. <br />Discussion of prudent financial spending in relation to <br />engineering costs was again raised. Jankowski suggested this <br />board review permits itself before passing them on to the <br />engineer for his professional review and comment. Schrantz <br />stated our response time is limited to thirty days usually. <br />He felt it preferable to allow the engineer to proceed with <br />reviewing permits as has been the done in the past. However, <br />because of a tight budget, this board must closely watch <br />engineering costs when they come in. <br />Schrantz noted our legal adviser is also concerned about the <br />legal expenses of the LRRWMO. <br />PENDING PROJECTS /PERMIT REVIEWS <br />Schrantz provided a June 18, 1991, communication from Barr <br />Engineering to the LRRWMO regarding the Waste Management <br />pumpout system, permit #91 -03.. The recommendation:_provided <br />was no permanent water quality measures are required by the <br />LRRWMO guidelines. The information the engineer has reviewed <br />does not meet the requirements for construction erosion <br />control. <br />Schultz indicated he concurred with Jankowski's previously <br />stated position in that he does not think everything, from a <br />watermain plan to a sanitary sewer plan, should have to have <br />LRRWMO approval. It was his position erosion control should <br />only become effective, as far as this board is concerned, if <br />it affects the wetlands. These reviews add additional <br />