Minutes from 1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

LRRWMO Meeting Minutes May 20, 1992 Page 8 review it and report back to the LRRWMO with his recommendation. A copy of this material will be retained for LRRWMO files. Weaver concurred the board should be consistent in its approach to projects. Schrantz indicated this is consistent with what developers, including members cities, must do now. However, Schrantz felt the question still remains does the county have to mitigate this proposed project; can it be banked. Jankowski felt it is not reasonable to require 0.16 acre mitigation, adding that that amount could perhaps be banked and added to a future project(s). Schultz concurred. Mr. Fischer asked the board to consider having a district - wide permit. Schrantz felt the board would have to contact the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) on how to handle this. Schrantz stated for the present this project will be handled the same as for city projects. In the future the LRRWMO will contact BWSR for a procedure on which to handle Anoka County. Erickson agreed the board should obtain the opinion of its legal counsel on these issues. Motion was made by Weaver, seconded for discussion by Jankowski, that IN LIGHT OF ANOKA COUNTY'S DISCUSSIONS, THE LOWER RUM RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION SHALL REFER THE MATTER OF THIS WATER MANAGEMENT JURISDICTION IN COUNTY WETLAND MATTERS TO THE BOARD'S LEGAL COUNSEL FOR RECOMMENDA- TION ON THE PROPER COURSE OF ACTION. Jankowski stated he does not want to run to our attorney every time the question comes up. This board has the respon- sibility to exercise good judgement and should do so in this case. Weaver indicated he could appreciate Jankowski's position, but felt in this case the LRRWMO is establishing its future relationship with Anoka County. Our attorney is a recog- nized, experienced authority in watershed matters. Weaver felt Pearson will be able to properly advise the board on the right course to take. Erickson and Weaver agreed the question to the attorney should be specific: What should the LRRWMO's answer to Anoka County be in the matter of the ongoing request by the county for encroachments into wetlands abutting the county highway right -of -way on maintenance projects, including minimum and maximum acreages. Can we set a minimum size? VOTE: 4 ayes - 0 nayes. Motion carried.